Credit deflation and the reflation cycle to come (part 4)

[Yadda yadda yadda]

21 minutes ago, jamtomorrow said:

That penny has yet to drop (as far as I can tell) and it's rather a sneaky rug-pull. Unlike the working-age population, there's no way for retired wealthy boomers to ride the wave of occupational schemes that the working middle-classes are about to pile into, and they can't or won't sacrifice their material wellbeing to pay for care that was free and easily accessible until recently - it was never part of the plan, and it simply does not compute.

Any retirees that can afford private care will take it if needed. Up until now it hasn't been necessary for the big diseases. If diagnosed with cancer it was best to stick to the NHS. The private treatment was no better. At least that is what they told my parents when my Mum was diagnosed with cancer perhaps 10 years ago. They treated her successfully and she is still with us. No doubt my Mum and Dad would have paid if it would have given her better care. I suspect the answer would now be that treatment would start sooner and would thus have a better chance of success. Therefore definitely worth it, including having to give up holidays or even downsizing to raise funds.

Where there might be a problem is diagnosis in the first place. I think pensioners are less likely to consider paying for private tests. These are unlikely to be seen as a lifesaver.

[DurhamBorn]

6 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

What is their plan to get people to do low wage jobs? They're better off on benefits.

The collapse is caused by people quitting work to suck the state teat. Nothing they're doing addresses that. Unless they want the collapse to usher in lower benefits that are not sufficient to live on, lower living standards and greater state control. I always try to forget that option in much the same way that a drunk forgets most of New Years Eve.

We have to remember as well the BOE cant monetise for them now,so all welfare needs to come from more borrowing or tax.So far they have taken it from low paid workers by freezing allowances and anyone trying to grow capital (then the economy).They are the worst policies iv ever seen from any government in UK history and i used to vote Tory.Its incredible.They are saying we will take all wealth,all saved labour,destroy work,destroy the family,savings,everything,before we cut bennies on freeloaders.

Labour have a huge chance here in Rachel Reeves.She understands welfare will destroy working people.She knows it.If she can find the strength to tackle it and face down the woke in Labour.

[CannonFodder]

2 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

Any retirees that can afford private care will take it if needed. Up until now it hasn't been necessary for the big diseases. If diagnosed with cancer it was best to stick to the NHS. The private treatment was no better. At least that is what they told my parents when my Mum was diagnosed with cancer perhaps 10 years ago. They treated her successfully and she is still with us. No doubt my Mum and Dad would have paid if it would have given her better care. I suspect the answer would now be that treatment would start sooner and would thus have a better chance of success. Therefore definitely worth it, including having to give up holidays or even downsizing to raise funds.

Where there might be a problem is diagnosis in the first place. I think pensioners are less likely to consider paying for private tests. These are unlikely to be seen as a lifesaver.

Partner went to the doc as got a lump and wait times were discussed

Partner mentioned that had private through work though felt NHS was the best.

Doctor advised partner go private as 1 year plus wait time atm if you dont wish to travel the country to find trust with lower wait times.

Main challenge with private is that it is still really only NHS A&E outside of London and that is where you can die waiting in an ambulance in car park

[PatronizingGit]

16 minutes ago, CannonFodder said:

 

Doctor advised partner go private as 1 year plus wait time atm if you dont wish to travel the country to find trust with lower wait times.

 

£211 billion this year on the NHS. £7500 a household. To be told to basically fuck off.

[DurhamBorn]

8 minutes ago, PatronizingGit said:

£211 billion this year on the NHS. £7500 a household. To be told to basically fuck off.

My daughter is a nurse.Her bosses are on big salaries and the pension,but seem to do nothing much at all.The nurses track how much sick the bosses have and they then have the same minus two days,usually around three weeks a year.The only things the bosses seem to do is keep up with the red tape.Mind you im part of the problem,im getting plastic surgery every 12 weeks on the NHS for some lumps on my arm,i just told the quack it was affecting my mental health so they would do it.The nurse then said 6 months wait,but i told her that was well into polo shirt season could she do the main one quicker,so she reduced it to 12 weeks.Self medication is also a growing area,even Superdrug have a self medication bit now online.You just pretend you have been to the quacks its all wink wink.

