We're doomed I tell ya.......doooooooooomed !

[Cointreau]

@HighlandTiger So,who are these top economists then? Who do you get your inspiration from? The infallible Mark Carney?

The IMF whose projections are always too optimistic? Janet Yellen or Paul Krugman? Anyway here's a list of'experts' who

have been spectacularly wrong.

http://economicsofcontempt.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/official-list-of-punditsexperts-who.html

Edit: I 'see' that the Footsie is now down to 5700.

[Cointreau]

Here you go HT. These people are on your side.

 

 

 

[HighlandTiger]

15 minutes ago, Cointreau said:

@HighlandTiger So,who are these top economists then? Who do you get your inspiration from? The infallible Mark Carney?

The IMF whose projections are always too optimistic? Janet Yellen or Paul Krugman? Anyway here's a list of'experts' who

have been spectacularly wrong.

http://economicsofcontempt.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/official-list-of-punditsexperts-who.html

Edit: I 'see' that the Footsie is now down to 5700.

Interestingly your list is from 2008, when there was a lot of navel gazing going on, as people tried to work out how they missed predicting the world recession. Practically everyone got it wrong then, the only ones who called it right were the human equivalent of a broken clock. Afterall even a broken clock is accurate for two seconds out of 86,400.

As for the footsie, well I have my own thoughts on that posh blokes betting shop. A company could be making a decent profit, paying out good dividends to its shareholders, and because its share price drops its often deemed to be in trouble. Doesn't make any sense what so ever

This is the problem with PM's, stocks and shares etc, too much of the price is down to human emotion and greed, and very little to do with the actual reality of supply and demand.  

[DRooster]

Can we agree that the "science" of economics proves its practitioners to be completely incompetent, moreso than any other "science" I can think of.

If there were any skilled economists in influential positions we would never have bubbles and crashes, unless those economists are actually advising from an evil point of view ...

[Cointreau]

48 minutes ago, DRooster said:

Can we agree that the "science" of economics proves its practitioners to be completely incompetent, moreso than any other "science" I can think of.

If there were any skilled economists in influential positions we would never have bubbles and crashes, unless those economists are actually advising from an evil point of view ...

How about climate science? The 99% consensus on AGW?

[HawkHybrid]

3 hours ago, HighlandTiger said:

I just love this forum, where else can you find lay people claiming they know better than all the top economists in the world, and somehow . just somehow, they've managed to navigate the conspiracies maze in order to work out what is really happening. 

 

Youtube has a lot to answer for....lol

 One slight problem with your "facts" there. God bless Youtube

In 2008 at the start of the recession, on average, mortgage payments for first time buyers had hit over 50% of average household income. Today that figure is about 33% of income, (and falling). Nothing like a few facts to get in the way of the doom and gloom merchants.

I'd just like to say that these charts are inconclusive and thus, on their

own are likely misleading. things the charts may not have taken into

account include during this recession are people likely to lie and say

that their income is smaller. what governmant schemes were there

that helped defer mortgage payments to later years? ie if I was a first

time buyer in 2008 but had mortgage relief until 2009 would I still be

a first time buyer in 2009 when paying the correct full amount?

did people take out longer term mortgages so the yearly rate of

payment was less?

the simple answer is often the most correct

 

I personally believe that eventually owning the house that you live

in is a good idea if you can afford it.

 

HH

[goldbones]

2 hours ago, HighlandTiger said:

Interestingly your list is from 2008, when there was a lot of navel gazing going on, as people tried to work out how they missed predicting the world recession. Practically everyone got it wrong then, the only ones who called it right were the human equivalent of a broken clock. Afterall even a broken clock is accurate for two seconds out of 86,400.

As for the footsie, well I have my own thoughts on that posh blokes betting shop. A company could be making a decent profit, paying out good dividends to its shareholders, and because its share price drops its often deemed to be in trouble. Doesn't make any sense what so ever

This is the problem with PM's, stocks and shares etc, too much of the price is down to human emotion and greed, and very little to do with the actual reality of supply and demand.  

No, the stock market is based on earnings and net asset values on a future projected basis, stocks trade at a multiple of earnings, a p/e of 10 implies you'll double your money over 10 years, so you're correct in a sense because those p/e ratios were fudged by stock buybacks and emotional greed up and above what they can actually deliver.

But at the same time why can't they deliver those earnings? why is  a company as big as walmart cutting 269 stores and laying off workers? because the economy is not doing as well as expected.

The companies are cutting dividends (not all of them YET), companies are laying workers off they are having to sell parts of the business because in the good times all of these companies took on stacks of debt and when interest rates shifted down they escalated the amount of debt. And now they are stuck with the task of unwinding which will lower the projected earnings growth.

As these companies break down and parts of assets are sold they are left less profitable with less workers , it feeds on itself the more people become unemployed and the more the companies wind down the weaker the economy gets it becomes a vicious spiral.

[a_a]

The economy's doing great, and the experts who didn't see it coming last time are sure to point when or if it will happen again. Which it definitely isn't.

Even if it is, (which it isn't), you can shrug it off and kick back with a delicious cup of normalcy bias.

New Paradigm! It really is different this time.

[StackemHigh]

It's the same story as before silver to make a profit (but when?) 

Gold to preserve your wealth!

Is it worth going all in with silver? It depends if you like those lovely shirts you just bought. 

[Cointreau]

On 20/01/2016 at 19:19, a_a said:

The economy's doing great, and the experts who didn't see it coming last time are sure to point when or if it will happen again. Which it definitely isn't.

Even if it is, (which it isn't), you can shrug it off and kick back with a delicious cup of normalcy bias.

New Paradigm! It really is different this time.

@a_a  Really fail to understand the point you are trying to make here.

What is it that isn't? Can you elaborate?

[JB3]

There are those who admit that they can't predict what's going to happen to stocks, price of gold, the economy...

 

...and there are those who are lying, probably to themselves.

 

 

[HelpingHands]

41 minutes ago, Cointreau said:

@a_a  Really fail to understand the point you are trying to make here.

What is it that isn't? Can you elaborate?

I think I can clear that up.  

The economy's doing great,  

That's what isn't.

[Cointreau]

OK, next dumb question. What economy is doing great?

[HelpingHands]

27 minutes ago, Cointreau said:

OK, next dumb question. What economy is doing great?

Exactly.

I'm purposely misreading that as a rhetorical question if it wasn't already.

[DRooster]

a_a was using the /sarc tags in an invisible way,

I hope Cointreau understands.

Too subtle a_a !