Independent nonsense: banks should be lending to house buyers

So, house prices are way down but the silly banks aren't lending. As usual the Independent leaves out half the story.

The monthly cost of a mortgage (and so the ability to repay it) is determined by the price times the interest rate. Interest rates for Irish borrowers are about twice what they were.

Our interest rates used to be a little above the ECB but now they're massively above it. There's a double reason for this. Irish banks have to pay lots more for their credit now, they can't get it at ECB rates anymore. So they have to charge people what the bank is paying plus a margin for profit.

Secondly, the banks sold a load of tracker mortgages which means that for all those customers, not only are they not getting to add a profit margin, they are actually charging those customers less than what it costs the bank. The result is that they have to add an even bigger profit margin on their non-tracker loans. Yes, if you don't have a tracker not only are you not as well off as those who got a tracker, you are actually being charged extra because of them!

The only mention of "interest" in that whole article is for the buyers who are "interested" in the properties.

So should the banks be lending? I had no idea before I read that article I have no better idea afterwards.

Independent nonsense: balance of payments

Am I missing something or is this article contradicting itself in the space of a single paragraph?

Our export-led growth has given us a positive balance of payments position on current account. Depressed consumer demand has helped keep our spending down on imports. So we don't owe as much as we might. The real problem impeding a fuller economic recovery is that consumer confidence and domestic demand have not bounced back. The positive balance of payments will be short-lived if domestic demand does not improve.

So on the one hand depressed consumer demand has kept our imports low and so our balance of payments is positive. Yet somehow, our balance of payments will become negative unless consumer demand increases.

While I agree with some of what he says, the whole article has the feel of a random collection of assertions and opinions about the crisis cogged from others.

Independent nonsense: negligent doctors

As usual, the Indo provides some useless statistics, this time on malpractice cases. What they tell us is:

A senior house officer -- a grade of junior doctor -- was most likely to be involved (74pc) as against 14pc for registrars and 8pc for consultants.

What they don't tell us is what percentage of patients are dealt with by each type of doctor. So if only 50% of patients were dealt with by junior doctors but they were involved in 74% of malpractice cases then that's a black mark against junior doctors and would be something worth knowing. Elsewhere in the article it's stated that they deal with "the majority" of cases. Without these other figures, the statistics are not just useless, they're possibly quite misleading.

in reference to: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ae-blunders-responsible-for-one-in-seven-medical-claims-1951185.html (view on Google Sidewiki)