[twocents]

On 31/12/2022 at 21:33, Castlevania said:

I largely regard my degree as a complete and utter waste of time. However, I did learn about the Austrian school of economics. Joseph Schumpeter’s “Creative Destruction” made complete sense to me the best part of twenty years ago, it still does.

Unfortunately those running things in the UK (and elsewhere) have used it as an excuse and cover for their preferred plain destruction.

[Harley]

On 31/12/2022 at 12:08, Harley said:

Price Value Partners write a stream of good stuff but every now and then write a very good and timely piece.  I found this to be one:

https://www.pricevaluepartners.com/chauffeur-knowledge-and-the-crack-up-boom/

Austrian Economics, the flaws with the current Keynesian approach, the Permeant Portfolio, and potential changes to it given the current state of things.

This last piece has been on my mind (funny how I seem to be in lockstep with these guys) and their suggested asset allocation is an interesting starter which I wil refine.  I already follow this model for a high percentage of my assets but have felt the need for some revision (which worryingly maybe goes against the ethos of the model and it's historical performance - a tough one).

Interestingly, no emphasis on income stocks per se which is challenging given recent posts about record div receipts this year.  But this is one to watch given the potential for recession and lower yields.  Maybe yield is a factor in their determination of value stocks in that allocation of theirs.

An excellent mention of trend following as I also feel this is necessary in a volatile but overall flat to down biased market and have already moved into this area.  I'll need to read their piece on value stocks to better understand their view on that other allocation.

A hard asset allocation of gold and silver seems too restrictive for such a large allocation so I'll branch out, further taking some assets outside "the system".

I better re-read because no bonds or cash?  I'm less negative on bonds than DB but do seem them as volatile and tradeable like stocks, and not like they have been seen in the past.  Also, a reasonably wide choice there to facilitate some targetting.

So overall, an excellent primer for my current 2023 planning which is already heading in this direction with an emphasis on capital preservation.

And a Happy New Year to you all with many thanks for your contributions and humour.

Many thanks for the feedback guys, and the speed of the response.  I'll seriously take on the comments.  Mad not to given our alignment.  Looking forward to investing more time with you even as I feel the lurky coming on.  I'd like to listen to the podcasts again but I found the interruptions and interviewer monologues grating.  Not wanting to end on a rediculously unwarranted negative note - your stuff rocks louder and louder, madness not to tap along!  

https://www.pricevaluepartners.com/all-change-please/

[Mouse]

9 hours ago, JMD said:

Btw I think the first group to be targeted might be the un-vaccinated and anti-immigrant early-retiree with assets!?

Gulp! 😔

[JMD]

2 hours ago, jamtomorrow said:

This NHS unravelling is starting to look demographically interesting, especially in terms of how it affects those boomers with gold-plated pensions. What's the point in all that material wealth if diseases and conditions that were considered treatable just 5 years ago are now - effectively - disabling or fatal?

That penny has yet to drop (as far as I can tell) and it's rather a sneaky rug-pull. Unlike the working-age population, there's no way for retired wealthy boomers to ride the wave of occupational schemes that the working middle-classes are about to pile into, and they can't or won't sacrifice their material wellbeing to pay for care that was free and easily accessible until recently - it was never part of the plan, and it simply does not compute.

It also looks interesting as part of wider labour market policy when coupled with UBI: the idle get a roof over their head, food on the table, basic energy needs paid for; the productive get access to healthcare, and that becomes the defining incentive to work for the majority (much like in the US).

Question is, will fear of illness and death prove sufficient to reverse the recent downtrend in labour participation?

I listen to LBC radio occasionally and then only for 'background noise'. However I actually do find it instructive to monitor the media zeitgeist. Especially in terms of the radio station host (in reality their employer's) blatant bias and/or propaganda message.

For example they loathed Boris at the time of party gate, repeatedly calling for his effective removal, and they also despised Truss's short tenure. Both polos were ultimately ejected. 

