House prices..

tbh I think this week I have started to get very worried about where all this is going. The government since the NR crisis just doesnt have a clue what its doing, and when your PM comes out with a statement

Speaking to the BBC, the prime minister said he wanted to show people worried about their homes and jobs that the "economy is safe for them over the next few months".
Click to expand...

You think what the hell is he playing at :(
 
Rotty said:
give it 6 months tops and all this will have blown over and we will have something new to talk about, prices aren't going to shoot up in the near term but in 2 years they will be similar to what they are today IMO
Click to expand...

not a chance, i doubt it will be over in 6 years.
 
yes the last time it took ten years 87 to 97 and prices didn't really start rising until 2001 buts that when the current seeds were being sewn
 
Well i'm hoping prices don't drop too much seeing as we bought our first place last August!

Tell you what though, i'm glad we went for our 5 year fixed rate mortgage with the way things appear to be going.
 
The Mad Rapper said:
This is moot anyway - the BoE is going to take on toxic mortgage debt for a period of 1 - 3 years as security against Government loans. This is a huge sign of how much pressure our financial system is under.

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews...169544420080416
Click to expand...

Link not working.

I don't understand why the government doesn’t just cut its losses and leave the market to do what it wants. They've had their fingers burned in the past by trying to fight market forces, and in the end it often proves futile. Worse still, if what they're trying to achieve doesn’t work, it could only serve to exacerbate the situation in the long term.
 
Last edited:
Stretch said:
Link not working.

I don't understand why the government doesn’t just cut its losses and leave the market to do what it wants. They've had their fingers burned in the past by trying to fight market forces, and in the end it often proves futile. Worse still, if what they're trying to achieve doesn’t work, it could only serve to exacerbate the situation in the long term.
Click to expand...

Because the population of this country has been conditioned to think the government should always step in and protect them from their own excesses or decisions, and therefore it would be electoral suicide for the government to do nothing...
 
Dolph said:
Because the population of this country has been conditioned to think the government should always step in and protect them from their own excesses or decisions, and therefore it would be electoral suicide for the government to do nothing...
Click to expand...
Madness isn't it. Ether way I can see the current economic problems being the undoing of the present government. Especially after their promises of ending the boom bust cycle, and painting it's self as the only party that can be trusted with the economy.

Tbh I don’t blame the government for the current problems. In the same way I don’t credit them with the past periods of economic success. Sometimes I wish they just kept well away.
 
Last edited:
Stretch said:
Madness isn't it. Ether way I can see the current economic problems being the undoing of the current government. Especially after their promises of ending the boom bust cycle, and painting it's self as the only party that can be trusted with the economy.

Tbh I don’t blame the government for the current problems. In the same way I don’t credit them with the past periods of economic success. Sometimes I wish they just kept well away.
Click to expand...

The thing that this government has done that I do blame them for is tax and spend when the going's been good, increasing taxes while people aren't really noticing, and somehow still managing to come up with spending plans that require borrowing. Taxes have increased massively under Labour, yet we've seen no real improvements, and we're still borrowing.

That's inexcusable.
 
Stretch said:
Link not working.

I don't understand why the government doesn’t just cut its losses and leave the market to do what it wants. They've had their fingers burned in the past by trying to fight market forces, and in the end it often proves futile. Worse still, if what they're trying to achieve doesn’t work, it could only serve to exacerbate the situation in the long term.
Click to expand...

I would hope that this episode shows why government intervention and regulation is necessary. Leaving the market to its own devices results in greed, excessive risk taking, panic and short-termism. If the regulators i.e. the FSA had done their job properly, then the crisis at Northern Rock would never have happened. It's no surprise that the crux of the credit-crisis started in the country that has very little in the way of financial services regulation either.

I think the government is trying to mitigate the effects of the credit crunch by following the example of Sweden during the last recession - here's an article explaining what they did and why: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7337007.stm

But the state aid was skilfully targeted, so none of the cash went to the bank's shareholders.
Click to expand...

This is key imo, I hope we're doing the same this time round.
 
Dolph said:
The thing that this government has done that I do blame them for is tax and spend when the going's been good, increasing taxes while people aren't really noticing, and somehow still managing to come up with spending plans that require borrowing. Taxes have increased massively under Labour, yet we've seen no real improvements, and we're still borrowing.

That's inexcusable.
Click to expand...
True, it doesn’t help and leaves little/no room for manoeuvre when times are hard and the country really dose need the money.

It funny how about the only thing that hasn't been suggested by this government in order to stimulate economic grow is tax cuts.

I don't believe any of really matters in the long term though. Government medalling only delays or speeds up the economic cycle, unless there's fundamental reason for stagnation in the economy.

scorza said:
I would hope that this episode shows why government intervention and regulation is necessary.
Click to expand...

Regulation yes. Intervention no.

When it comes to intervention the government can't be trusted to not take short term measures aimed at getting them re-elected rather than what's in the long term interest of the economy. This is why economic decisions such as interest rate have been pasted over to non elected bodies such as the Bank of England.
 
Last edited:
^I wondered about that too, but it may be that he's pleased to have got hold of a good deal while they were still available. The 'problem' in the mortgage market at the moment isn't so much the BoE base rate, but the fact that lenders have drastically reduced the number and quality of products on offer.
 
HangTime said:
^I wondered about that too, but it may be that he's pleased to have got hold of a good deal while they were still available. The 'problem' in the mortgage market at the moment isn't so much the BoE base rate, but the fact that lenders have drastically reduced the number and quality of products on offer.
Click to expand...

No fear the tax payer is stepping in to back up the sub-prime and other negative equity mortgages.

Good call Gordon.
 
I can't believe they're really doing this

Throwing good tax payers money after bad. Why is it down to the tax payer to bail out irresponsible borrowers and lenders?

I whole heartedly agree with the sentiments expressed in this article from the times yesterday.

I've been sensible. I have virtually no debt and plenty of savings. All this tells me is live frivolously and the government will bail you out when things go wrong. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Stretch said:
I can't believe they're really doing this

Throwing good tax payers money after bad. Why is it down to the tax payer to bail out irresponsible borrowers and lenders?

I whole heartedly agree with the sentiments expressed in this article from the times yesterday.
Click to expand...

Because it's cheaper than having to bail the homeowners out when the bank raises their SVR to insane levels and they default, or the economy crashes, causing large scale unemployment?
 
Last edited:
Dolph said:
Because it's cheaper than having to bail the homeowners out when the bank raises their SVR to insane levels and they default?
Click to expand...
Cheaper for who? Basically what you’re saying is the debt situation is so bad that ether we bail them out of the whole economy goes under. What the point in being sensible with your finances?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom