By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 10:21 - Sep 18 by JakeITFC
Gut feel whilst reading it and backed up by speaking to colleagues after. He stumbled across a (admittedly very lucrative) niche in a desk and coined it for a little while but don’t think it was via some super savant skill set.
(FWIW I don’t disagree with a lot of his conclusions about inequality etc, I just think he’s a bit full of himself in the book as some sort of Nostradamus type).
I remember when that FT article came out and was peddled as some sort of 'gotcha' moment, it is and it isn't. He's quite clearly embellished his success, and the most pertinent point in that article is that he would never know how profitable other traders at Citibank were globally, so its almost certainly a baseless claim. Its important to hold people to account when they spout stuff like that don't get me wrong, but I'm not sure it really detracts from a lot of what he says. Ultimately he shares his opinion, he's attempted to build credibility and an audience based on exaggerated career claims, in hindsight perhaps unnecessarily bullish and inflated. I've no doubt he's an intelligent guy who has done very well for himself though, and he articulates his views well. I can't help but think had he been a bit more realistic of his successes it still would've served the same purpose for him. Or maybe the soundbite has helped him 'cut through', who knows.
I think he has to be taken for what it is. Even if his claims of being Citi's most profitable trader were true, it doesn't change a great deal and wouldn't guarantee what they're saying is necessarily accurate or would transpire. He's offering his opinion, its up to people listening to form their own conclusions.
1
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 13:31 - Sep 18 with 1104 views
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 12:22 - Sep 18 by _clive_baker_
I remember when that FT article came out and was peddled as some sort of 'gotcha' moment, it is and it isn't. He's quite clearly embellished his success, and the most pertinent point in that article is that he would never know how profitable other traders at Citibank were globally, so its almost certainly a baseless claim. Its important to hold people to account when they spout stuff like that don't get me wrong, but I'm not sure it really detracts from a lot of what he says. Ultimately he shares his opinion, he's attempted to build credibility and an audience based on exaggerated career claims, in hindsight perhaps unnecessarily bullish and inflated. I've no doubt he's an intelligent guy who has done very well for himself though, and he articulates his views well. I can't help but think had he been a bit more realistic of his successes it still would've served the same purpose for him. Or maybe the soundbite has helped him 'cut through', who knows.
I think he has to be taken for what it is. Even if his claims of being Citi's most profitable trader were true, it doesn't change a great deal and wouldn't guarantee what they're saying is necessarily accurate or would transpire. He's offering his opinion, its up to people listening to form their own conclusions.
Of course, but I don’t think his schtick of being the best trader in the world whose predictions are right every year holds up.
0
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 09:22 - Sep 19 with 713 views
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 10:09 - Sep 18 by J2BLUE
Go on...
Sorry, busy day yesterday.
I avoid most of what he says now, but in the last year I can recall words to the effect of “you don’t own a house because rich people own them or are buying them all up.”
Well, while global “wealth” (stock markets, luxury assets etc.) have surged over the last decade, UK house prices have been flat or falling in most regions. In London for example, prime and super-prime areas are down considerably.
So if the wealthy are hoovering up all the housing stock at the expense of your kids, why have UK prices flatlined while global wealth and asset markets soared?
Yes, there’s a degree of truth I'm sure that a lot of housing is held by wealthy boomers, but the real drivers of housing are cheap credit, supply constraints, and planning policy.
Which is why, to my mind, he’s just another populist spouting slogans and pushing simple answers to complicated questions. Much like dear old Nige.
-1
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 09:35 - Sep 19 with 681 views
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 09:22 - Sep 19 by nrb1985
Sorry, busy day yesterday.
I avoid most of what he says now, but in the last year I can recall words to the effect of “you don’t own a house because rich people own them or are buying them all up.”
Well, while global “wealth” (stock markets, luxury assets etc.) have surged over the last decade, UK house prices have been flat or falling in most regions. In London for example, prime and super-prime areas are down considerably.
So if the wealthy are hoovering up all the housing stock at the expense of your kids, why have UK prices flatlined while global wealth and asset markets soared?
Yes, there’s a degree of truth I'm sure that a lot of housing is held by wealthy boomers, but the real drivers of housing are cheap credit, supply constraints, and planning policy.
Which is why, to my mind, he’s just another populist spouting slogans and pushing simple answers to complicated questions. Much like dear old Nige.
You misunderstand the difference between the rich [trying to equate them to boomers] and the mega rich - the ones that own the institutions which lend the money on housing, office space and own huge developments outright.
If someone has £5bn, and a huge family office running their affairs making a minimum of 5% return each year; where is that money coming from to go to them?
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 09:22 - Sep 19 by nrb1985
Sorry, busy day yesterday.
I avoid most of what he says now, but in the last year I can recall words to the effect of “you don’t own a house because rich people own them or are buying them all up.”
Well, while global “wealth” (stock markets, luxury assets etc.) have surged over the last decade, UK house prices have been flat or falling in most regions. In London for example, prime and super-prime areas are down considerably.
So if the wealthy are hoovering up all the housing stock at the expense of your kids, why have UK prices flatlined while global wealth and asset markets soared?
Yes, there’s a degree of truth I'm sure that a lot of housing is held by wealthy boomers, but the real drivers of housing are cheap credit, supply constraints, and planning policy.
Which is why, to my mind, he’s just another populist spouting slogans and pushing simple answers to complicated questions. Much like dear old Nige.
Thanks for replying.
Not sure I agree with that.
I think deposits along with higher interest rates are pricing first time buyers out of the market. The mega rich have to put their money somewhere. I am sure a certain portion of that is in property. Gary seems to be saying the average person cannot afford a property because the mega rich can pay cash where as you need a deposit and the ability to pay the mortgage at 4% (I know this is not a high rate historically but it is in today's circumstances).
I'd like to see the evidence for prices falling over the last decade as well. My property has gone up 50% (based on the price I paid and the price an identical one went for recently). Like Gary says, I was able to buy this property because my parents gave me the deposit, not because I worked harder or was smarter than anyone else. That's what he's saying. You can have a much better job than someone else but if they get a deposit from the family bank you have no chance of competing (generally, there will always be some who have such a high paying job they can or people who work 60 hours in Tesco every week and works their nuts off to get on the ladder)
Jimmythegiant, Zack Polanski and Gary’s Economics- on 09:35 - Sep 19 by itfcjoe
You misunderstand the difference between the rich [trying to equate them to boomers] and the mega rich - the ones that own the institutions which lend the money on housing, office space and own huge developments outright.
If someone has £5bn, and a huge family office running their affairs making a minimum of 5% return each year; where is that money coming from to go to them?
Hi Joe – sorry, I'm being thick here but not sure I follow your question?
FWIW, as I’ve mentioned on here, I set up a family office for some clients a couple of years ago. I can assure you they’re not out buying up houses in Preston with their money. But I suspect that wasn’t the point you were making?
In the UK, the money being lent on housing is generally from the high street banks — listed institutions, owned largely by ordinary savers through funds, ETFs and pension pots. So if you want to trace “where the money comes from,” a decent chunk of it is basically you and me via said funds in our pensions.
As an aside, I’m based in Switzerland where the housing/rental market actually functions really well: rents are capped, tenants have the majority of the rights, and maintenance is carried out swiftly and properly. Most buildings are owned by family offices, pension funds and insurers rather than private landlords. Frankly, if the UK moved towards that kind of more professional, institutional ownership of a chunk of the housing stock, it’d probably be a net positive imo.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