Anyway recently I note that when the current NHS problems are under discussion, sometimes reform is also mentioned in terms of the alternative European health models. This is a big departure from the disingenuous fear mongering up to now of only referencing the US health system, and which was always formerly introduced as a straw man argument against any reform happening, because 'obviously the NHS is far better than the US'. 

 

I also note that there is much more talk, beginning 3-months ago, of the prospect of an end-game to the Ukrainian war In terms of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. They now even allow experts who say that ultimately Ukraine can't win - whereas previously the radio channel agenda was for no compromise/existential threat to West/Putin is mad, etc. Is the zeitgeist changing?

Unfortunately all their invited economic 'experts' are exclusively big state Keynesians. But I shall definitely report back to this thread immediately if they start grooming their listeners with economic morsals of Austrian (School) sausage or schnietzels!

[AWW]

13 hours ago, Bobthebuilder said:

I would love to know how that's possible. I am a bloody gas man ,and cannot get mine anywhere near that (even with theft), more like £300 a month.

You are either , taking the piss, or have something dodgy going on.

I'm still on a fix from 2021. Last year, I spent £800 on electricity and £300 on gas. My DD was £90 a month. The government then gives me £67 of my own money back to me, for a monthly bill of £23. Nothing dodgy - we just lived in a very warm flat.

We've now moved into a Victorian semi with sash windows and open fireplaces. I doubt I'll see another bill that low in my lifetime.

[feed]

Also still on fix.  £27 for gas.  £34 for electric
So they're paying me £5 a month

But how many people are you paying to heat.  I'm just paying for me..  

[AWW]

2 hours ago, PatronizingGit said:

£211 billion this year on the NHS. £7500 a household. To be told to basically fuck off.

It's absolutely scandalous, isn't it? And the waste is so obvious to anyone who uses it. I mentioned that I was in A&E on Christmas Day - it was packed out. Most people just had a bad cold or flu. But, because it's impossible to see a GP on a normal working day, never mind on Christmas Day, they end up in A&E, which costs an order of magnitude more than a GP visit.

I was in there again a few days later with one of my kids, who had hurt her arm. Hospital did x-rays, couldn't find anything, said if she's not moving it within 48 hours, come back. There was no improvement after 48 hours, so back we went. They did more x-rays because the doctor didn't like the ones done 2 days prior. Still couldn't find anything, but suspected she'd experienced a "pulled elbow", which didn't ring true for me because the mechanism of injury didn't match what the literature said. Again he said come back in a couple of days if no improvement.

I decided to just treat her as though she had a sprained shoulder, elbow and wrist. , stuck her arm in a sling and alternated ice and warm compress on her joints. Next day, right as rain, zooming about on her scooter.

It's crap, but most people just see it as "free". I remember at antenatal classes, all the parents-to-be waxing lyrical about the NHS because their births were "free". There was a German girl there who told them how much it would cost in Germany. I pointed out that everyone here was paying more tax in a few months to fund the NHS than a private birth in Germany. "Oh, I hadn't really thought about that" was the typical response. Then, a few months later, at the post-birth meet-up, the German girl explained in the pub that the NHS hospital she'd had her baby in was filthy, understaffed and borderline dangerous, and that the standard of care in her native Germany was much, much better. I particularly enjoyed her story, because the other parents were clearly caught in a mind-fuck of "she's complaining about the sainted NHS", "maybe there is a better way" and "can't argue with her in case she thinks I'm racist/Brexity".

[One percent]

3 hours ago, DurhamBorn said:

We have to remember as well the BOE cant monetise for them now,so all welfare needs to come from more borrowing or tax.So far they have taken it from low paid workers by freezing allowances and anyone trying to grow capital (then the economy).They are the worst policies iv ever seen from any government in UK history and i used to vote Tory.Its incredible.They are saying we will take all wealth,all saved labour,destroy work,destroy the family,savings,everything,before we cut bennies on freeloaders.

Labour have a huge chance here in Rachel Reeves.She understands welfare will destroy working people.She knows it.If she can find the strength to tackle it and face down the woke in Labour.

