IS ireland gone to hell

Eagleye

is it me or is ireland goverment , ruined ireland , because all they seem and most people care about is money and economy.


Housing estates are what im talking about, Enviromental i know , Some say it doesent matter , yet it really pisses me off when i travel through the country and there everywhere,Is it the prices of houses ,supply and demand all that ****e, and the fact the devolopers money ,,, are heavily favoured,


if you look a holland and denamark ,the model system they over there , is nothing like here, housing is 100% better planned than it is here , its like
if ireland adopted that system ten years ago there would be no bloody hos. est.

patzer117

huh?

Demetrius

Totally agree eagleeye. One off housing has destroyed this country since sixties. Though I was brought up in a one-off bungalow. In Denmark I think they have to build a new house on the site of an old one in the countryside at least

BrianD

What economy?

As some one recently said, when there is a 'fast buck' to be made - in our case property - all other economic activity ceases. This seems to be fast becoming the case in Ireland.

As Dick Roche continues to say when confronted with our poor track record on the environment (polution and bad development) - "I make no apologies for our economic success".

Yet, we complain about the Americans in Iraq, drilling in Alaska and ignoring the Kyoto Protocol. How hypocritical - as a nation with no natural resources we need that damn oil to drive to and heat all those boxes we call homes that we are building across the landscape!

There was a time when an entrepeneur was somebody with a clever idea and a good business model. Now an entrepeneur is a guy or gal with a couple of houses mortgaged and rented out.

Hal1

Well one main contributing factor to our increased need for more housing is the boom in the population over the last number of years.

And with so many non-nationals emmigrating to Ireland it doesn't help matters at all. So we need to develop and invest in our housing structure to compeate with the growing demands.

Hal1

Its becoming harder each DAY for anyone considering purchasing a home because of the growing interest rates and money gready property developers leeching on the blood of first time buyers.

gilroyb

I think the initial post was in favour of 'one of housing' and against estates.

Ireland needs high rise in its urban centres so that estates in the surrounding areas aren't necessary. As long as people say that tall buildings are an environmental eyesore, the longer they will have to put up with the eyesore of neverending rows of identical houses as far as the eye can see.

Cork

I think the fact Irish people can find work here is a great thing.

Now house prices - They are high over in the UK at the moment.

Never has there been more houses been built. But we have a problem.

Houses are over priced.

Solution:
Increase capital gains tax on houses that are not your residence to 40%.
Bring in a property tax.

Bertie brought in property tax & there was a minor revolt among interest groups.

This country have much more one off housing in Famine times. I see no problem with this as long as it it is properly in keeping with its surrordings.

BrianD

Introduction of a property tax would be a logical step and one of bringing the market into some sort of normality. The tax would apply to second and third homes that are not the primary residence.

On paper it's a good idea, in reality it would hit some people very hard and cause chaos in the short term. As I said in an earlier post many so called entrepeneurs are "property investors" and would feel the pinch. The property market is like a run away train and any sudden measures to slow it down will de-rail it. I don't think any political party has the will or the guts to tackle this monolith.

Right now you have plenty of people who will rapidly turn any green field into as many housing units (all poorly built) as physically possible to turn a quick buck. Forget the facilities and the transport - they can add the price of a car onto the mortgage! On the other hand, you have people building a one off house on family land in an attempt to live in something affordable. Far too often, these houses like any design qualities, pollute the enviromnemt and aren't economically sustainable in the long term (i.e those who live in equally bad suburban developments end up subsidising them).

Hobbes

The main problem with housing (well apart from price) is that the infrastructure wasn't put in place for all the people moving. I recall a few years back that they had to pause building on the northside because the drainage system couldn't handle the extra houses. But more to the point for examples is Schools/Doctors/Dentists.

patzer117

Cork wrote:

Solution:
Increase capital gains tax on houses that are not your residence to 40%.
Bring in a property tax.

You're right about one thing, that will bring down the price of houses, but our economic boom has it's foundations in investment in the construction industry, and that is being financed soley by investors buying houses in Ireland. If you were to increase capital gains tax on houses i fear the investors would simply shift market, and our expansion would dry up.

BrianD

But surely this is no basis for an economy? A property boom or a strong construction industry should follow a sound diversified economy and not the bedrock of it. Eventually these 'investors' will shift to another market and we need to create an environment where investors will look at other options outside of property.

Sand

A 40% capital gains tax? Yeah, well speaking as a property owner I just wont sell. No sell = reduced supply. Reduced supply = rising prices!

In the meantime the rent will cover the mortgage. Property tax will hit the people looking for rented accomadation more than it will hurt me tbh. Ill just add it on top of the rent. The Dublin area is pretty demand inelastic so costs can be quite happily shovelled onto the consumer.

And thats the problem - everyone wants to live in Dublin or within a reasonable commute of it. If you really want to "fix" the property market then you either go high rise in Dublin - appartment living - or you work on cutting down the commutes through viable public transport links.

I know typical government policy on the economy is to tax it until it stops moving, but quickfix solutions like taxes etc wont change the realities that people want to live in Dublin, and are willing to pay for it. Theres nowhere else in the country to rival it, and the Governments haphazard gombeen handling of "decentralisation" doesnt make it likely that will change soon.

BrianD

I agree and disagree. Yes, I think a tax will hit rental prices (as you say land lords will seek to pass them on) . So what happens next? Rental market depresses and land lords are left with empty buildings while the flood of migrant workers head off to somewhere else where they can live and work. I'm not sure if I agree with Dublin being demand inelastic - there are plenty of rental properties knocking about.

One of the reasons why the property market is so buoyant is that people can leverage the (artificially high) equity contained in an existing property to but a second etc. Property is always a good investment so why not. Though its only as good as when you can get a contribution from it.

I do agree that we need to get rid of the Ballymun syndrome and start building high rise in a planned manner in our cities both for offices and residential use (though I'm sure there's plenty of developers who don't want to see that happen).

Out of curiosity, does anybody know what percentage of the market is either first time buyers and/or people trading up/down?

jd

Cork wrote:

This country have much more one off housing in Famine times. I see no problem with this as long as it it is properly in keeping with its surrordings.

We were dog poor, lived in hovels, and had pigs in the parlour. Saying we had lots of one off housing in famine times isn't a great argument in its favour

Sand

I agree and disagree. Yes, I think a tax will hit rental prices (as you say land lords will seek to pass them on) . So what happens next? Rental market depresses and land lords are left with empty buildings while the flood of migrant workers head off to somewhere else where they can live and work. I'm not sure if I agree with Dublin being demand inelastic - there are plenty of rental properties knocking about.

A property tax will be hitting all landlords, and the majority will have to pass it on, and the rest who dont have to will because they can. Rental market isnt going to go anywhere - the 18-30 demographic cant really commute to work from Cork. Im told the rental market is in the doldrums (when exactly was it fantastic?) and yet the place I rent has never gone a mortgage repayment without a tenant to soften the blow. Let alone the people I have to turn down for the week or two following it being gone. Dublin is pretty demand inelastic, especially when renters will be facing the same passed on tax increases everywhere they go. In dublin anyway.

I do agree that we need to get rid of the Ballymun syndrome and start building high rise in a planned manner in our cities both for offices and residential use (though I'm sure there's plenty of developers who don't want to see that happen).

Id disagree - developers would love to stack 40 appartments on the same square footage as a 2 bed semi detached if they could. 40 times the profit per square foot.

The thing with appartment buildings is that they need to be extremely well built, to shake the Irish love of suburbia. In Irish terms youre seen to have failed if youre still living in an appartment at 30-35.

oscarBravo

Sand wrote:

...everyone wants to live in Dublin or within a reasonable commute of it.

I don't.

BrianD

Sand wrote:

Id disagree - developers would love to stack 40 appartments on the same square footage as a 2 bed semi detached if they could. 40 times the profit per square foot.

The thing with appartment buildings is that they need to be extremely well built, to shake the Irish love of suburbia. In Irish terms youre seen to have failed if youre still living in an appartment at 30-35.

Personally, I believe that a planned high rise strategy for all urban centres would wipe out the property market overnight. Part of the reason for high prices is essentially an inefficient use of land for both apartment type accomodation and traditional housing. Within a few km of the city centre you have two storey houses with gardens - something that doesn't happen in other countries.

Build up and you increase the supply of apartments in urban areas dramatically. This will also suck many renters out of suburban housing (you know the 3-4 people renting a house together in Rathfarnham) into these newly created units. Despite what people may think, there is not an infinite supply of renters in the market. I think it will restore some order to the market.

DublinWriter

Eagleye wrote:

if you look a holland and denamark ,the model system they over there , is nothing like here, housing is 100% better planned than it is here , its like
if ireland adopted that system ten years ago there would be no bloody hos. est.

There has been a complete lack of urban planning in this country.

When I worked in Frankfurt, I used to be able to walk to the office as the city was a happy mix of apartments, offices, schools and playgrounds. The same applies for almost every other major European city.

Urban planning in this country has been left to windy and corrupt politicians fumbling about for the brown bag stuffed with cash.

bonkey

DublinWriter wrote:

When I worked in Frankfurt, I used to be able to walk to the office as the city was a happy mix of apartments, offices, schools and playgrounds. The same applies for almost every other major European city.

Notably, the word house is absent from this description, and therein lies the problem.

Until the Irish get over this "need" to own a house (as opposed to even the "need" to own a home), urban densities cannot climb significantly. While urban densities cannot climb, the best one can do with respect to urban planning is pay it a mild form of lip-service.

As for Ireland "going to hell"....sorry...I may not live there any more, but I don't buy into that for a second. Ireland is facing new problems because its managed to overcome some of the old, and thats all. If people would prefer a return to the days of mass-exodus, 78% upper tax brackets and significantly higher unemplopyment for those who remain....you're more than welcome to, but I can guarantee you won't see it as an improvement.

jc

DublinWriter

bonkey wrote:

Until the Irish get over this "need" to own a house (as opposed to even the "need" to own a home), urban densities cannot climb significantly.

We'll get over the "need" to own a house when we get over the "need" to get sick and ill and require long term residential care when we are older.

bonkey

DublinWriter wrote:

We'll get over the "need" to own a house when we get over the "need" to get sick and ill and require long term residential care when we are older.

You've lost me.

How would owning a flat or an apartment instead of a house be different in this regard.

And thats what I was hinting at. For the Irish, owning a home - a residence - is not sufficient. People want to own a house. This has an unavoidable effect on population-density which ultimately is a prime factor in the problems we have with urban planning.

Take a simple issue - public transport. The number of stops you require on a route is inversely proportional to population density. THe lower the density, the more stops needed, or the further you require people to walk in order to avail of transport. The more stops, the longer the transit-time. This can be countered by more routes, but then each route serves fewer people, and is thus less economical.

Thus, the lower the population density, the less feasible it is to make public transport attractive, as it requires too much walking, too much time and/or too much cost to maintain.

People in Frankfurt face the same sickness / ageing issues that we in Ireland do. They, however, do not feel the need to own a house. As you pointed out - their city (as with most European cities) is full of apartments.

jc

musiknonstop

I think what DublinWriter meant by "the need for long term residential care" is that if you own a house, you can sell it in your later years to fund care in a nursing home, instead of relying on your pension/the state.

bonkey

musiknonstop wrote:

I think what DublinWriter meant by "the need for long term residential care" is that if you own a house, you can sell it in your later years to fund care in a nursing home, instead of relying on your pension/the state.

And I think that what I meant is that if you own an apartment, you can also sell it in later years to do exactly likewise.

The difference, as I pointed out in my first and second postings, being that one is a house, and one is an apartment. That might sound bloody obvious but the impact of the difference is a significant factor in why DW could walk around a city like Frankfurt, but not around a city like Dublin.

The effect of this difference is primarily on population density, and population density is one of the most significant factors in the problems that Dublin experiences.

Irish - broadly speaking - want to own (or at least live in) houses, regardless of whether they are living in the countryside or in/around Dublin city. Mainland Europeans - like the Frankfurters DW mentioned - generally do not own / live in houses in cities.

Dublin has, over the last number of years, seen a huge increase in the number of apartments springing up around the place, but the impression I've got of people buying them is that for the majority its either to get a foot on the property ladder with a mind to selling and trading up to a house, or its to rent out (immediately or after a while) in order to be able to afford a house.

