Bullish Bulls have been calling the "Soft Landing" every year since 2002.

geneer

RenovationMan wrote: »

Yes, but as I said in my post you are forgetting that once people are in the housing market they tend to stay there for most of their lives. Hence your assertion above is true that I could indeed have sold my house in 2007 for more than I did in 2010, but then the house that I bought would also have been more expensive so I would not have been any better off one way or the other.

Even better is that if house prices fall 10%, then I 'lose' £25,000 on the sale of a £250k house and 'gain' £45,000 on the purchase of a £450k house. However, the market doesnt work that way and the falls and rises in a market are transitory.

All of that is generally true RV, particularly the latter.
As to the former, you could of course have chosen to rent.

Either way it has nothing to do with your "personal soft landing" theory, because as much as you'd like to ignore events between two points, it doesn't mean events didn't happen.

Hence "utter twaddle".

geneer

RenovationMan wrote: »

Sorry Pimp, got the wrong end of the stick with original post (changed now). Poor old geneer is getting whipped across two websites. How humiliating for the poor chap. :rotfl:

Of course "whipped" in both cases means having unsubstantiated assertions about who's "winning" peppered inbetween weak and increasingly irrelevant attempts to negate my original argument and supporting evidence.

So not so much on the humiliation front.

But if you want to ally yourself with a star performer like pimperni1 RV, you go right ahead. :rotfl:

robmatic

geneer wrote: »

All of that is generally true RV, particularly the latter.
As to the former, you could of course have chosen to rent.

Either way it has nothing to do with your "personal soft landing" theory, because as much as you'd like to ignore events between two points, it doesn't mean events didn't happen.

Hence "utter twaddle".

Looks like Geneer is struggling to accept the limitations of a poorly chosen analogy...

I think RenovationMan has a point as it's only a crash if you end up in pieces on the ground, no?

geneer

RenovationMan wrote: »

Have you ever heard that old phrase "Just because you are paranoid, it doesn't mean that they are not out to get you?"

Well, in your case this phrase will suffice: "Just because you are too stupid to realise it, it doesn't mean that you havent lost an argument". :rotfl:

Heres a quote: "isn't it ironic, dontcha think". :rotfl:

geneer

robmatic wrote: »

Looks like Geneer is struggling to accept the limitations of a poorly chosen analogy...

I think RenovationMan has a point as it's only a crash if you end up in pieces on the ground, no?

Thats kind of the point.
The plane did crash.
Just as house prices did in fact crash.

No amount of semantic masturbation can change the simple salient facts.

geneer

RenovationMan wrote: »

Well we will not know how soft or hard the landing is until my 'airplane' actually lands will we? Look me up in 2062 when I sell my last house and go into rented sheltered accomodation. We shall see then if a bit of turbulence back in the old days really had any sort of lasting impact on my finances.

Back again to: if we draw a straight line between two points, and ignore the bit in the middle, then the bit in the middle doesn't count.

Yawn. Deeply uninteresting.

Pimperne1

geneer wrote: »

Thats kind of the point.
The plane did crash.
Just as house prices did in fact crash.

No amount of semantic masturbation can change the simple salient facts.

To use this analogy we were predicting a "plane crash" back as far as 2004. It didn't happen in 2004, the plane climbed higher. We were predicting a "plane crash" back as far as 2005. It didn't happen in 2005, the plane climbed higher. We were predicting a "plane crash" back as far as 2006. It didn't happen in 2006, the plane climbed higher. We were predicting a "plane crash" back as far as 2007. It didn't happen in 2007, the plane climbed higher. In 2008 and 2009 the plane gently decreased in altitude but hardly reached the 2004 altitude. In 2010 the plane commenced gently increases and decreases in altitude but was always much higher than it was in 2004. If I ever have to be in a "plane crash" that's the kind I would want. If I ever want to be affected by a "housing crash" this is the kind I would want (accepting that, as predicted and as usual, the worse is yet to come :rotfl:).

DervProf

RenovationMan wrote: »

Is the problem that you're getting your backside whipped because of your own analogy?

Not really. < No condiment inferred.

DervProf

RenovationMan wrote: »

Is this you finally coming clean that you are geneer?

Yes. I am geneer.

Drat, I knew I'd slip up one day.

How clever of you to work that out. I tried to fool you, but you sussed me out.












































:rotfl:

DervProf

RenovationMan wrote: »

Why do you need so many logons? Are you so insecure that you need to back yourself up with additional users?

Sad, really sad.

I know. Sitting here, friendless, single, not as clever or wealthy as you. I find that having another identity helps to take me away from all the sadness in my life. < You know what that means, you explained it earlier.