I think you are going to be very disappointed if you think labour will do anything different. They have all been following the same globalist agenda since thatcher. The worst for ordinary people (and it’s a high bar) was probably Bliar the war criminal.  

[One percent]

1 hour ago, JMD said:

I listen to LBC radio occasionally and then only for 'background noise'. However I actually do find it instructive to monitor the media zeitgeist. Especially in terms of the radio station host (in reality their employer's) blatant bias and/or propaganda message.

For example they loathed Boris at the time of party gate, repeatedly calling for his effective removal, and they also despised Truss's short tenure. Both polos were ultimately ejected. 

Anyway recently I note that when the current NHS problems are under discussion, sometimes reform is also mentioned in terms of the alternative European health models. This is a big departure from the disingenuous fear mongering up to now of only referencing the US health system, and which was always formerly introduced as a straw man argument against any reform happening, because 'obviously the NHS is far better than the US'. 

 

I also note that there is much more talk, beginning 3-months ago, of the prospect of an end-game to the Ukrainian war In terms of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. They now even allow experts who say that ultimately Ukraine can't win - whereas previously the radio channel agenda was for no compromise/existential threat to West/Putin is mad, etc. Is the zeitgeist changing?

Unfortunately all their invited economic 'experts' are exclusively big state Keynesians. But I shall definitely report back to this thread immediately if they start grooming their listeners with economic morsals of Austrian (School) sausage or schnietzels!

Once you spot the nudging and grooming, you can’t unspot it.  The narrative changes and suddenly black is white, or at least a sludge grey. I only listen to msm to find out what they have in store for us down the line.  Well, apart from Steve Allen who doesn’t do politics on his show.  Mind, I’ve noticed a few comments recently which makes me think he is being pressured.  
 

once the majority wake up to the nature of the msm, it’s game over.  

[twocents]

3 minutes ago, One percent said:

I think you are going to be very disappointed if you think labour will do anything different. They have all been following the same globalist agenda since thatcher. The worst for ordinary people (and it’s a high bar) was probably Bliar the war criminal.  

As soon as any Labour leader stepped out of line they'd get the Truss treatment as incompetent and Truss seems to be as globalist as the rest of them.

[Pip321]

1 hour ago, Harley said:

Many thanks for the feedback guys, and the speed of the response.  I'll seriously take on the comments.  Mad not to given our alignment.  Looking forward to investing more time with you even as I feel the lurky coming on.  I'd like to listen to the podcasts again but I found the interruptions and interviewer monologues grating.  Not wanting to end on a rediculously unwarranted negative note - your stuff rocks louder and louder, madness not to tap along!  

https://www.pricevaluepartners.com/all-change-please/

1) I know it goes against the grain but have you considered having one of their advisers give you a financial review?

Its one thing I am going to do is go to a couple of free IFAs each year and have an hours free advice. We are all in different positions and my product and micro knowledge is ‘good’ but during the free sessions it’s always helpful to get a little insight to what someone else thinks. Also being asked ‘what do you want’ is a useful reflection moment when you have to explain that to a stranger. 

I pay an IFA for my SIPP but will ditch them once I sort out my SIPP once and for all. (Keeping him because if I transfer my pension he will have some ideas, wider product/pension knowledge and it’s all free advice whilst he stays on the books).

2) Other observation was the exposure to Gold was via SPDR gold….rather than physical which was interesting. I think miners and gold EFTs are the ‘investment’ answer…..holding the real stuff under the bed is for another scenario where things get serious. 

3) I see the portfolio suggested T Bills rather than cash, but now moving away from all bonds. Not sure about that, not sure short term anyway.

I know your question was value stocks and I just use the historic yields, P/Es and basic news…..but that’s where this thread has helped because it’s given me direction to focus on sectors which are then pointing in the right direction. So Wetherspoons may be a great share and do well from a micro viewpoint and that’s a fair punt. Whereas the Telecoms, EMs, PMs are out of favour but the arrows are pointing in the right direction…..so if I can find value their I will focus there. The odd Wetherspoons punt doesn’t harm of course. 

