By: ecchi.gaijin
14/10/2009
1:59 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ecchi.gaijin Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| one man's treasure is another man's trash :P |
|
By: ang101000
14/10/2009
1:58 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ang101000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Great, and it is much more simple than predicting and counting waves.
Thanks Lasty, I knew you are a treasure! |
|
By: lasty49
14/10/2009
1:55 pm Yahoo! Profile:
lasty49 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Ang,
Try darts ...Once you have conquered that try throwing them whilst swinging on the pole.
That stockpicking dartboard in the sunday papers usually comes up a winner...!! |
|
By: ang101000
14/10/2009
1:40 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ang101000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Lasty,
are you aware of any market theory incorporating pole dancing?
I would give it a try; if it would not increases my market predicting accuracy it would benefit my overall fitness level. It is a win_win (: |
|
By: lasty49
14/10/2009
1:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
lasty49 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Dont get him started on the Idiot (Elliot) Wave theory.
I think he only likes it because he's a surfer ;-) |
|
By: ang101000
14/10/2009
1:22 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ang101000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Oh Ecchi,
there are some things that Menta stubbornly believes in. The housing oversupply (as opposed to shortage) is one of those things.
He is rational at 99.9% of the time but when it comes to certain issues (empty houses) the 0.01% takes over his brain.
I don't know why he is clinging to the above notion of 850,000 empty houses when his housing correction theory does stand correct without it. Just call it Mentas mystery. |
|
By: ecchi.gaijin
14/10/2009
1:18 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ecchi.gaijin Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"But the one thing that always struck us was the lack of referenced evidence. We’ve hardly ever read one of these ‘experts’ point towards ironclad proof."
"Well, the responses we received made us realize the following…
First, it was laziness. A simple search on Google would have given us the information we needed in a flash."
Menta, the quote above demonstrates what I hate most about the media today. Too much sensation, not enough substance.
In one line they say that it was laziness that stopped people from quoting figures, and now that the author actually had the figures, he doesn't use the actually stats to demonstrate if there REALLY is a shortage or not. He just jumps on the sensation of how stupid the logic behind the findings are. |
|
By: ecchi.gaijin
14/10/2009
1:10 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ecchi.gaijin Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| The 830 000 vacant premises * |
|
By: ecchi.gaijin
14/10/2009
1:08 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ecchi.gaijin Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Menta, I am sure there are some interesting figures in the stats linked to that article but the article itself hasn't proved anything except for the stupidity of the 85000 shortfall premise. demonstrating a flaw in the logic behind that statistic does not disprove the overall claim. BOTH sides of the arguement need to look at the actual figures to back up their views.
The 850 000 vacant premises was of key interest to me. Me being your favourite skeptic :) would ask why are these vacant? should they be included? would they impact on the figures?
My point being that vacant houses set to be demolished or unlivable should not be included (just as unemployable people are discounted from the real unemployment figures ie 4% is considered to be 0%). Similarly if vacant premises are in rural areas with low value because peopel are moving to the cities, these low value properties would have a low impact on property value stats. |
|
By: ang101000
14/10/2009
1:07 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ang101000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
To put it in plain English, there is an expectation that due to Chinese and Indian economic growth Aus is in a very good position to dig up and sell all of its resources at a premium. Gold is very important for both markets for both personal and industrial applications. But personal use is very sensitive to price fluctuations, not as sensitive to price increases.
Again, there is two schools of thought;
1) price has picked (too long to explain the reasons, to do with economic recovery and stability)
2) price will continue to increase (opposing view to do with (mostly) personal investors perceptions of the inherent and pending economic instability.
Pick your choice, I am not a fortune teller.
(sorry, having difficulty with typing) |
|
By: jaymarcel
14/10/2009
12:55 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jaymarcel Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| So ang is that true for gold too |
|
By: jaymarcel
14/10/2009
12:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jaymarcel Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| menta house prices will rise because of inflation, irrelevant to supply/demand, supply/demand is another reason for prices to rise |
|
By: ang101000
14/10/2009
12:44 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ang101000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Lasty and Jay,
There is an economic school of thought that postulates perpetual economic growth based on limited resources (be it housing, water, oil) etc. If you subscribe to this view than Aus is in for a great time due to increasing valuation of the resources.
But, there is an other, opposing view; growth fueled and based on the increasing cost of limited resources is not sustainable for long term, something has to give... |
|
By: mentawaisurf
14/10/2009
12:43 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mentawaisurf Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Pete, those who are still predicting future house price rises in Australia are basing their forecasts largely on the 'assumption' that Australia has a supposed housing shortage.
That's quite an assumption - especially when it is flawed.
The one key point that property bulls continually emphasize to justify Australia's over-priced and over-leveraged housing market is that we have a chronic housing shortage. But as this article shows - there is no housing shortage in Australia.
