Central Banks

youngdan wrote:

Falling house prices is in everyones interest. A vital necessity of life and the cheaper the better

Seconded.

The idea that the family home is an "investment" is peculiar to a few countries. In a lot of european countries people of all income brackets prefer to rent.
Rising house prices are a nightmare for a lot of reasons. One is that the small section of the workforce who are buying their first house put a lot of upward pressure on wages, with inflation and loss of competitivity as a result for the whole economy.

youngdan wrote:

Falling house prices is in everyones interest. A vital necessity of life and the cheaper the better

Not for those who spent 850k on a house and now that same house or one very like it is nearer 550. Surely they don't want those low prices to remain low. Here's a Pin link on that very house:

Quote :

Was 850k

Cached link

Now 780k

Link

Sold for 585k by same agent in late 2005

SBP link

http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=12946

and this is the feckin house



It's hardly worth 575k but it is near the Pigeon House, some Dart Stations and a greyhound track near the centre enough of Dublin. What do you think a house should be worth youngdan, before either sense or interest rates, tax, kicks in to drive the price down?

It should not be so expensive that a person has to slave for 40 years to pay for it. What would you call a lad that slaves for 40 years.

Anyone that paid almost a million for a house deserves what they get.

That is an average house and should be MAX 5 times average income and preferably a lot less.

Squire wrote:

That is an average house and should be MAX 5 times average income and preferably a lot less.

For a 3 bed near the city centre and Dart stations, maybe half a mill is about right???

Anyway the bit I'm on now is about Jackson - Andrew Jackson? and he wasn't long after Lincoln and like Lincoln he wanted the Americans to have their own money printed interest-free, probably. At least he wanted the Fed in public hands.

Guess what? He was shot.

expat girl wrote:

Squire wrote:

That is an average house and should be MAX 5 times average income and preferably a lot less.

For a 3 bed near the city centre and Dart stations, maybe half a mill is about right???

Only if the average income in the area is 100,000 or more! In London you would pay a hell of a lot more than that.

You are going to get areas that are more attractive for some reason, and command higher prices and attract higher wage earners. Parts of London are convenient for some with considerable disposable wealth.

The house in the link did not look in anyway exceptional or well located to me.

Often I can't see any rational reason why one area is cheap and another expensive. Often wealth itself makes an area interesting and supports a greater diversity of shops and facilities. A wealthy area is generally well maintained. It is a combination of many things, schools, transport, employment but sometimes there just is no rational!

Squire wrote:

expat girl wrote:

Squire wrote:

That is an average house and should be MAX 5 times average income and preferably a lot less.

For a 3 bed near the city centre and Dart stations, maybe half a mill is about right???

Only if the average income in the area is 100,000 or more! In London you would pay a hell of a lot more than that.

You are going to get areas that are more attractive for some reason, and command higher prices and attract higher wage earners. Parts of London are convenient for some with considerable disposable wealth.

The house in the link did not look in anyway exceptional or well located to me.

Often I can't see any rational reason why one area is cheap and another expensive. Often wealth itself makes an area interesting and supports a greater diversity of shops and facilities. A wealthy area is generally well maintained. It is a combination of many things, schools, transport, employment but sometimes there just is no rational!

The craziness is that a couple probably was earning that - but its most unlikely that the woman would not take a career break at some stage for children. High house prices put a squeeze on the numbers of children people have.

There are some very basic houses in Dublin in excellent central or coastal locations. People aren't snobbish about the appearance of the house so much as they are about the area. There's not so much desire for an old house as there is in the UK.

youngdan wrote:

This is a difficult article to follow but the whole idea of the Fed is to confuse. I hope to get back to this

http://seekingalpha.com/article/98991-how-bad-is-the-fed-s-balance-sheet

So what's a term auction facility?

Quote :

I was astonished when I heard that the Fed was contemplating increasing the Term Auction Facility to $900 billion. I wanted to take another look at the ever-changing balance sheet of the Fed to see how logistically Bernanke might be able to perform such a feat.

The one power that the Fed unquestionably possesses is the ability to create money. It traditionally did so by buying Treasury securities from the public, crediting the sellers' banks with newly created Federal Reserve deposits (a "liability" from the Fed's point of view), and adding the securities purchased to the Fed's asset holdings. Those newly created Federal Reserve deposits are essentially electronic credits that the banks could use to receive delivery of green cash from the Federal Reserve.

from a link in that article

Quote :

Term Auction Facility Increased to $900 Billion, With No Apparent Success

The increase in the size of the Term Auction Facility, from $150 billion a month ($75 billion per two 28 day auction) as of its last auction to $900 billion today (with an interim plan to go to $450 billion that was blown past in this announcement) is an admission that the banking system is not functioning. The size of the TAF, a single facility, now exceeds that of the Fed's entire recent balance sheet size.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/10/term-auction-facility-increased-to-900.html

More International Jewish conspiracy banking - worth watching these 7 youtubes if you're in the humour.

Here is the conspiracy theorist Lindsey Williams arguing - in 1986 - that there would be an eventual, pre-planned collapse of and bankruptcy of important banks in order for a small group to buy up the world. Believe it or don't believe it there's a lot of good references to currencies and to the idea of central banking.

Sometimes it might be useful to approach a difficult subject from a particular hysterical angle, in this case the NWO angle, - it can help to focus ideas and perhaps give a context for vocubulary.

This is the same lad that I was talking about a few months back that said there was a trillion barrels of oil up in Alaska. 905 disagreed. He said when oil was 140 that the decision had been made to drop it to 50 dollars to break Iran and Venizuela.

Karl Marx predicted this back in 1848:

http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html


A similar movement is going on before our own eyes. Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many a decade past, the history of industry and commerce is but the history of the revolt of modern productive forces against modern conditions of production, against the property relations that are the conditions for the existence of the bourgeois and of its rule. It is enough to mention the commercial crises that, by their periodical return, put the existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more threateningly.

In these crises, a great part not only of the existing products, but also of the previously created productive forces, are periodically destroyed. In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity -- the epidemic of over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed. And why? Because there is too much civilization, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary, they have become too powerful for these conditions, by which they are fettered, and so soon as they overcome these fetters, they bring disorder into the whole of bourgeois society, endanger the existence of bourgeois property. The conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them.

And how does the bourgeoisie get over these crises? On the one hand, by enforced destruction of a mass of productive forces; on the other, by the conquest of new markets, and by the more thorough exploitation of the old ones. That is to say, by paving the way for more extensive and more destructive crises, and by diminishing the means whereby crises are prevented.

The Financial Times reports that strengthening of the ECB's regulatory role is a strong possibility ( in spite of Charlie McCreevy's reluctance).

Quote :

Although Europe avoided a bank collapse on the scale of Lehman Brothers of the US, European policymakers fear the existing fragmented structure, based on national institutions, leaves the region dangerously exposed.

Proposals to strengthen the ECB’s role at the expense of domestic regulators would run into heavy opposition in national capitals. Some European Union policymakers would also prefer to keep eurozone bank regulation at arm’s length from the ECB’s responsibilities for setting interest rates and combating inflation.

But there are signs that Mr Papademos’s suggestions would command strong support in the ECB’s 22-strong governing council.

In the European Union, some 45 large cross-border institutions account for 70 per cent of total bank assets.

So far Jean-Claude Trichet, ECB president, has stopped short of suggesting explicitly that the powers of the Frankfurt-based institution should be enhanced. But last month he told the FT it was “clear that we can improve the present framework”.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/de79d808-da85-11dd-8c28-000077b07658,dwp_uuid=70662e7c-3027-11da-ba9f-00000e2511c8.html

McCreevy is a fatuous turkey. The sooner he is hauled out of there, the sooner we can start redeeming our reputation. We should not repeat the mistake of sending an economically semi-literate time-server like Harney to replace him. One embarrassment is enough.

Slim Buddha wrote:

McCreevy is a fatuous turkey. The sooner he is hauled out of there, the sooner we can start redeeming our reputation. We should not repeat the mistake of sending an economically semi-literate time-server like Harney to replace him. One embarrassment is enough.

Any suggestions for a good candidate ?