IMF details risks to UK growth

Graham_Devon

The International Monetary Fund says there are still "significant" risks to inflation, growth and unemployment in the UK.

In its latest assessment of the UK, the IMF said growth would be 1.5% this year - less than the government expects.

It backed the current austerity measures as "appropriate" to the present economic conditions.

However, it warned the government may need to react to new economic problems such as falling house prices.
The Office of Budget Responsibility had forecast 1.7% growth for 2011.

In its most likely "central scenario", the international financial regulator and lender predicted inflation would fall from 5% in 2011 to 2% by the end of 2012, while growth would accelerate to 2.5%.

And of interest to this forum...

The report warned that the ratio of house prices compared with average earnings was still 30% above its historical average - meaning prices could fall, so limiting consumer spending.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14370681

Seem to be calling for further stimulus for house prices? Or at least pointing in that direction.

heathcote123

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And of interest to this forum...

Seem to be calling for further stimulus for house prices? Or at least pointing in that direction.

Anyone for a return of MIRAS pre election ?

That shold sort it out.

geneer

heathcote123 wrote: »

Anyone for a return of MIRAS pre election ?

That shold sort it out.

HA HA HA. Heathcote types Shold. Instead os Should.

FUNNIEST THING EVER.



Sorry, just doing my bull impression.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And of interest to this forum...



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14370681

Seem to be calling for further stimulus for house prices? Or at least pointing in that direction.

It also says that nominal house prices are unlikely to fall due to the reasons put forward (many times) by the likes of Hamish.

So where does the report say this?

The report warned that the ratio of house prices compared with average earnings was still 30% above its historical average - meaning prices could fall, so limiting consumer spending.

It does say this.

On balance, staff’s central scenario assumes a reduction in the house
price-to-income ratio of 12 percent over the medium term (though house prices still rise
slightly in nominal terms).

Graham_Devon

Thats very nice stevie.

A bit like saying wages did rise by 0.5% when living costs rose 5%, and saying "yes, but its still a rise, I told you wages would rise".

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Thats very nice stevie.

A bit like saying wages did rise by 0.5% when living costs rose 5%, and saying "yes, but its still a rise, I told you wages would rise".

You mean the report doesn't say that prices will fall as you wrote? poor reporting from the BBC.

heathcote123

geneer wrote: »

HA HA HA. Heathcote types Shold. Instead os Should.

FUNNIEST THING EVER.



Sorry, just doing my bull impression.

os?

Retired.

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

You mean the report doesn't say that prices will fall as you wrote? poor reporting from the BBC.

I didn't say that. (again).

I quoted what was said and wrote about further stimulus.

And no, thats not what I meant either. I said what I meant when I responded to what you stated. You promptly ignored that and went for the usual "you mean" nonsense. I usually just write what I mean to say...I find it easier.

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And of interest to this forum...



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14370681

Seem to be calling for further stimulus for house prices? Or at least pointing in that direction.

To my reading the report predicts prices may fall but not that the Government should seek to prop them up.

Governments interfering in price discovery always seems to end in tears.

Masomnia

'IMF details risks to UK economy' isn't news.

'IMF supports coalition plans', as the article describes, is.

I do like the BBC, but sometimes the bias is a bit too obvious.

Wookster

I haven't read the report but I'd have to say the biggest risks come from abroad now rather than within. A slow down in the States or an implosion in Europe would certainly cause shock-waves here, though ironically, the UK seems to have established itself as a safe haven. Who'd have thought eh?