From the paper version of City AM:
Between August and September, prices rose 0.8 per cent on a seasonally-adjusted basis, with first-time buyers found themselves paying an average of 4.3 per cent higher than in September last year.
It's an encouraging sign for the market, after figures over the summer suggested the chancellor's cooling measures - which included a hike to stamp duty and rules limiting how much mortgage customers can borrow - were beginning to take their toll.
They added a few extra words to the online version:
It's an encouraging sign for the market (or discouraging for buyers), after figures over the summer suggested the chancellor's cooling measures - which included a hike to stamp duty and rules limiting how much mortgage customers can borrow - were beginning to take their toll.
And how any sensible person can be opposed to limiting the amount of money banks can create when houses are bought and sold is a mystery to me.
Nope - it was ridicule
52 minutes ago
4 comments:
And in related news http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/bank-of-england/12001252/Bank-of-England-fears-challengers-will-never-de-throne-the-giant-banks.html
Is it any fucking wonder you absolute twat Bailey when you officially sanction special privileges and cartelisation and the ex nihilo money creation for the incumbent banks?
L, correctamundo.
A more hopeful straw in the wind is Adair Turner's interview in Naked Capitalism entitled "To fix inequality and steady the economy" (on Net)which links bank money creation explicitly to land price inflation in the way we do (or some of us do).The concluding paragraph is the best summary and was read by Stacy Herbert on Keiser tonight.It was startling just to hear land values and money creation mentioned in the same breath on television.
Good to hear, DBC. Some days I definitely think that we're getting somewhere.
Post a Comment