Display:

The borrom two are the same as the top one (GDP growth minus a component of debt, left is US, right is eurozone).

Europe's grwoth thus also has quite a strong debt component. Whether it's "good" debt or not (as per Colman above) is hard to tell, but it's clearly there.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Sep 27th, 2006 at 12:29:06 PM EST
OK, I know nothing about real estate, but does all this mean that me planning on buying a small apartment is a bad idea?

After all I need somewhere to live, recession or no recession.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid (arvid.hallen at gmail.com) on Wed Sep 27th, 2006 at 02:11:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I rent, both for mobility and because of the bubble.

Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.
by technopolitical on Wed Sep 27th, 2006 at 07:08:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
As long as it is not in the US, you should be alright. Houseprices go up and down and though it is be a bad idea to buy when everybody agrees that the prices will soon crash. Then you wait until they actually crash to buy.

But in general it depends largely on how long you plan to keep it and what area it is. If you for example plan to live somewhere for the a rather long time, and pay down loans while you live there buying is probably not a bad idea. When you move and sell you might turn a profit or a loss compared to living in a rented flat. But unless you bought at the peak or your area becomes depopulated you should be able to pay back your loans and have a downpayment for your next home.

And as you say, you need somewhere to live.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!

by A swedish kind of death on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 11:33:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'll keep the apartment for at least 2-5 years. If housing values crash I will not be inclined to sell the place but instead rent it to someone else if I decide/have to move away.

The area will absolutely not become unpopular or depopulated. And I won't loan the money but pay in cash.

And renting is not an option. In Sweden we have rent control (aargh!) which means it is impossible to find an apartment to rent.

Any more ideas and comments?

Please! :)

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid (arvid.hallen at gmail.com) on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 07:06:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why wont those pesky poor people get out of your way, eh? Stop whining about your upper middle class travails. Poor you that has to suffer through rent control.

I only wish Oslo still had some rent control housing. Maybe I could hope to afford renting an appartment here then... But then I don't own an appartment in the "right" part of Stockholm and cheer when the conservatives win elections.

by Trond Ove on Sat Sep 30th, 2006 at 06:51:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Rent control is the single most efficient way to destroy a city, including nuclear weapons. 99 % of all economists from all different political camps agree on this. Rent control is the reason I have to buy an apartment instead of renting one, as there are no apartments to rent.

So stop your whining about my upper middle class travails.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid (arvid.hallen at gmail.com) on Mon Oct 2nd, 2006 at 06:56:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Are there diagregated figures available for the UK, Ireland and Spain?  As the piece I linked to said, there's a strong divergence between the Anglo-Saxon economies + Spain (+Ireland, eh semantics?) and the Germany and France.  Can the EU maintain the fiscal policy coherence needed to avoid the Euro being disintegrated by centrifugical forces?  Remember Italy last year about the Euro, and leaving the euro?

That possibility, pressure to leave the euro, to reinstate inflationary policies to mitigate private and public debt, that is the danger I see to "Europe" (as in the plural) rather than Anglosaxons plus Spain.

On another note, I should find the post from Escolar showing "renovated" living spaces up for sale in Spain.  Precious, I had to do the measure conversion to English units, but I know that 15m2 is a small flat no mater what the unit of measure.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Wed Sep 27th, 2006 at 02:30:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Zulitos.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Sep 27th, 2006 at 02:38:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
15m2 sounds like a large tent.  450sq.ft?  The Spanish market is all bubble and there are a lot of horror stories, particularly for foreign owners.  Be careful.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Wed Sep 27th, 2006 at 05:34:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
15m2 is about 160 sq.ft; not a large tent...

Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
by Bernard on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 04:20:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Are you familiar with the term outhouse?

Because they're damn near the same size.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 10:06:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, I'm not.

Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
by Bernard on Fri Sep 29th, 2006 at 04:49:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
An outhouse is a shed outside a house, where people go to perform bowel movements.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Sep 29th, 2006 at 05:20:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The best ones are the 7m^2 flats. That's about 75 sq ft.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Sep 29th, 2006 at 05:22:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Why is such a strong difference between the two graphs for the USA? (It appears as if borrowing was taken into account with a different multiplier.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 03:45:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think that the top is given in dollars, and the bottom in percent, so that one in dollars appears flatter.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 08:16:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, I don't mean that. I mean the line for growth minus borrowing, which on one graph goes clearly into minus in the Bush era, on the other just passes under it.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 08:22:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The top one deducts all of net new debt from GDP volume; the bottom one deducts 60% of the percentage of growth of debt from the percentage of growth of GDP.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 11:48:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Huh!? What sense makes the second?

I wonder what the EU's graph would be done the fort way.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Sep 28th, 2006 at 02:49:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series