We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Deconstructing Moneyweek: Why British House Prices Won't Fall
Comments
-
Agreed. Why are the perma-bears resorting to ad-hominem attacks, instead of trying to refute the arguments presented by Hamish?
Because they can't refute them....
It's why they're so angry all the time.;)“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
but you do go out of your way to wind them up and the same folls bite every time :THAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Because they can't refute them....
It's why they're so angry all the time.;)
good man hamish - keep it up!!0 -
Hamish, you need to get out more. Seriously, you do.0
-
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Because they can't refute them....
It's why they're so angry all the time.;)
Actually Hamish, it's you that comes across as angry in quite a lot of your posts, obviously scarred by the crash more than you'll admit. The bears here are pretty calm.0 -
says the man that feels the need to put Aberdeen house prices in his footer of posts when he lives no where near to the place and lives in Bath....Actually Hamish, it's you that comes across as angry in quite a lot of your posts, obviously scarred by the crash more than you'll admit. The bears here are pretty calm.
where's Boomerangs when you need him to post that picture of Obsession for Men?0 -
Doctor_Gloom wrote: »Hamish, you need to get out more. Seriously, you do.Actually Hamish, it's you that comes across as angry in quite a lot of your posts, obviously scarred by the crash more than you'll admit. The bears here are pretty calm.
Excellent rebuttal to the issues raised, well done, all we need now is an ascii facepalm.This is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com0 -
Excellent rebuttal to the issues raised, well done, .
So many bear posts, such little substance.....:rotfl:“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Good post, shame MoronScummerWebb can't see it here.
I wonder if we'll see a single structured counter argument today?
Detailed point by point debate with Hamish is, well, pointless. No-one is prepared to invest as much time in it as he is. However repetetive and/or fallacious the points he's making might be, he'll always have the last word.
Hamish's posts are pretty much all based around a few pertinent facts repeated ad nauseum. These are: (1) low (and possibly persistently low) interest rates; (2) low rate of housebuilding; and (3) rising prices in Q2-Q4 2009.
But he doesn't think, or even try to think, like any kind of professional economist/analyst/financial person. He takes his facts and goes straight into Daily Express mode, predicting 'soaring' or even 'rocketing' inflation.
He doesn't ever seriously think about the relationship between average incomes and house prices, e.g. he might attempt to posit something along the lines of, 'maybe with a decent level of housebuilding a ratio of about 3.5 is the norm but with low housebuilding a higher, even a much higher, ratio of 5 or so may be sustainable' - rather, he prefers to [implicitly] assume that any ratio whatsoever [6? 7? 67?] is perfectly sustainable.
He doesn't ever seriously think about the relationship between interest rates and inflation (e.g. back in the days of the very high interest rates that he's fond of referring to, double digit wage inflation had often been absolutely the norm, quickly rendering historic debts more or less meaningless).
He doesn't ever seriously think about the relationship between employment and house prices. His observation above that house prices rose in the same year as unemployment rose [2009] is literally pathetic when the exact same argument could be applied to falling interest rates & falling priecs in 2008 [but reliance on such a snapshot would be so fatuous that I doubt anyone with half a brain would do so].
The truth is that there are very decent arguments on both sides but Hamish [day after day, month after month, repeatedly] extremely clumsily cherry-picks his favourites, backed up with a few very cynically chosen bits of casual empirics, and never makes any attempt to guesstimate what he thinks a sustainable price level is.
His arrogance and foolishness in thinking that he's given a Cambridge-educated economist, with 20 years' worth of financial experience, and who writes well, some kind of 'roasting' by recycling his provincial estate agent's mantra is the icing on the cake.
That's pretty much why it's generally much easier & fairer just to sling a bit of abuse in his direction rather than getting bogged down in silly detailed debates.FACT.0 -
Hang on a minute, what is with all the Hamish defenders?
This is the same poster who's occasional rebuttals to people include calling them "monkeyboy", or posting well thought out, reasoned & researched responses like:HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »This whole thread is........
How about the fact that he chooses not to respond to genuine questions like I posted to him on this thread in post 7 https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/33032807#Comment_33032807
Or repeatedly failed to acknowledge that he posted perported "facts" about me which were actually assumptions made on the basis of 1 post, & when challenged declined to respond.
Seriously, major double standards here. A pessemistic viewpoint is a troll, whereas Hamish is a reasonable minded researcher with an opinion that people find difficult to respond to? Please, do me a favour.
Those of you defending him want to look at yourselves. His postings and actions are frequently nasty and obnoxious.
And he isn't man enough to offer an apology when proved wrong either.It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards