• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Nationwide Building Society House Price Index March 2019

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by scooterscot View Post
    Imagine creating money out of thin air just by pressing a button.
    Like Bitcoin ?
    'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by meridian View Post
      Just because they are European countries, does not make it the EU. It’s not disingenuous, it’s accuracy.

      Speaking of accuracy, you might want to redo your calcs with the correct UK amount of £435bn as per the BoE:

      Page not found | 404 Error | Bank of England

      And then translate both the ECB and BOE QE amounts to USD so that the calculations are working from the same basis.

      So

      UK : .570 / 2.6 = 21.9%

      ECB: 2.92 / 13 = 22.4%

      Assuming GDP is the correct measure to compare against.

      Against currency in circulation (given that QE is used when printing new banknotes isn’t an option) then:
      UK: 435 / 70bn = 6.2 times
      ECB: 2.6t / 1.2t = 2.3 times

      So depending on what measure you use to compare QE to, the ECB could be slightly more, or the UK could be.

      Either way, it seems to me to be an exaggeration to say the “the EU” is the “worst offender”, when other comparisons may show differently.
      You do realise the ECB is an institute of the EU (Institutions of the European Union - Wikipedia), as much a part of the EU as the European Parliament.

      Also note your $0.570tn is based current USD/GBP exchange rates.

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by TheGreenBastard View Post
        You do realise the ECB is an institute of the EU (Institutions of the European Union - Wikipedia), as much a part of the EU as the European Parliament.
        A part of the EU, but not the EU. Similarly, the U.K. is (currently) a part of the EU, but not the EU.

        So you saying the ECB is “the EU” implies that the U.K. is also involved in decisions for the ECB including QE, which is not correct. It is governed by an Executive Board plus the governors of the central banks of the 19 Euro area countries, not “the EU”.


        Also note your $0.570tn is based current USD/GBP exchange rates.
        Base it on any exchange rates that you like, as long as both the Euro and GDP conversion are consistently applied it shouldn’t matter significantly. What you’ll probably find is that there are fluctuations in percentages depending on whether you take exchange rates at the 2014 high of 1.7 or the 2017 low of 1.2 (cable) or anywhere in between.

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by meridian View Post
          A part of the EU, but not the EU. Similarly, the U.K. is (currently) a part of the EU, but not the EU.

          So you saying the ECB is “the EU” implies that the U.K. is also involved in decisions for the ECB including QE, which is not correct. It is governed by an Executive Board plus the governors of the central banks of the 19 Euro area countries, not “the EU”.




          Base it on any exchange rates that you like, as long as both the Euro and GDP conversion are consistently applied it shouldn’t matter significantly. What you’ll probably find is that there are fluctuations in percentages depending on whether you take exchange rates at the 2014 high of 1.7 or the 2017 low of 1.2 (cable) or anywhere in between.
          It's still "the EU", except it's limited to the currency union (naturally). All 19 are EU countries.

          Me saying it's the EU is exactly it is, an institute of the EU handles QE. UK doesn't participate as it's not a member of the currency union.

          The European Parliament chooses the executive members.

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by scooterscot View Post
            I suspect the majority of house price rises were thanks to the BoE burning printing presses and ultra low interest rates.
            Thank you for contacting CUK with your puerile ramblings. All of our posters who give a toss are busy at the moment.

            Your drivel IS important to us however and your views are currently 3789th in the queue, just behind the ship's cat. Please continue to vent your nonsense, there is not enough wind and piss here at the moment.

            “The period of the disintegration of the European Union has begun. And the first vessel to have departed is Britain”

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
              Like Bitcoin ?
              Exactly. I see a few posters have clocked on. Expect for the small difference being that the BoE can still keeping printing. Bitcoin, however can not. Go figure.
              "Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience". Mark Twain

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by TheGreenBastard View Post
                It's still "the EU", except it's limited to the currency union (naturally). All 19 are EU countries.

                Me saying it's the EU is exactly it is, an institute of the EU handles QE. UK doesn't participate as it's not a member of the currency union.

                The European Parliament chooses the executive members.
                Not quite. Executive members are put forward by the Euro countries, and discussed within the Eurogroup before going to the Council to agree on a recommendation. Given that this is political, it’s likely that the Eurogroup have already decided on their choice(s) before taking them to the Council.

                The European Parliament is only consulted, it neither chooses nor approves.

                Handy graphic here:
                Appointment of the ECB Executive Board - Consilium

                Comment


                  #18
                  Bit weird I could be exercising my democratic right voting in the European elections whilst me indigenous quitlings will be left without a voice despite the outcome of those elections having a considerable impact on them.
                  "Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience". Mark Twain

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by meridian View Post
                    Not quite. Executive members are put forward by the Euro countries, and discussed within the Eurogroup before going to the Council to agree on a recommendation. Given that this is political, it’s likely that the Eurogroup have already decided on their choice(s) before taking them to the Council.

                    The European Parliament is only consulted, it neither chooses nor approves.

                    Handy graphic here:
                    Appointment of the ECB Executive Board - Consilium
                    No matter how you spin it; it's still in effect the EU - Eurogroup being the collection of EU states in the euro currency collective.

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Originally posted by TheGreenBastard View Post
                      No matter how you spin it; it's still in effect the EU - Eurogroup being the collection of EU states in the euro currency collective.
                      Stating facts is not spin. You stating “in effect” is spin.

                      HTH, but at this point I seriously doubt it.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X