Revealed: The Housing Shortage Lie
by Kris Sayce on August 24, 2009
http://www.moneymorning.com.au/20090824/revealed-t he-housing-shortage-lie.html#more-2159 |
|
By: mentawaisurf
14/10/2009
12:37 pm Yahoo! Profile:
mentawaisurf Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Lasty, with a strong AUD, and the belief that interest rates will continue to rise in Australia, waning demand from foreign investors will not be offset by immigration. |
|
By: ecchi.gaijin
14/10/2009
12:34 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ecchi.gaijin Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Circumstances changed way too rapidly in the share market to accurately produce a price prediction chart. Each time the facts change significantly you have to recalculate your supply and demand curves. |
|
By: ecchi.gaijin
14/10/2009
12:28 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ecchi.gaijin Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Of course there is Jay!!!
Prices have increase 250% in 20 years
price to income ratios are 7:1
and the reasons WHY are irrelevant ...... apparantly :P |
|
By: lasty49
14/10/2009
12:25 pm Yahoo! Profile:
lasty49 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Elliot wave- Like all charting systems/methodologies they all fail at some point.
Those who rely soley on a system to guide them through will encounter financial losses.
The trick is to identify these losses and cut them before it turns into a meltdown rather than believing the system is correct.
Lets just say im not a great fan of chartist.Why?
Because they all seem to have a reason as to why the event didnt happen rather than admitting their system was wrong. |
|
By: jaymarcel
14/10/2009
12:22 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jaymarcel Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| is there a house price bubble, the population boom has only just arrived, just because other countries property has dropped does not mean we must also do the same |
|
By: lasty49
14/10/2009
12:10 pm Yahoo! Profile:
lasty49 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"To escape a major correction, Australia will not only need to defy a global trend of falling house prices, but also maintain a house-price bubble that's already "beating the best of the debt-driven world".
What about Immigration Menta?
There are plenty coming through the legal gateways. |
|
By: ang101000
14/10/2009
11:55 am Yahoo! Profile:
ang101000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
An other well reasoned, well supported insight from Menta.
He never stops amazing his readers with his clear and eloquent observations!
There is nothing to add to perfection,
Ang |
|
By: ecchi.gaijin
14/10/2009
11:54 am Yahoo! Profile:
ecchi.gaijin Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"Since 1987 our house prices rose by 250% (adjusted for inflation) while in the US it was just 180% before their bubble burst in 2006."
Statistics are amazing how they can purport to demonstrate something while only giving half the true picture.
You need to ask yourself what also happened before 1987 in both markets in order to get the REAL picture as opposed to just the WOW 250% verse 180% comparison.
ie if USA had already had a large increase while Aus had stagnated on historical prices then the USA could in fact have a larger bubble. As I keep saying there are underlying assumptions being made with all these articles, you need to understand them first and foremost. |
|
By: mentawaisurf
14/10/2009
11:40 am Yahoo! Profile:
mentawaisurf Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
For those who have found Elliott Wave insightful and helpful, that's great - I know I have too. Those who dismiss it 'out-of-hand' because it challenges their beliefs or what they've been taught and have studied or their core assumptions, well I guess the only proof will be in the pudding (but it may be too late by then).
Back to Steve Keen's predictions, the subject of this thread afterall, he recently wrote on Crikey that the Australian property market is the world's "last unpopped asset market bubble". Since 1987 our house prices rose by 250% (adjusted for inflation) while in the US it was just 180% before their bubble burst in 2006. To escape a major correction, Australia will not only need to defy a global trend of falling house prices, but also maintain a house-price bubble that's already "beating the best of the debt-driven world".
Every recession has involved a fall in debt-driven demand, and every recovery has been characterised by a return to debt rising faster than income. In the 1980s the mortgage debt to GDP ratio was 18%. Now it's 87.5% - which means there's limited debt potential to help support a recovery. That will translate to less growth than the RBA anticipates. They might have "killed a dragon that wasn't there" with inflation-fighting rate rises up until March 2008. Now, again with rate rises, they may be "taming a lion that is asleep".
See his Debt Watch website for more.
Meanwhile in the US, and American's actually have lower household debt than Australian's, here's what's happening to their debt bubble;
Life after the bubble: From American dream to American nightmare
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2009/ 10/life_after_the_bubble_from_ame.html?ref=patrick .net |
|
By: jaymarcel
14/10/2009
11:14 am Yahoo! Profile:
jaymarcel Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| so the borrowing figures being released out there are not always a negative signal, we all borrow & add to the statistics the important part is what the borrowed money is being spent on & if the borrower can pay it back. |
|
By: ang101000
14/10/2009
10:58 am Yahoo! Profile:
ang101000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Hi Jay,
Yes, sometimes I use the banks money to invest. I like to live on the edge, take calculated risks, chase high risk _ high return investments.
My partner is my exact opposite, hence our joint investments are much more conservative. He is the brain in the household, he is a genius compared to me (and most people).
In regards to elliotwave, I need to know and understand the philosophy and mental model much more before forming an educated opinion.
(Today I am on Chinese word processor, can't type well) |
|
