Is London ready for the Big Squeeze?

chucky

brit1234 wrote: »

Prices are coming down here in West London

not again brit.... you got proved wrong the other day...

sales prices have been increasing

Jonbvn

carolt wrote: »

With all due respected to our respected fellow poster , I'm not sure his opinions carry as much weight as 'official' economists.

It is a fact that the BOE will still use the M4 data as the basis for any IR decisions.

If you want another economist - how about Anatole Kaletsky at the Times?

And if growth does seem endangered by next year’s cuts, the Bank of England can be relied on to keep interest rates at rock-bottom and to pump out more money. Even with yesterday’s inflation figure far above target, the Bank remains confident that the spending cuts will keep prices under control.

Pete111

I read that article with the same sense of amazement that Carol did.

I also liked the way it managed to segue seamlessly from a story about nightclubs via house prices to personal financial idiocy

Personally the area of london I rent out a flat in appears to be going a bit crazy - peak prices and then some looking at rightmove.

System

chucky wrote: »

not again brit.... you got proved wrong the other day...

sales prices have been increasing

I've highlighted your error, brit only looks at propertybee

michaels

They are only official because they are working for the govt for lower wages than are available in the private sector - so may be they didn't get the private sector jobs?

I have just as much confidence in G's reading of the economic runes as I do of Roger Bootle's or the MPC members'.

Before his head stops fitting through the door tho I have to say that I don't have much confidence in any of them! Economists should stick to the behavioural stuff that actually works.

carolt wrote: »

With all due respected to our respected fellow poster , I'm not sure his opinions carry as much weight as 'official' economists.

Sorry, Gen.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

They are only official because they are working for the govt for lower wages than are available in the private sector - so may be they didn't get the private sector jobs?

I have just as much confidence in G's reading of the economic runes as I do of Roger Bootle's or the MPC members'.

Before his head stops fitting through the door tho I have to say that I don't have much confidence in any of them! Economists should stick to the behavioural stuff that actually works.

To be fair michaels et al, I don't describe myself as an economist. All I do is take some pretty basic economic theory and a little common sense and try to apply it to what I see around me. I think the latter is what is missing from a lot of economics, that and usually it is reported via the filter of journalists who know less about economics than the average Chancellor of the Exchequer!

TBH, economics is hopeless at prediction, the only problems are that prediction is the fun bit and also it's where the money's at (even in the public sector, AIUI anyway). Economics is generally very good at explaining where we are now and how we got there. The only trouble is, nobody wants to know about that.

drc

carolt wrote: »

Jodie Oliver, 31, who is buying her first flat with her boyfriend in Tufnell Park for £220,000 with a tracker mortgage, says the purchase already feels like a huge leap into the dark without the added worry of rising interest rates.

She says: ”We've already given up nice little treats like vine tomatoes, freshly squeezed orange juice and Parma ham. We've stretched ourselves, all our savings have gone into this and if rates go up more than two per cent we'll find it difficult. It will mean only going out to dinner once a week :eek: instead of two or three times and we will have to start saying no to going out to dinner with friends when they ask. Holidays abroad will be out of the question.”"

Surely this is against her human rights?

carolt

Really2 wrote: »

10th of May 2010, It was forecast to go up Carol so I don't think 2 days before the inflation report many economists got a surprise do you?.

You seem desperate that rates go up to cause problems, but as proven most economist still do not think rates will shoot up like you think/want.

The economy will remain to be targeted more than inflation while growth is so weak/delicate.

I like the way that you here, and uber bulls such as Hamish generally, manage to walk that tightrope so nicely, where on the one hand, prices are bound to rise because everything in the economy is tickety boo, unemployment figures just a blip, etc, and yet, on the other hand, apparently at the same time, to use your words, the economy is "so weak/delicate" that it would collapse immediately if they put rates up.

You want to have it both ways.

I personally think that you are right that the economy is "so weak/delicate" - BUT I think that with inflation rising as rapidly as it is the BoE may not have any choice in the matter.

carolt

Generali wrote: »

To be fair michaels et al, I don't describe myself as an economist. All I do is take some pretty basic economic theory and a little common sense and try to apply it to what I see around me. I think the latter is what is missing from a lot of economics, that and usually it is reported via the filter of journalists who know less about economics than the average Chancellor of the Exchequer!

TBH, economics is hopeless at prediction, the only problems are that prediction is the fun bit and also it's where the money's at (even in the public sector, AIUI anyway). Economics is generally very good at explaining where we are now and how we got there. The only trouble is, nobody wants to know about that.

Very wise post.

I was arguing with my OH last night (who studied economics and has marginally more faith in it as a science than I do), that I basically thought econmics was pants because since when have people always acted rationally?

It's no wonder all economists are male. If they were women, they'd know this rational stuff is just baloney.

Or to put it in a less sexist way, most of the stuff that really matters isn't remotely quantifiable. However much economists would like it to be.

Really2

carolt wrote: »

I like the way that you here, and uber bulls such as Hamish generally, manage to walk that tightrope so nicely, where on the one hand, prices are bound to rise because everything in the economy is tickety boo, unemployment figures just a blip, etc, and yet, on the other hand, apparently at the same time, to use your words, the economy is "so weak/delicate" that it would collapse immediately if they put rates up.

You want to have it both ways.

Can you point out once where I have ever said everything is OK and that house prices are bound to rise.

The only reason people conceived me as a Bull was because I thought house prices were going to fall 25-35% and things were not going to be as bad as many on here made out.
I have banging the drum we would see stagnation and slugish growth for well over a year now.
I would not have touched a lifetime tracker if I thought everything was going to be rosey would I?

I think you have got the wrong guy here carol I am not trying to get it both ways,
But would putting rates up when inflation is 3.7% in a weak economy be having it both ways. We know why you want rates to go up carol and it is not because of inflation.;)

PS diesel is 3p a liter cheaper this month.:T (just for LJ)