Is inflation starting to hit the housing market?

Graham_Devon

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I know which posters comments I am more aligned with.

Seems you do to me!

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I know which posters comments I am more aligned with.

Of course. As they justify your personal view of the property market and its direction of travel. Similar to your reliance on historical data.

I respect Generali's views as well. As presents well thought out and debatable points.

My views may well change tomorrow as further events unfold. I reserve that right. As I am totally flexible to the situation.

However reading some heavyweight statistical analysis recently. Has suggested to me that this financial crisis is no different to any that have preceded it. However one likes to dress it up.

Harry_Boyle

Thrugelmir wrote: »

My views may well change tomorrow as further events unfold. I reserve that right. As I am totally flexible to the situation.

I'm sorry Thrug, but I've never seen you change your viewpoint, which is almost exclusively downbeat. It's not just you, people in both camps remain positive or negative no matter what news comes out.

I always used to get annoyed at the (mis)use of the stockmarket terms 'bear' and 'bull' used on here because they refer to a short-term opinion on a particular market, not a permanent state of mind - i.e. no one is bearish about the stockmarket for life. However, it does seem on here that people are 'bears' or 'bulls' for life. It seems really odd for people peering in from the outside.

IveSeenTheLight

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Of course. As they justify your personal view of the property market and its direction of travel. Similar to your reliance on historical data.

It's not reliance on historical data, it's merely reflecting what has happened.

I know past performance is no gaurantee on future returns.

We can understand from historical information and learn from the lessons they provide.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I respect Generali's views as well. As presents well thought out and debatable points.

Indeed, which is why reflecting on Generali's points and your own, his have more weight in my opinion.

I've also reflected in here when BASLE II was announced, there were teams of people working out how to circumnavigate the banking laws and something which I though would happen with BASLE III.

It's interesting that America have alraady declined to operate under and that there is a consensus that Europe will follow a "watered down" version

Thrugelmir wrote: »

My views may well change tomorrow as further events unfold. I reserve that right. As I am totally flexible to the situation.

Indeed, as more information comes to light, you should re-valuate

Thrugelmir wrote: »

However reading some heavyweight statistical analysis recently. Has suggested to me that this financial crisis is no different to any that have preceded it. However one likes to dress it up.

Is this a reliance in historical data?

I too like to read up on events and make my own thoughts and decisions based on the information.

So far, I can show that many of my predicitons have been pretty close, but I am not envisaging deflation as you do.

We appear to have different viewpoints on the future and we shall see which ones come to bear.

Thrugelmir

Harry_Boyle wrote: »

I'm sorry Thrug, but I've never seen you change your viewpoint, which is almost exclusively downbeat. It's not just you, people in both camps remain positive or negative no matter what news comes out.

I always used to get annoyed at the (mis)use of the stockmarket terms 'bear' and 'bull' used on here because they refer to a short-term opinion on a particular market, not a permanent state of mind - i.e. no one is bearish about the stockmarket for life. However, it does seem on here that people are 'bears' or 'bulls' for life. It seems really odd for people peering in from the outside.

In answer to your first point. My view has been consistant from the outset. Back in 2007/08 no one envisaged the extent of the problems that have since emerged. If RBS announces a £5,000,000,000 loss for 2012 will you regard that a positive sign?

As for stockmarket comparisons. Are you referring to those (private investors) bulls that at the height of the DotCom boom, valued a business at £530 million. That had an annual turnover of £3 million and had never made a profit.

Anyway. Average period for holding a share is now 7 months. So the stock market is now more of a casino. With computers effecting trades. To make profit by trading with less and less emphasis on the underlying business.

If ultimately I am proved to be wildly wrong. Them I will happily post on here and say so.

Game is on and the temperature is rising notch by notch. So let's sit back and see how events unfold.

In the meantime I will continue to trade my personal equity portfolio in a totally contrarian manner. Seeking out value in unloved sectors. So yes I do take calculated risks.

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Is this a reliance in historical data?

A well recommended read. "This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly". So a synopsis.

Throughout history, rich and poor countries alike have been lending, borrowing, crashing--and recovering--their way through an extraordinary range of financial crises. Each time, the experts have chimed, "this time is different"--claiming that the old rules of valuation no longer apply and that the new situation bares little similarity to past disasters. With this breakthrough study, leading economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff definitively prove them wrong. Covering sixty-six countries across five continents, This Time Is Different presents a comprehensive look at the varieties of financial crises, and guides us through eight astonishing centuries of government defaults, banking panics, and inflationary spikes--from medieval currency debasements to today's subprime catastrophe. Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, leading economists whose work has been influential in the policy debate concerning the current financial crisis, provocatively argue that financial combustions are universal rites of passage for emerging and established market nations. The authors draw important lessons from history to show us how much--or how little--we have learned.

Using clear, sharp analysis and comprehensive data, Reinhart and Rogoff document that financial fallouts occur in clusters and strike with surprisingly consistent frequency, duration, and ferocity. They examine the patterns of currency crashes, high and hyperinflation, and government defaults on international and domestic debts--as well as the cycles in housing and equity prices, capital flows, unemployment, and government revenues around these crises. While countries do weather their financial storms, Reinhart and Rogoff prove that short memories make it all too easy for crises to recur.

An important book that will affect policy discussions for a long time to come, This Time Is Different exposes centuries of financial missteps.

IveSeenTheLight

Thrugelmir wrote: »

A well recommended read. "This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly". So a synopsis.

Sorry, I'm getting confused now.
Do you agree at looking at historical evidence or not?

If you do and in terms of housing, this latest correction was larger both in terms of nominal price correction and nominal percentage drop.

I'd be keen to understand why you think that this will fall further.