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
Mortgage Lending for new purchase up 19%.
Comments
-
I`d say that`s pretty bad.
Why would anyone support/celebrate those conditions ?
So you do or don't admit the conditions are far from ideal for a stonking great crash?“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 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »So you do or don't admit the conditions are far from ideal for a stonking great crash?
Indeed, the conditions are not ideal for a "stonking great crash".
A "stonking great crash" would be bad.
Attempts to resume HPI, given these conditions, seem stupid. You shouldn`t pour petrol on a fire.
You should be pouring a little water on the fire, or at least requesting less petrol to be poured, not basking in the glow of it.30 Year Challenge : To be 30 years older. Equity : Don't know, don't care much. Savings : That's asking for ridicule.0 -
How do I post a graph?
EDIT:
I can't find how to post a pic anywhere! Oh well.
ISTL - If you plot the adjusted price for 1977 - Q1 1990 and then get excel to put on an exponential line and then lay on top of that the same data series extended to today and put another trend line on for the whole data set, you will see that the trend line is noticeably above where it sits today for that shortened data series.
I don't agree with Graham that prices are going to fall as he believes, but IF they do, it would put a significant downward drag on the trend line and 3, 5 or 10 years from now the prices as of today would be signficantly above the trend line.0 -
Procrastinator333 wrote: »How do I post a graph?
.
To post a graph or pic, insert the link to it into the dialogue box that appears when you clik on the postcard shaped icon to the left of the quotes icon in the "reply to a post" header bar.
At the bottom of this page, under the "quick reply" heading, you'll see some icons. The insert pic icon is the second from the right.
Alternatively wrap the link with the [] tags with the letters IMG in the first one, and /IMG in the second one.
If you created the picture yourself, you'll first need to host it somewhere on the web.“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 -
don't......
the old boy will get upset again...
Upset , not in the slightest.
Every time I see that graph published again it makes me chuckle.
I'll refrain from commenting as requested. As you put it earlier today it's "rear view mirror" and the events that occured during the timespan of the graph have no bearing as to future price movements.
0 -
Procrastinator333 wrote: »I think you miss my point. 2007 is irrelevant to the point I'm making.
If you cut the data at Q1 1990 and plot a trend line with the data from the start to that date, the trend line would be above where it sits as we look at the data now.
I agree, but could that be because it's over a shorter period?
The longer the timeframe the better.
Certainly 30 years is pretty reflective when considering it's house prices and standard mortgages are 25 years:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Good lord. I have never seen something so desperate.
Of course it curves. Thats my whole point. The trend line moves wth house price movements.
If they go up 200% for a total of 5 years, the trend line will be pulled up massively, even over 50 years data.
Therefore, the trend line is skewed, when you try to use it to say "look, this is normal".
Your right, it is desperate.
I should never have attempted to clarify compounded interest to you.
Carry on.
Let me just show this.
:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Why choose that specific timeframe of 13 years ending more than 20 years ago?Procrastinator333 wrote: »ISTL - If you plot the adjusted price for 1977 - Q1 1990
You could have said "plot the trend line between 1989 and 1996 and it would similarly irrelevant.
The graph's base is the latest month and calculates going backwards over a significant time period of 30 years to show what the long terms trend has been for house prices over the last 30 years that incorporates the peaks and troughs of the market:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Why choose that specific timeframe of 13 years ending more than 20 years ago?
You could have said "plot the trend line between 1989 and 1996 and it would similarly irrelevant.
The graph's base is the latest month and calculates going backwards over a significant time period of 30 years to show what the long terms trend has been for house prices over the last 30 years that incorporates the peaks and troughs of the market
I took 1990 as that was a comparable point (if you believe we are about to fall again) - E.g. Just off the previous peak.
Doh, just read Hamish's post. Got to figure how to host pics before I can post them. Not enough time now.
The point is that the trend is very different depending on when you look at it. Look Q1 1990 and it is steeper than today. Look as at 1995 and it looks far shallower than today.
The same may apply in 5 years. If prices track down as Graham suggests, the trend line will have shifted significantly and we today won't be on the trend line anymore.
That is the issue with this graph, it tends to support whatever is the curent position.
Anyway, can't post till later when I will figure out the graphs as it is easier explained with pics.0 -
Procrastinator333 wrote: »Doh, just read Hamish's post. Got to figure how to host pics before I can post them.
.
Set up an account with imageshack or photobucket.
Upload your pic. Get the URL.
Insert into MSE post.“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
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards