@Matt

Here we go again folks.

"GCT was cut in 2008, house prices declined in 2008, so how could slashing ( your words not mine ) GCT contribute to an increase in house prices?."

I think you decided that I'd said it contributed to an increase in house prices in 2008. Even if I had said that, which I didn't (look at the posts), tax cuts generally boost activity in the area they are directed. Unless you can explain how tax cuts don't do this?

Maybe these cuts made house prices fall less than they otherwise would? maybe they contributed to the bounce in house prices post credit crunch? Maybe the effects of housing policy doesn't instantly feed through to the stats?

Whatever the case this point is totally irrelevant. Why do you make such a big deal over it? Try answering the questions I ask instead of focussing on these insignificant details. What is your defense of the housing record under New Labour?

I posted the reference to a cut in CGT as bad housing policy nothing else, can you explain how it wasn't a bad one given the cost of housing?

" also had to remind you, your hero Osborne, wanted to abolish stamp duty, up to a value of £125,000 for 1st time buyers, and as a double whammy, his inheritance tax policy of abolishing it for estates under £1 million would have greatly distorted the housing market. "

Are you for real? My hero? He's not my hero. How many times do I have to tell you I'm not a Tory supporter? How can you say these things after saying this:

"Don't forgot no-one appointed you as a spokesperson for me or anyone else, please remember that. "

"Do you remember your answer Mike555, I do, your waffle about registering your protest against the policy, what a complete cop-out. "

Post up my answer to your question and explain why was it a cop out? I am not going to waste any more time on you if you can't answer my questions.

It looks like Matts computer has broken.

@mike555

I better warn, someone identifying themselves as you, posted these comments on the 18th of January, time 17:03 ( that is 5.03pm ).

Don't worry, it's only temporary. It's only been above target for 12 months in a row now, with more to come.

If the BoE were going to raise rates surely they would have done it by now? It's been obvious for a long time that inflation was going to go up.

That's 0.5% rates (300+ year low) for 22 months and we're not in a depression, not even a recession, and inflation is almost twice the target level. I'm sure they will remain vigilantly watching inflation while it takes off.

http://www.newstatesman.com/2011/01/inflation-bank-england-raise

I take it an apology will be forthcoming?

@Des Demona

"As you appear to be a true blue Tory, perhaps you can explain how the 0.5% interest rate is good for your pals with savings getting eroded by the 4% inflation rate?"

Des, I'm not a Tory and have never voted for them, please read my posts from the "Too big to fail becomes too big to bail" article onwards.

Some people don't seem to be able to see things as anything other than Labour v Tories. I am working class, I don't own a house, but I have saved up some money by not spending much, which is for a deposit on a house. The interest helps towards my rent, not as much as it used to though of course.

Your question doesn't make any sense as I am saying rates are too low (I'm not calling for a big rise in rates).

What some people don't seem able to grasp is that the status quo of high house prices , low rates etc. hurts people too, it's simply not a case of nobody loses if we carry on as before.

I can think of few things which have divided society and wealth like the housing boom, monetary policy has helped support house prices, this doesn't sit comfortably with the New Labour apologists which I presume is why most of my questions go unanswered.

I see Mike555 your not being serious, your being sarcastic?

So no apology, your not big enough to admit your in the wrong?

@Matt

You must have been really excited when you found that post, unfortunately you've missed the point of it as usual. What exactly am I supposed to be admitting being wrong about?

@Matt

Seeing as you can't explain why I should apologize then of course it's a no. I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong.

@Matt

It should be clear. Is this really the best you can do to try and trip me up?

I imagine this is highly tedious for other posters.

@Matt

"It is crystal clear old chap. I take it your being ironic in accusing me of being sarcastic."

I haven't accused you of being sarcastic. Where do you get these things from?

"I didn't know you had been appointed to express an opinion on other people's behalf. When did this happen?"

I haven't, it is my opinion that other people will find this tedious which is why I said 'I imagine'.

Just so you don't get confused you have my word I will not post any sarcastic posts again, it obviously doesn't come across in written form for some people.

@Matt

If you spent as much time answering my questions instead of focussing on these moot details then perhaps I would have some respect for you.

An example of what I'm talking about is illustrated on this article:

http://www.newstatesman.com/economy/2011/01/public-sector-services-data

I said how hard "youngsters" had it these days, you followed my post up with this:

"Referring to these individuals as

" youngsters " comes across as very condescending."

I asked why this was so, but you didn't explain. I'm not sure if you noticed that DB used the word "youngsters" twice in the actual article.

@Matt

This could go on all night, I've answered your questions, please do me the same honour, there are lots for you to get through.

@Matt

"you still have problems with CGT and a calendar."

Matt I dealt with all your posts on CGT. You thought I'd said something which I didn't if I remember correctly. Wasn't it you who got mixed up on the CGT rate? Post the link up so we can all see.

Let me think, mmmmmmmm!

2.5 Million unemployed

Brent crude over $100 a barrel

Inflation at 4%

UK Consumer Confidence down in January

BoE downgrading economic growth to 2% from 2.6 %

It is shame our resident bozo, who keeps mouthing off with the same old nonsense, has so little understanding of the word
" Temporary "

According to Mike555, the inflationary pressures where
" Temporary ", even though Mervyn King predicts inflation will hit 5% and will start declining in 2012.

When are you going to get your story straight Mike555?

