House prices expected to fall - Official

Really2

paul1964 wrote: »

I don't really know the background to the characters on this thread, but can't you all see that he fully understands terms like "real" and "nominal" and is probably having a bit of a chuckle each time he "presses your buttons".

But that would then mean we would have to believe everything he posted was utter *ollox he did not believe in.
Rather than just being utter *ollox.:D

So GD is a closet BTL Slumlord. I should have known.

System

paul1964 wrote: »

I don't really know the background to the characters on this thread, but can't you all see that he fully understands terms like "real" and "nominal" and is probably having a bit of a chuckle each time he "presses your buttons".

I don't believe it personally, I genuinely believe he is that dense.

Don't get me wrong, he's nice and everything, but just proper thick.

paul1964_2

chucky wrote: »

wow - i know you were born in 1964 and everything Paul but i can't believe that he got you too. i'm surprised in you.

I would love to reply to you, but I haven't got a clue as to the point you are trying to make.

However, I will try my best to converse with you.....

Hello Chucky. I know you were once an egg, but now you are a chicken.

chucky

paul1964 wrote: »

I would love to reply to you

you just did

Harry_Powell

I love the number of sockies that come out of the woodwork when I make a deflamatory statement. Anyone would think I deliberately made an appalling accusation just to see how many appeared. It's a bit like banging on a stepping stone and watching all the creepy-crawlies come running out to see what the fuss is.

I retract my earlier statement about bruises. I'm sure that carolt's kids are untouched - she's far too busy on here with her carolt and numerous other identities to waste on her family, positively or negatively.

I wonder when jojill and that other jo identity will make an apearance, then we'll have the full set. :rotfl:

p.s. I can see why carolt and devon create all the fuss on MSE, it's an amazing rush being in the middle of a post whirlwind! Stop it now though, I'm not as needy as the above mentioned posters. Back to a quiet life on the boards for me now.

botchjob

I love the hysterical nature of the house price debate. Reading the RICS report a little closer than the OP's tabloid headline reveals this totally shocking quote:

"Rics spokesman Jeremy Leaf said: "A shortage of stock has been one factor holding back transaction activity in the housing market, but the abolition of Hips is helping to belatedly address this issue. This is likely to be reflected in higher sales numbers over the coming months. However, with supply of property now beginning to outstrip demand there is a risk of some modest slippage in prices during the second half of the year."

OMG! Some modest slippage! NO! CRASH CRASH CRASH....cough...splutter... yadda...yadda...yadda...Zzzzzzz

davilown

Really2 wrote: »

No, there is only one way to view a graph. But some people may not understand what the data means.
If they are they don't understand in general they are wrong.
It is not like a piece of art and how you interpret it, it is a graphical representation of statistical information.


How you argue what the data means is up to you. But failing to understand it is usually a problem because it frustrates people who can see what is being argued is not correct to what it actually means

Graphical representation of statistical information can be interpreted in different ways. Suggest you understand statistic before quoting rubbish?

Any one who has completed statistical work, especially post graduate, knows that.

Harry_Powell

Here's Devon's sockie.

System

davilown wrote: »

Graphical representation of statistical information can be interpreted in different ways. Suggest you understand statistic before quoting rubbish?

Any one who has completed statistical work, especially post graduate, knows that.

So how many different ways can a YoY graph be interpreted?

Or should I say how many different, correct ways.

Really2

davilown wrote: »

Graphical representation of statistical information can be interpreted in different ways. Suggest you understand statistic before quoting rubbish?

Any one who has completed statistical work, especially post graduate, knows that.

What so three people looking at the same graph can interpreted the graph how they want as per the OP said?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's all about interpretation isn't it. Everyone can look at a graph, but out of 3 people, 1 person can see the graph differently as they hold a different viewpoint.

Mathmatics must be a lot easier to pass now you can use your own viewpoint. It is getting nearer to a social science.

I am sure the best way to view any graph is to look at it correctly though on that corresponds with the data. Not what you perceive it to mean.