The Sun blames Brown for coming economic recession

My faith is ok, it is your abilities or should I say lack of them that is at test, in this regard we don't need to wait

It's quite rare for a vested interest to be so negative - and don't forget that Rightmove covers 50% of the UK property market. My guess is that their report is either fairly accurate OR It's false and they are determined to persuade sellers to reduce their prices.

Which brings us right back to where we started from.....

yes but do something about your grammar for chrissake!

"Chris.S" wrote

I do, but I'll need to do some digging for it as it was a month or two back.

No, it will be proven to be fact or false by the data when it is collected on houses sold and their purchase price. So basically you are using as a source of proof a report that your sceptical about. If it does bring us back to the start then we have plenty of data on actual prices of house that they were sold at, we haven't any sources of proof to back your claim, which is now so vague that it is irrelevant.

That should be a capital Y

Well, yes actually - we got precisely nowhere!

is a pronoun without a referring noun - the remainder of the sentence is meaningless.

No, that's quite incorrect, and really, your penchant for inventing dispute is bordering on a psychosis - the Rightmove link was posted purely as an antidote to your absurd pathological optimism, not as proof of anything. Check back.

vague? I thought it was crystal clear but for the benefit of those who haven't yet died of boredom, I'll paraphrase it one last time...

........the market is too transitional, too weak, too mixed for the usual run of generalised indices to be useful...only sellers and buyers will know the state of their local market.......

It's most important that you understand that the above is a reasoned contention, a postulate, it can't be proved or supported by ANY index since the postulate itself condemns them all as useless!! Do you see? Of course you can reject it and it's of no moment whatsoever to me if you do, but kindly stop hurling around your ridiculous kindergarten logic. There is no absolute truth here which is accessible to either one of us. Learn to deal with that.

Now, if your next post contains any more meaningless minced english or phony dispute, I shall have to ignore you.

Oh, I forgot to post this:-

".......The RICS said that property sales were 30% lower during May than they had been in the same month last year. And although prices have followed sales volumes downwards, they do not appear to have fallen enough to tempt new buyers into the market..."

I don't know about you but I think that means that prices have fallen but not enough.

That's probably enough on this topic for a while......

Two points:

1. This kind of divergence is a classic sign of the top of a bubble. If you're going to play a bubble with a view to getting out at the top, this is what you look for as it precedes the stampede.

1. The idea that prices can fall to a level where buyers will come in seems fine on first analysis. However this work mainly in cash markets where buyers can snap up a bargain. In markets where buyers must carry loans, they will worry that in falling markets, they'll be forced to carry loans worth more than the assets (negative equity) if prices continue to fall. This worry, and the simple fact that if they wait to buy, they'll get an even better bargain, tends to drive prices ever downwards in a reverse of the psychology of the boom whn buyers feel they must buy in at any price, lest prices rise higher.

The trouble is that it's the marginal buyer who decides what "enough" amounts to in this case, and it's not obvious what he's thinking.

Heh. Good one!

FoFP

Pronunciation flame snipped!

The rightmove link said prices were rising at a rate of 4.9% and forecast 0% rise. That in no way is a fall in house prices, but rather a reduction in the rate of increase. So whatever your link said it did not support you claim that house prices were falling.

Saying it does not mean it is true, do you actual have *any* proof to support this claim or is it just more opinionated self delusion?

Following copied from your other post

I wonder do you actually read these links before you post them as they claim there has been an increase in house prices but that rate of increase will fall to 0 That doesn't produce a fall in prices. You're inability to provide evidence further undermines your claim.

That doesn't refute John's claim. They could be going bankrupt for quite trivial amounts and are possibly more likely to go bankrupt than the 50+ age group who have an appreciating asset to fall back on (there house). Young people often have lower earnings with which to pay off debt.

I think the same psychology works in cash markets too. That is why central banks fear deflation and once it sets in it is quite hard to eradicate from an economy.

It makes it more plain who is going bankrupt. Of those in bankruptcy two thirds are under 30's who are using credit to support their lifestyles, the majority aren't those with mortgages.