I naively thought the original whole approach outlined was what our pension funds did ie shares, cash, bonds, property, gold etc. I guess they do to an extent but not in the proportions outlined nor do the actively manage things based on the bigger picture. I have realised generic 60/40 funds aren’t intrinsically wrong it’s just they are non transparent, vanilla and measured against each other rather than actual return. So effectively what we are doing here is creating that fund but building it in separates ourselves and moving from equities or bonds or cash depending on the wider macro calls on this thread….whereas market makers move funds by agreed consensus depending on which performs ‘in the pack’ and earns the wealth manager a decent commission.

Interesting times. 

[spygirl]

3 hours ago, PatronizingGit said:

£211 billion this year on the NHS. £7500 a household. To be told to basically fuck off.

~15k a working household ...

[One percent]

Just now, spygirl said:

~15k a working household ...

And that’s just the NHS. Add on everything else and you do have to wonder how long before it all implodes. 

[spygirl]

33 minutes ago, AWW said:

It's absolutely scandalous, isn't it? And the waste is so obvious to anyone who uses it. I mentioned that I was in A&E on Christmas Day - it was packed out. Most people just had a bad cold or flu. But, because it's impossible to see a GP on a normal working day, never mind on Christmas Day, they end up in A&E, which costs an order of magnitude more than a GP visit.

I was in there again a few days later with one of my kids, who had hurt her arm. Hospital did x-rays, couldn't find anything, said if she's not moving it within 48 hours, come back. There was no improvement after 48 hours, so back we went. They did more x-rays because the doctor didn't like the ones done 2 days prior. Still couldn't find anything, but suspected she'd experienced a "pulled elbow", which didn't ring true for me because the mechanism of injury didn't match what the literature said. Again he said come back in a couple of days if no improvement.

I decided to just treat her as though she had a sprained shoulder, elbow and wrist. , stuck her arm in a sling and alternated ice and warm compress on her joints. Next day, right as rain, zooming about on her scooter.

It's crap, but most people just see it as "free". I remember at antenatal classes, all the parents-to-be waxing lyrical about the NHS because their births were "free". There was a German girl there who told them how much it would cost in Germany. I pointed out that everyone here was paying more tax in a few months to fund the NHS than a private birth in Germany. "Oh, I hadn't really thought about that" was the typical response. Then, a few months later, at the post-birth meet-up, the German girl explained in the pub that the NHS hospital she'd had her baby in was filthy, understaffed and borderline dangerous, and that the standard of care in her native Germany was much, much better. I particularly enjoyed her story, because the other parents were clearly caught in a mind-fuck of "she's complaining about the sainted NHS", "maybe there is a better way" and "can't argue with her in case she thinks I'm racist/Brexity".

The number of people - and families- whose sole experience of healthcare is the NHS is tiny.

This is a problem for the NHS and their backers.

Mots people whove been abroad think its shit.

The number of OAP whod remember paying for treatment and now the healthcare for 'free' is tiny ad shrinking.

They are being replaced by people who pay for healthcare vi tax and get nothing.

[afly]

This is how they are doing it...

Keep increasing funding for NHS to deflect blame from gov but actively employ retards for the key positions and bring it down from the top

Head of NHS strategy, policy and delivery - £61k

https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/jobs.cgi?jcode=1829506

 

[Boon]

43 minutes ago, AWW said:

It's absolutely scandalous, isn't it? And the waste is so obvious to anyone who uses it. I mentioned that I was in A&E on Day - it was packed out. Most people just had a bad cold or . But, because it's impossible to see a GP on a normal working day, mind on Day, they end up in A&E, which costs an order of magnitude more than a GP visit.

I was in there again a few days later with one of my kids, who had hurt her arm. did x-rays, couldn't find anything, said if she's not moving it within 48 , come back. There was after 48 , so back we went. They did more x-rays because the doctor didn't like the ones done 2 days prior. Still couldn't find anything, but suspected she'd experienced a "pulled elbow", which didn't ring true for me because the mechanism of didn't match what said. Again he said come back in a couple of days if no improvement.

