pols pandering to the whiny producer interests. Marconi whinging about BT not buying British last week just took the biscuit.
Once it starts rolling downhill, it becomes a bugger to stop it.
Silly buggers dont realise is that chinese consumer goods helped keep inflation down.
*OUCH*, the next few weeks should be interesting, who says history doesnt repeat itself.greg
I think it's their general editorial coverage rather than their leader comments that the parties worry about. Their editorial slant is important because if it only manages to swing a few hundred votes a constituency from one party to another that's a lot of marginals going to change hands.
Steve
Dr Dalton in the late 1940s, I suspect.
No I don't assume, they are gathered in the data.
I have your word for that, but the figures don't support you.
Well done, a SE person who has a map.
Why for telling the facts?
I see you haven't got over the election defeat.
Only of economic growth misses the target.
significantly
Why should you believe the experts now when they have been constantly wrong?
You can also borrow.
Whose interest rates are you talking about and when?
No, they where higher than that
Not if they are predicting it.
You mean like a 75 years cycle? Isn't this getting rather stupid. If a cycle is a good predictor of a downturn then it should not require adjustments to make it work.
That alone would not do what is suggested.
In what way do you mean?
The above is right, it is right in any circumstance, it isn't something special or different. I note you say if something panics them, well if the people making all these claims and 70 year cycles are right then they will panic.
I don't think we are going to see the burst, but a issue I have discovered is that much of this debt is unsecured credit cards and by under 30's, use it to fund their lifestyles. Which if there was a burst as you say its effects may be different, from a housing point of view than previous, and may have more of an effect on finance companies than the economy.
If you search you will see that the data gathered in these reports is based on the sale price not the asking price.
That's the most sensible comment yet in this thread. :-)
A foolish method which can only work for a short term, you can borrow over the economic cycle. The problem with borrowing is (inflation is removed to make it easier, but it adds to this problem) If your income is 10% shorter then your spending in yr 1. So, you raise
900 and spend a 1000. You borrow a 100, if your economic plans are based and budgeted for expansion of spending (as they currently are, and would have been had any of the three main parties elected). Then next year, your income is still at 900 but your spending is now 1100, you are now borrowing 100 on top of your original 100 deficet for that year, we move to year three, again we raise only 900, and we spend 1200.You see the point.... When you borrow it makes the following year even more difficult. If you look back at PSBR over time, you can see how quickly a deficet can build up, out of hand.
I think maybe a comparison with Browns economic policy might be, buying a house on a large mortgage, that you can just afford, but the repayments are so high, if financially anything goes wrong, you will be overwhelmed.
I dont wish bad fortune on the economy, but i get the feeling it is coming.
Gaz The problem is, in yr 2, if your income is 10% shorter again
No, you're quite wrong on that. SOME are based on asking, others on completed. As has been so often pointed out, those that are based on completed prices are out of date and therefore have no bearing on "house prices at the moment"......
....which is what we are discussing.
And which official data publishes the gap between buying and selling prices?
sorry, my autopilot is very bored............that should be:-
..................the gap between asking and agreed prices?
You are able to get both, the data that I have used is the sold price, this data will have a knock on effect to asking prices anyway, they are both valid as long as you don't mix .
Well aware of the problems of borrowing after the doubling of debt by the Tories
It doesn't really matter which data sets you are using as long as you use like with like, both will give a view as to what is going on. However the data I am discussing is for purchases, not asking prices, and there has not been a reduction. Which data are you referring to and could we see some data to support any view?
FFS whats the point? If I try to put forward a resonable argument, you retort with such a silly remark. Why should I bother trying to make discussion with you??
Gaz
message
So you think doubling the PSBR is a silly point? Why am I debating with you if you are of that opinion.
Read my posts, see how i discuss how the Government can quickly lose control of the economy, taking years to get it back on track. I have referred to Healey, Lawson and Lamont.
Browns handling of the economy was at its best when he kept to Clarkes spending plans (which even Clarke reckoned he would have had trouble keeping), we had a few years of huge surpluses, and a few one offs like the mobile phone license etc, enabling Brown to make huge debt repayments, to his credit, where he could of wasted it on gvt largesse.
That has all changed now though. If you include PFI back into PSBR, things do not look healthy at all.
Gaz
That's gobbleygook.
post some data please.
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.