Why is the UK property market fake?

https://cyberlibris.typepad.com/blog/files/Goodharts_Law.pdf

No more corset controls on the banks since 1979/80. Goodhart pre-empted it.

Now they loan to things that don’t boost GDP including mortgages.

It’s included in debt to GDP though.

Boosted in addition to the retarded notion of a crumbling hovel being a “retirement” fund.

Funds and other assets don’t depreciate.

Don’t bail out bad property investors, they’re idiots.

You wanted the reward, the risk is also ALL yours.

The ‘competition and credit control’ reforms, which removed direct controls on bank
lending, had been introduced in September 1971 and a dramatic surge in bank
intermediation, leading to broad money growth rates in excess of 25%, had resulted in
1972 and 1973. The conclusion drawn by policy makers in 1973 was that the only
option was to supplement monetary targets with direct controls on banks through
Supplementary Special Deposits known as ‘the Corset’ (See Zawadzki, 1981).
Modest interest rate changes seemed powerless in the face of this monetary expansion
and the previously stable money demand function seemed to have broken down. This
was clear well before 1975, but Goodhart (1975b) was a summary of the current
problems of monetary management, as the title suggests.

So Labour want rent controls but not bank controls.

I wonder (((why))).

Goodhart’s Law is the statement missing from the square brackets in the quotation
above. It says: “Ignoring Goodhart’s law, that any observed statistical regularity
will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes”.

“Houses as Collateral”
https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/epr/02v08n1/0205aoki.pdf
“First were the removal of exchange controls in 1979 and the direct control of bank lending (“the corset”) in 1980″

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.600.6032&rep=rep1&type=pdf
“The abolition of exchange controls in 1979 and the abolition of the last of the quantitative controls on bank lending heralded a period of rapid deregulation and increased competition in British banking during the 1980s”

They weren’t more productive in the 80s, they stole from the future (you).

The coming Communist cash grab

Orwell wouldn’t have thought of this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexplained_wealth_order

Notice the focus?

Liquid assets, especially jewels, difficult to trace themselves.

If you don’t have the paperwork for those family jewels, guess what?

They don’t DARE look into real estate purchases by foreigners.

50 million mansion versus 120k necklace?

Stunning and brave.

There is no cryptocurrency bubble

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/04/cryptocurrency-dogecoin-now-has-a-market-value-of-more-than-1-billion.html

There’s a software bubble, but that has nothing to do with the CCs carried by software. Buy Bitcoin because you’re too stupid to understand why placing your life savings where you can’t grab it before the Government is a great idea!

Buy Enron!

Everyone says it’s a good idea!

I mean, would the Government lie to you?

Would they deliberately act like a direct challenge to their financial authority was safe, so you pile in all your suspicious investments, only to sweep in and nationalize it at the last second, leaving you with no legal recourse?

No, obviously not, you paranoid conspiracy theorist.

But also you’re a paranoid conspiracy theorist if you’re using Bitcoin, according to the MSM, which isn’t like reverse psychology or anything so don’t buy Bitcoin with your real(er) money.

“They can’t find my bitcoin wallet at the border!” They can shoot you with a low-level EMP though, can’t they?

You can’t out-think sociopaths with all the resources.

Shrinkflation can no longer be denied

Chocolate boxes have been shrinking for decades.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40703866

That’s what they’re calling it.

Because stagflation, the economic term, would be giving the game away.

Stagflation is impossible by Keynes.

Everything wrong with modern economics?

Keynes.

Your money is literally worth less.

Imagine a crumbling ruin.

At least the ruin has historical merit.