I decided to just treat her as though she had a sprained shoulder, elbow and wrist. , stuck her arm in a sling and alternated ice and warm compress on her joints. Next day, right as rain, zooming about on her .

It's crap, but most people just see it as "free". I remember at antenatal classes, all the parents-to-be waxing lyrical about the NHS because their births were "free". There was a German there who told them how much it would cost in Germany. I pointed out that everyone here was paying more tax in a few to fund the NHS than a private birth in Germany. "Oh, I hadn't really thought about that" was the typical response. Then, a few months later, at the post-birth meet-up, the German girl explained in the pub that the NHS hospital she'd had her baby in was filthy, understaffed and borderline dangerous, and that the standard of care in her native Germany was much, much better. I particularly enjoyed her story, because the other parents were clearly caught in a mind-fuck of "she's complaining about the sainted NHS", "maybe there is a better way" and "can't argue with her in case she thinks I'm racist/Brexity".

I queued 9 hours in A&E last week. Annoying at the time but having read subsequent stories I might have gotten away lightly.

Some of these delays are self-inflicted. I first went to a 'Urgent Treatment Centre' and there was only 1 person there so I thought 'great, I will be in and out quick'. These centres cannot do blood tests or x-rays etc. The doctor there seemed sure of what I had, but perhaps in an attempt to cover their arse (in case I died or something) they gave me a letter and told me to present at A&E for blood tests, just in case.

At A&E the problems seem to be a lack of modernisation of workflow - your notes are processed via pen and paper; computerisation would make it easier as well as allow other benefits (people who have been waiting x hours could be checked on)

The biggest stumbling block to me seemed to be a lack of senior doctors. You are seen by junior doctors (of which there are no shortage) all the way but for the final treatment steps and discharge needs to be OK'd by a senior one, of which there were not many around. Thus long waits ensue, if he or she gets involved in a complicated case.

The lack of high-paid doctors is just obvious to me; many can go work privately. Others have no real incentive to earn over £100k because of tax. So some kind of measure such as exempting A&E shifts from personal taxation I think would short-term immediately increase supply.

Bigger picture is that population has grown and the facilities haven't kept up. My visit was a small sample of course, but it seems likely that tourists and illegals also use A&E, because it is free and they are not registered for anything else.

It would be good to try and build a 'best practice' new hospital outside of the trusts and try and experiment/innovate with new techniques to try and process people faster without losing effectiveness. I don't think there is any incentives for hospitals to try and innovate, in case it goes wrong. But how else do you get improvement.

[Majorpain]

Construction faces “perfect storm” for insolvencies | Construction Enquirer News

I said a few years ago that i thought 50% of UK construction companies would go out of business, things are starting to accelerate rapidly due to debt, inflation, staff and general lack of profitable work from competition.

Govt was going to require subcontractors to be paid 30 days or less, but even in that best case scenario you lose access  to 1,000's/100,000's/millions of £ whilst its going through insolvency with little hope of recovering more than 2-3p to £1 of debt.  Its pretty sobering looking through the insolvency reports and seeing small traders being owed £100,000+ that they are never going to get.

[Plan-b]

Blimey .. 

[sancho panza]

Yellow stuff catching a fair new year wind.Niceto see the insto moeny looking like its' flowing in with Newmont and Barrick catching bids

 

[DurhamBorn]

2 hours ago, One percent said:

I think you are going to be very disappointed if you think labour will do anything different. They have all been following the same globalist agenda since thatcher. The worst for ordinary people (and it’s a high bar) was probably Bliar the war criminal.  

Labour created most of the mess.However Reeves is anti welfare,iv read lots of her speeches from way back,she is old school Labour who sees every penny on welfare one less for education,health etc.Of course she will likely tow the line and be useless,BUT she is the only one on both front benches who knows welfare is a disaster.Labour have a once in three generations chance here to save the welfare state,and that means less bennies.I was a Tory,but id vote for the frogs in my pond to run things before this Tory party,they are the worst government this country has ever had.