Property Fund - Suspended

bigadaj

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Germany was a beneficiary of the rate that the DM entered the Euro. Prior to that wasn't an economic powerhouse.

Presumably you mean the dm was too weak.

I'd disagree about Germany being a powerhouse, it has been for the last 150 years or more. It's dominated Europe economically for most of that time, just unfortunate that militaristic ventures turned out so badly.

gadgetmind

bigadaj wrote: »

Yes, but this then logically suggests that the eurozone can't survive as it is, with the weaker members being forced out.

I can't see how it can survive without them accepting that money needs to flow from the powerhouses to "club med", which the German public aren't particularly receptive to TBH,

As for weaker members being forced out, it might make more sense for the stronger ones to announce they are leaving!

Thrugelmir

bigadaj wrote: »

Presumably you mean the dm was too weak.

I'd disagree about Germany being a powerhouse, it has been for the last 150 years or more. It's dominated Europe economically for most of that time, just unfortunate that militaristic ventures turned out so badly.

Some would say otherwise.

From Sick Man of Europe to Economic
Superstar: Germany’s Resurgent Economy

In the late 1990s and into the early 2000s, Germany was often called “the sick man of Europe” a phrase usually attributed to comments by Czar Nicholas I of Russia about the troubles faced by the Ottoman Empire in the mid-19th century. Indeed, Germany’s economic growth averaged only about 1.2 percent per year from 1998 to 2005, including a recession in 2003, and unemployment rates rose from 9.2 percent in 1998 to 11.1 percent in in 2003, and unemployment rates rose from 9.2 percent in 1998 to 11.1 percent in 2005 (according to World Bank data). Today, after the Great Recession Germany is described as an “economic superstar”.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctpb21/Cpapers/jep_germany_competitiveness.pdf

SallyG

Just wondering whether "diversified" income drawdown pension funds like mine [?most others?] should invest in commercial property?

Spooked by this:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/treasury-committee/news-parliament-2015/economic-relationship-with-eu-evidence-16-17/

gadgetmind

SallyG wrote: »

Just wondering whether "diversified" income drawdown pension funds like mine [?most others?] should invest in commercial property?

The clue is in the name. "Diversified" means that you recognise that you don't know what's going to happen, so a "hold a bit of everything" approach makes a lot of sense.

Of course, if we take this thinking one step further, should we restrict ourselves to old holding things that generate the income we want and would perhaps some growth oriented assets in there make sense?

Take a look at a Woodford portfolio to see this in action. He basically does fairly traditional UK income alongside small cap (almost) venture capital, with some wacky stuff thrown in.

bigadaj

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Some would say otherwise.



http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctpb21/Cpapers/jep_germany_competitiveness.pdf

Well for a decade or so they were hit by the absorption of the east, still a relative blip. Similar to periods after ww2 and during Weimar times, but they pull themselves out of it.

bigadaj

gadgetmind wrote: »

I can't see how it can survive without them accepting that money needs to flow from the powerhouses to "club med", which the German public aren't particularly receptive to TBH,

As for weaker members being forced out, it might make more sense for the stronger ones to announce they are leaving!

Well the uk has sort of done the latter.

I think this is the problem with the whole debate, it's been too simplistic. There are certainly economic problems for the uk flowing from Brexit, but markets act rationally and what we've seen is an increase in uncettainty and risk having a disproportionate effect on weaker economies. The U.K. Is affected, more so than the us or Germany or Japan, but less than Italy, Greece or Spain.

It's not practical for Germany to hold up the euro, the Scandinavians don't want to get involved. I'd say it's more likely that weaker med countries exit voluntarily rather than being forced out, France has its own crises to worry about. The problem then is the French and German banks go bust once the med loans are formally defaulted on, rather than assuming they are solvent, which brings issues straight back to berlins door.

gadgetmind

bigadaj wrote: »

Well the uk has sort of done the latter.

We were discussing currency unions, which are a whole different matter. Stronger players benefit from the EU as a whole as we can easily pull in much-needed and well-educated workers, but it's harder to see what the underdogs gain.

I think this is the problem with the whole debate, it's been too simplistic. There are certainly economic problems for the uk flowing from Brexit, but markets act rationally and what we've seen is an increase in uncettainty and risk having a disproportionate effect on weaker economies.

I don't expect Brexit to negatively impact any other EU members, and it may even strengthen the EU.

It's not practical for Germany to hold up the euro, the Scandinavians don't want to get involved. I'd say it's more likely that weaker med countries exit voluntarily rather than being forced out

I guess we'll see, but the problems of the Eurozone should not be conflated with the success of the Union itself.

bigadaj

gadgetmind wrote: »

We were discussing currency unions, which are a whole different matter. Stronger players benefit from the EU as a whole as we can easily pull in much-needed and well-educated workers, but it's harder to see what the underdogs gain.



I don't expect Brexit to negatively impact any other EU members, and it may even strengthen the EU.



I guess we'll see, but the problems of the Eurozone should not be conflated with the success of the Union itself.

They are implicitly linked as far as I can see.

You can't join the European Union without joining the eu, so long as you satisfy the conditions which Sweden has studiously avoided in doing for example.

As we discussed you can easily see most of the Southern European states dropping out of the euro, will they not then drop out of the Union as well, either voluntarily or by Brussels edict.

To maintain the status quo as you've stated there is a reliance on transfers from the richer north to the south and east, German voters aren't happy about doing this already. Also if this cases then as I stated earlier the loans will default bringing the French and German banks close to insolvency.

It now looks as though the Italian banking crisis will get worse, whether they get around eu state aid limitations or not.

talexuser

bigadaj wrote: »

Well for a decade or so they were hit by the absorption of the east

I agree, having worked there in the past. They effectively bailed out an entire bankrupt country and then just got on with it. It was something we could never do in a million years I think.