House Price Gains 'strongest in 6 years'

wotsthat

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Now that you have fixed for another 5 years time for an increase then if it isn't really going to affect borrowers. Start giving some benefits back to the prudent.

I don't think the BoE are that bothered whether I've fixed or not.

Why should rates rise just because people can afford them. I think people could afford to pay more for bread - why not increase that too?

grizzly1911 wrote: »

I did see something today, can't find it now, that suggests that annuity rates are starting to increase from the pitiful returns currently available.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23146968

I saw it. There's more pressure now on rates than there has been at anytime in the last 5 years. Government borrowing costs are drifting up and the increased gilt yields are filtering through to annuities.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Why would I find them interesting?

Because you are inferring you don;t know where the extra employment is gopng to come from , so I show you two very recent articles from respected sources showing that business confidence is at a 6 year high and manufacturing growth (not confidence) is at a two year high

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Don't ask me where this extra employment is going to come from .

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The employment figures are what should be looked at, including all those hundreds of thousands extra on part time instead of full time. .

Ok then, employment figures.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/march-2013/index.html

The employment rate for those aged from 16 to 64 for November 2012 to January 2013 was 71.5%, up 0.3 percentage points from August to October 2012. There were 29.73 million people in employment aged 16 and over, up 131,000 from August to October 2012.

Going back to 2009, I see the employment level was 29.379 million.
Therefore there are approximately 351,000 more people employed in 2013 that there was in 2009
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/march-2009/march-2009-stat-bulletin.pdf

In 2005, the employment level was 28.8 million.
There are 580,000 more employed in 2013 that was in 2005.

Prior to that we can see the trend in employment has increased over the years from 1971
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/labour-market-review-2006---archived/labour-market-review-2006--archived.zip
See chapter three.



How do you respond to these employment figures?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Why you carry on with this "they can just work more and spend less" malarky is beyond me.

For the record, I have never said people could "just work more spend less".
Are you trying to muddle posts again?
Stick to the facts Graham .

grizzly1911

wotsthat wrote: »

I don't think the BoE are that bothered whether I've fixed or not.

True. But at least you are protected.:)

wotsthat wrote: »

Why should rates rise just because people can afford them. I think people could afford to pay more for bread - why not increase that too?

Give the BOE one of it's levers back.

Put some money back into the hands of the prudent.

Conrad

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Put some money back into the hands of the prudent.

Grizz, is it then imprudent to take a mortgage and invest in a tax free main resi?
Some folk I know mortgaged to the hilt in order to have max' downsizing potential on retirement, all of it tax free. They are pretty sensible types. One is an architect, and his place is worth nearly £2m, yet his £250k mortgage 15 years ago seemed massive.

demystified

Tancred wrote: »

Only a minority of intelligent and clear sighted people really know what goes on behind the scenes.

And you're one of these I suppose? :think: How generous of you to impart your inspired wisdom to us poor, befuddled, unintelligent folk who know no better.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Kiss goodbye to your rate rise if literally millions would find a rate rise unsustainable.

I think we already discussed this on another thread?

While the BOE certainly do want to keep rates low. Mervyn King (again, this is not me) stated that they will do all they can to do so. However, if world events dictate that rates have to increase, then indeed, rates will increase.

There is little the BOE can do in those circumstances.

grizzly1911

Conrad wrote: »

Grizz, is it then imprudent to take a mortgage and invest in a tax free main resi?
Some folk I know mortgaged to the hilt in order to have max' downsizing potential on retirement, all of it tax free. They are pretty sensible types. One is an architect, and his place is worth nearly £2m, yet his £250k mortgage 15 years ago seemed massive.

Leveraging the potential HPI you frowned upon with the RTBers? You know the unearned bit. They can always downsize a bit sooner if it is a problem to service the debt..

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

While the BOE certainly do want to keep rates low. Mervyn King (again, this is not me) stated that they will do all they can to do so. However, if world events dictate that rates have to increase, then indeed, rates will increase.

There is little the BOE can do in those circumstances.

Just part of weighing up the pros and cons.

It would need to be some special world event that would push, to paraphrase Mervyn King, millions of households into an unsustainable position as far as paying their mortgage goes.

Can you think of circumstances where literally millions of people defaulting is seen as a price worth paying to get an interest rate rise in?

I can see mortgage defaults being seen as acceptable collateral damage when a rate rise happens but millions?

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Can you think of circumstances where literally millions of people defaulting is seen as a price worth paying to get an interest rate rise in?

I can see mortgage defaults being seen as acceptable collateral damage when a rate rise happens but millions?

I've never stated millions would default. You are implying I have by asking these silly leading questions.

I'm not sure whyh you are being quite so aggressive in your "interogation". You did it with the "day trader" stuff which you invented out of thin air too.

I've stated why I said what I said. I've given you the quote of what was said by Mervyn King (hence why i was stating it in the first place). We've discussed the interest rate thing already, but this time you are implying I have said millions will default, which I haven't.

It's impossible to have any type of conversation when it seems every post I'm having to clarify the situation or what was stated.

Really you should be having a pop at Mervyn King....not me. I'm just a messenger reading the media.

If you want examples of why interest rates would rise, then that is pretty simple. It's been discussed at length in most of the media over the past couple of weeks and indeed is being discussed again as lenders are putting their mortgage rates up as a response to the financial landscape out there.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I've never stated millions would default. You are implying I have by asking these silly leading questions.

You quoted Mervyn King who said that rate rises would be unsustainable for millions and I think it's fair to say you think that mortgage holders can't adjust. That sounds like the road to default?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

If you want examples of why interest rates would rise, then that is pretty simple. It's been discussed at length in most of the media over the past couple of weeks and indeed is being discussed again as lenders are putting their mortgage rates up as a response to the financial landscape out there.

So we should be seeing a sharp increase in arrears, defaults & repossessions if rates are rising and millions will find them unsustainable?

Didn't Halifax increase their SVR a little while ago - not heard anything about a big increase in distressed mortgage holders.

What about Bank of Ireland - didn't they have a stiff increase in their SVR from 1st May? Wonder if they're seeing a big increase in arrears yet.

I think Mervyn King will be proven to be wrong - he was just doing his bit to keep rates down.

Don't you find it a little far fetched?