I knew you wouldn't let me down Matt. My story has been consistent show me where it hasn't been. You've nicely sidestepped all the points I raised as usual. The housing issue doesn't sit well with the New Labour apologists does it? A generation up to their necks in debt or stuck living in expensive rented accomodation or with their parents.

"According to Mike555, the inflationary pressures where " Temporary " ".

I don't remember saying that inflationary pressures were temporary Matt other than in obvious sarcasm, perhaps you can explain how you arrived your logic? or not as is usually the case. We all know how good the inflation predictions have been so far.

Just realized I have one of Matt's questions left to answer:

"First of all, Low earners have to contend with a VAT rise, inflation in excess of 4% and rising. I take it your aware inflation ERODES earning, familiar with that concept?"

Yes, I am well familiar with that (as you should well know having paid special attention to my posts), which is why I've been arguing that inflation is a problem (see my consistent posts on this - and yes the ill advised sarcastic one).

Are you saying I'm right and that those who say we don't need to worry about inflation because it's "temporary" are wrong? Think carefully Matt.

I don't hold much hope of getting a sensible answer, or an answer to the long list of other questions I've asked.

While we're at it, anyone care to post what happened to house prices between 1997 and 2007 (or 2010)? It matters not if they only went up a bit in one of those years or were flat, or went down in another, that's not the point. I think most people accept they went up a lot over the period, which is all that matters.

Get a room you two.

I hope your apologising for yourself Mike555.

Don't forgot no-one appointed you as a spokesperson for me or anyone else, please remember that.

GCT was cut in 2008, house prices declined in 2008, so how could slashing ( your words not mine ) GCT contribute to an increase in house prices?.

As I stated before, your completely clueless to this historical nature of house prices, you yap on, whinging about house prices since 1997, trying to make out house prices increased year on year, when they plainly haven't.

If your not prepared to do even the most basic form of reearch, then your open yourself to looking a fool, which in your case comes pretty second nature.

I also had to remind you, your hero Osborne, wanted to abolish stamp duty, up to a value of £125,000 for 1st time buyers, and as a double whammy, his inheritance tax policy of abolishing it for estates under £1 million would have greatly distorted the housing market.

Do you remember your answer Mike555, I do, your waffle about registering your protest against the policy, what a complete cop-out.

Over to you little man.

David Blanchflower is one of the best Economic mind of our time. If he is predicting bad omen in case the interest rate rise, then all sensible person should heed his advise.
The UK economy is in a bad shape and if the inflation goes up for the time being in order that the economy get a boost from consumer spending then so be it. During his time BoE, Professor Blanchflower was known for his knack to predict things correctly. I for one is an ardent supporter of his prediction.

@Benedict: A room with two candelsticks?

Thanks for the none answer Mike555, I take it your last comment was sarcasm.

Your comments are a waste of web-space. Going back to CGT and house prices, if CGT was suppose to boost house prices, why did they decline in 2008?

Since your an expert in the housing market, why did they decline in 2008?

As I mentioned before, house prices have been declining since the last quarter of 2009, and all through 2010.

Strange how those facts slip your mind.

If the cut in CGT, was suppose to stimulate the house market, it was pretty much useless.

It seems your knowledge of house prices is pretty irrelevant.

If you want to spout off about low and middle earners, I'm game.

Because of George Osborne, low and middle earners are being punished and going to take a beating in 2011.

First of all, Low earners have to contend with a VAT rise, inflation in excess of 4% and rising. I take it your aware inflation ERODES earning, familiar with that concept?

Here's a interesting articles about Osborne and low earners.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/20/low-income-earners-g...

Okay lets progress to middle earners.

Your hero Osborne is going to drag an estimated 650,000 people into paying the higher tax rate.

On top of that, they will lose their child benefits, and the cost of childcare will increase by £404 a year.

But that only for starters, you are unaware petrol prices are at a record high. Brent crude is $102 a barrel and expected to break $120 by mid may.

With the dire unemployment figures out this week ( another article to miss you again ) there are less low and middle earners out there.

Idiots like Chris Grayling who was bragging 6 months ago how unemployment was declining, has now stated the unemployment has stabilised.

Come on little man Mike555 over to you.

Missed this in the post above

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/the-banks-v-the-people-decision-t...

Fraser Nelson is a Tory nincompoop, he can't see the woods for the latest Tory u turn.
This government is criminally feckless, with the emphasis on criminal and feckless!

Professor Blanchflower said: "Economics is not for amateurs" Please professor tell that to Mr Osborne, because if someone doesn't do something about this dreadfully incompetent load of buffoons we have in government soon, we are all going down the gurgler and then we will only wish we were like Greece and Ireland.

DB

You say that your views and those of the governor of the BoE are in alignment at the moment. That may be the case now but given Merv the Swerve's track record I fear that this is only a temporary blip.

Consistency has never been his strongpoint so I think he will only be able to hold out for another month before the demands of the dog boiling fraternity get the better of him.

Finally well said on the comments regarding the Speccy editor's attempts to do economics. He is an idiot of the highest order when it comes to his comic attempts to do economics.

No wonder the MOD is in the state it is when you consider all the money that was wasted subsidising his private education.

@Benedict and Mr Divine,

I can only apologise for this puerile drivel, I have to defend myself when each of my posts is derided so. If it weren't for Matt I'd only post one or two comments.