MSE News: House prices to fall next year, says Nationwide

Emy1501

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Not denying there has been stimulus for houses, including helping to stop people being repossessed, but is it quantifiable?

Propping up the banks was not solely done for the benefit of house prices.
It may have been done because of the debt the banks had, but it was to safegaurd the whole business, not just mortgages.

Why does it matter how much has been spent? We all know its quite alot and cannot go on ever. All the money the government has spent to prop up the economy has an affect on house prices and therefore whether directly or in directly the housing market is being propped up.

MissMoneypenny

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

They're exposing their savers to the full force of the interest rate cuts too and I suspect many (including me) are deserting them for better rates elsewhere.

I closed my accounts with them too and then recevied a lot of mail from them telling me what good rates they had. Yeah...right.

Really2

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

Less sure about this. Think sentiment is too high re:buyers (in general) to risk missing boat. Sentiment for sellers is kinda bit more complicated imo

I mean in terms of credit, there are still going to be a lot of "potential buyers" (in terms of deposit and multiple) going to be excluded from the market.

the_ash_and_the_oak

Really2 wrote: »

I mean in terms of credit, there are still going to be a lot of "potential buyers" (in terms of deposit and multiple) going to be excluded from the market.

def agree w this - misread what you meant before

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Can someone quatify exactly how much has propped up house prices?

Probably around £4 billion in 2009. Directly as a result of the Government loans to NR.
(NB NR aren't going to hit their £5 billion Government target).

Otherwise QE has kept the banking system going.

Net mortgage lending is fairly insignificant in terms of the billions flying around.

IveSeenTheLight

Emy1501 wrote: »

Why does it matter how much has been spent? We all know its quite alot and cannot go on ever. All the money the government has spent to prop up the economy has an affect on house prices and therefore whether directly or in directly the housing market is being propped up.

Why it matters, well because it's sited so much on here that they have been propped up.
I posed the question to get people to think about quantifying the number rather than just spouting it as a reason for house prices rising and why they think they will drop.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Probably around £4 billion in 2009. Directly as a result of the Government loans to NR.
(NB NR aren't going to hit their £5 billion Government target).

Otherwise QE has kept the banking system going.

Net mortgage lending is fairly insignificant in terms of the billions flying around.

Thanks Thrugelmir.
So £4 Billion is your guess.
That would equate to roughly £64 per personin the UK.
Not really much is it?

Graham_Devon

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Why it matters, well because it's sited so much on here that they have been propped up.
I posed the question to get people to think about quantifying the number rather than just spouting it as a reason for house prices rising and why they think they will drop.

You know full well you are asking an impossible question.

What people can tell you, which is why you are trying to divert to an impossible question is houses have been propped up by:

- QE, meaning banks are more likely to lend.
- BOE TELLING banks to lend.
- Interest rates being put to the lowest level in over 300 years.
- Government putting pressure on banks to not reposess, but instead, allow arrears.
- New homebuyer / rescue scheme.

Emy1501

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Why it matters, well because it's sited so much on here that they have been propped up.
I posed the question to get people to think about quantifying the number rather than just spouting it as a reason for house prices rising and why they think they will drop.



Thanks Thrugelmir.
So £4 Billion is your guess.
That would equate to roughly £64 per personin the UK.
Not really much is it?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/dan-roberts-on-business-blog/2009/oct/28/northern-rock-housing-market

http://www.summitfinance.co.uk/blog/?p=50

Its closer to 9billion if you believe the above two articles and of course a far bit of the money that has gone into propping up RBS and Lloyds will be used to lend.

If you feel that propping up the housing market is more important than education, healthcare, looking after the elderly then good luck to you.

I suspect though that most of the population would rather the money spent on the above than propping up the housing market. Especially a market than even the BOE would admit is too high

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What people can tell you, which is why you are trying to divert to an impossible question is houses have been propped up by.

propped up!? what a stupid comment.

2009 house prices have been supported by people buying them because there has been demand - no other reason.

propped up :rotfl:

Emy1501

chucky wrote: »

propped up!? what a stupid comment.

2009 house prices have been supported by people buying them because there has been demand - no other reason.

propped up :rotfl:

So why waste at least 10-15billion propping it up then? next you will telling me that the market would be where it is if the 10-15b had not been spent :rolleyes: