I hate to say I told you so
but I did call this current collapse a few weeks ago.

PJM, I really hope you were right.
( The Resident Loon Not a demographic. Do not measure., Tue 30 Sep 2008, 11:46, 22 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

I'm just glad we got rid of those pesky threaded replies

( Gilgamesh gazed in wonder as Frampton came alive, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 11:48, Reply)

@ Loony
What are you talking about?
(The Stig, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 11:49, Reply)

I'm happy that they'll soon close down QOTW as the lies and slander basically make this look like one big Daily Star headline.

( Jam Master Geordie Hero of B3ta., Tue 30 Sep 2008, 11:51, Reply)

I don't know what this thread is about but I can smell smouldering resentment, pent-up frustration and the acrid smoke of a petulant internet frenzy brewing right here

( Gilgamesh gazed in wonder as Frampton came alive, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:08, Reply)

Meh.
This too will pass.

The best part of two decades of irrational exuberance has come to an end. Unfortunately, a financial squeeze has coincided with an economic slowdown, so that makes things look hard. But the nature of these things is that a fall, though justified, has probably gone too far the other way.

Here're my predictions: the markets will stabilise over the next few months. That'll give time for some new regulations, perhaps aping the Spanish model - Spain has got off lightly - and perhaps with a renewed interest in mutuals. For a year or so, not much'll happen, because it'll take that long for liquidity to reenter the market. But it will. This time in a couple of years we'll be all happy and bouncy again.


At least, I hope that's what happens. At the moment, the (few) stocks and shares I own are worth less than when I bought them in 1997. My parents, on the other hand, bought gold a few weeks ago. Bastards.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:13, Reply)

We've been heading for a recession/ depression for a long time
my other half has been talking about this for the last year- what with the over inflated housing market, and the continued consumerism, we've been heading for this for ages.
( Madam Marlboro wonders if you've found her yet, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:30, Reply)

@ Enzyme
My best mate has just invested in some gold too, as he predicted this coming around this time last year.
( Boss Keloid Got your mother's maiden name tattooed on my arm, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:33, Reply)

see
loon, things like this just fuel the tin hat "WE ARE ALL DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED" brigade.

Shit happens, we will survive as a species, I very much doubt that this will cause the collapse of civilisation as we know it, same with the oil running out, our greatest feats of technological advancement usually come during periods of great turmoil
(Halfy By light alone, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:35, Reply)

@MM
We might yet not hit a recession. Noone'll know until we've analysed all the data. And that won't be for years yet - by which time it'll all be over.

Halfy - I think you're right. The lack of petrochemicals will be a huge problem, and possibly for decades - but it's not insurmountable.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:37, Reply)

The massive figures being thrown about
are likely just distractions so as the US taxpayer doesnt realise how ripped off he is getting. This is just another pay day for the rich. In a few months time, as the economy recovers, they'll say it wasnt enough and they need more etc...and the cycle continues...
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:49, Reply)

I don't think we're doomed per se
but for a fact we're in for a few years of Very Bad Times.

For those of us who are temporary employees and own a house, this is a very nervous time. Were I solidly employed I would be worried, but not as much as I am right now. The timing on this shit is tremendously bad from my perspective- but then, my friend did warn me of it back in February. Not that there was a goddam thing I could do about it, of course, but still...

Remember Victory Gardens? Might be a good idea to start doing that again. I'll say no more than that.
( The Resident Loon Not a demographic. Do not measure., Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:52, Reply)

Enzyme
What do you expect will happen? I'm not being a doom monger but the current price of property makes it impossible for people to find accomodation- either the market collapses and we build it back up over the next few years, or everyone gets together for a nice cup of tea and agrees to lower prices in some sort of economic happy time. Which I personally don't believe will happen. But the bubble has gotten too big not to pop now. We've seen this approaching over the last few years and done piss all to stop it, and rejoiced in our booming economy cough.
( Madam Marlboro wonders if you've found her yet, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 12:52, Reply)

@ancrenne
Of course we're better off than some. That's really not the point that the Loon was making. Being poor is bad. Being rich is good. Being less rich is less good. That stands irrespective of your starting point.

I don't see what you mean about gambling, either. Noone thinks that basing an economy wholly on gambling is a good idea. But, at the same time, and a lot of our wealth has to do with the ability of the financial system to operate in the way it does. Occasionally, it goes tits up - but, on the whole, it serves us well. Datedness of ideas has nothing to do with it.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 14:33, Reply)

Markets
My old house I bought with my ex-wife in 2000 was worth £70k eight years ago. It's now worth £210k.

What's changed? The roof? Nope. The doors and windows? Nope. The walls? Nope.

The only thing that changed was "the market". The reason "the market" changed was because more people could qualify for bigger mortgages because the rules changed. The banks and governments based their own loans and wealth on the value of these assets and loaned accordingly.

Meanwhile, mean incomes (adjusted for inflation) increase by only 25%. The difference is simply borrowing, nothing more. Debts were allowed to accrue a value far beyond their "real" worth and it's as simple as that, the amount of money available simply couldn't keep pace because earnings haven't changed significantly. It's the 1920s all over again.

Banks will of course react with shock and surprise - they after all made up the rules. We in the UK will have it particularly bad because the government cannot realistically push taxes any higher without having an immediate detrimental affect on the country's earning power. Meanwhile, the government hasn't stopped spending like there is no tomorrow. Government debt is paid by each and every one of you - you'll all find that your taxes (direct and indirect - prescription charges, fuel taxes, alcohol duties, taxes on energy and flights etc will all increase massively in the near term, your tax deducted from you salary will increase later) will rise higher for longer and won't fall as quickly as those in the US or mainland Europe. To my countrymen, the best advice I can give is to think very carefully about who you vote for in future. You might pay more attention to how your football team performs than how your government does it's job, but try to remember that the average Briton is contributing £12800 a year in taxes. That's a lot of money and it's going to get bigger. It's a lot more than your football season ticket costs.

However, it'll pass simply because that's exactly what economic trends do. It's a myth that opportunities dry up in times of recession, as some businesses do quite well. People will stop spending money on plasma TV screens and Porsche off-roaders and might get their old TV sets fixed and ride bicycles instead. There's still opportunities to be made.

Rightly or wrongly, this will sort itself out. The less profligate banks will survive and we'll see a return to financial common sense. And not a minute too soon.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Tue 30 Sep 2008, 14:34, Reply)

ancrenne
Hippies are tedious.

You are a hippy.
(Star Wars Starwarsy McStarwars Face, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 16:17, Reply)

House prices
this is half opinion, and half hope

house prices aren't going to go down all that much, because people who bought fairly recently, like me, would end up in huge amounts of negative equity and unable to remortgage their houses or meet increasing costs and thereby lose their houses.

I'm hoping that the work I've done to my house will have kept the price at what it was at least, if not added some more to it, and I'm lucky to live where I do, but if things do go tits up then I could potentially lose my house.

In spite of the fact that at 27 and 26 my gf and I earn way above the average and are generally pretty good with our money.

without meaning to give offence to the Loon, the situation wouldn't be quite so bad if it weren't for people panicking and media scare-mongering.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 17:27, Reply)

If you've invested in stocks for the long term
and are not planning on retiring within the next 18 months they should be relatively safe.
The problem yesterday was because the House failed to pass the bailout bill which caused panic selling.
Today, people are panic buying because they're realising that the economy will fall even further if they don't - and they're getting in cheap!

As for WAMU and Wachovia being taken over, all accounts are FDIC insured up to $100K - spread the money if you have above that between banks.

I'm not worried about my stocks, I don't like to see them falling, but I'm in it for the long term.
( Batshitmentalist is sane for once, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 17:40, Reply)

I was listening to all the panicked news about market crashes this morning
and I came to the conclusion: I don't actually care.
Yeah, that wasn't insightful or useful but there must be some other people out there who don't actually care either.
No?
Here - have one of those lolcats thingies you humans seem to find amusing:
icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/funny-pictures-frankly-my-dear-this-cat-does-not-give-a-damn.jpg
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Tue 30 Sep 2008, 20:26, Reply)

@ancrenne
There is an element of gambling to the economy, for sure. That's because there's a bigger element of gambling in the financial system, and that contributes to the economy. (There's also a lot of trading of risk, which isn't the same as taking a risk.) It doesn't follow from that, however, that the economy is based on gambling: there's a lot of other stuff going on, too.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Wed 1 Oct 2008, 9:22, Reply)