Ownership also tends to have a reduction on mobility (although this is less of a factor than it may initially seem), which means that people are less likely to live near their job, but rather will live where they have bought their house, and work where their job is. This makes it more difficult again to be withing walking distance of your office. There may be offices within walking distance, but if you work for a different company, that doesn't really help you.

But lets not get distracted on that one. I did not say, and am not saying, that it is the high degree of ownership which is the problem in ireland. I said, and continue to say, that it is the penchant for houses that lies at the root of the problem.

jc

Its a matter of perception. Houses are seen as being a more stable and more reliable investment than Apartments. With Housing you're going to firstly gain ownership of the land the house is built on, and secondly, houses used to be better built than apartments. Apartments in Ireland used to (not sure if its still the same) be built with very low quality in mind, which leads to the viewpoint that houses, which are stronger structures are a better investment.

I bought a house rather than an apartment because I wanted the insurance of owning the land it was built on aswell. At least that was the intention at the time. After I bought the house, reality set in and I started learning about Management companies, and other little tidbits that aren't immediately obvious.

Regardless though, Houses are seen as being more "sound" and therefore a better place to raise children or to invest in.

Hagar

bonkey wrote:

People in Frankfurt face the same sickness / ageing issues that we in Ireland do. They, however, do not feel the need to own a house. As you pointed out - their city (as with most European cities) is full of apartments.

jc

So who owns all the properties then and collects all the rent?
There couldn't be that many Gardaí in the world could there?

bonkey

Deleted User wrote:

Apartments in Ireland used to (not sure if its still the same) be built with very low quality in mind, which leads to the viewpoint that houses, which are stronger structures are a better investment.

Isn't that putting teh cart a bit before the horse?

Apartments were/are built to lower quyality because there was the viewpoint that what people wanted were houses, and therefore apartments are really only for those people who haven't gotten a house yet...until such times as they get one.

Regardless...it still isn't relevant to the point I am making. I'm not saying we are right or wrong to have chosen / continue to choose houses. I'm saying that the ensuing population density is a root cause of the problems being faced, and that while its convenient to blame corrupt politicians, it is still true that no-one has produced a successful model of large-scale urban planning with such low population densities.

Regardless though, Houses are seen as being more "sound" and therefore a better place to raise children or to invest in.

And houses are also a/the root evil of the problems that are being attributed to other factors such as corruption. This is basically what I'm driving at. We can offer any number of justifications as to why its better to own / live in a house over an apartment...but when it comes to dealnig with the ramifications that are a direct result of a lot of people making such a decision....we seek someone or something else to blame.

Houses are seen as being more "sound" - at least partly - because we focus on the benefits and ignore or re-attribute the problems. Apartments are seen as less "sound" because we - again, at least partly - ignore or re-attribute the benefits and focus on the problems.

Hagar wrote:

So who owns all the properties then and collects all the rent?

From my last post - the one you responded to : I did not say, and am not saying, that it is the high degree of ownership which is the problem in ireland.

I'm at a loss as to what you're responding to in my post. It seems to be that you're trying to take issue with what I've already clarified is not what I'm talking about.

jc

Hagar

It would appear that in continental Europe the average person cannot aspire to own the home he lives in. Most of the property is owned by either corporations or very wealthy landlords.

The apartment rental culture that is arising in Ireland is creating great wealth for a small number of people, much of it through corruption if the various tribunals are anything to go by. At the same time it is impoverishing a generation, and by extension future generations, by robbing them of the opportunity to own their own homes.

The new culture evolving is a culture of greed fuelled by politicians working hand in glove with developers and aided and abetted by avaricious estate agents.

"One-off" housing is the only way a lot of people could ever own there own homes. What is so terrible about it? I wonder is the clampdown on "one-off" housing just a new way to force people into the developers hands?

grumpytrousers

Hagar wrote:

It would appear that in continental Europe the average person cannot aspire to own the home he lives in. Most of the property is owned by either corporations or very wealthy landlords.

The apartment rental culture that is arising in Ireland is creating great wealth for a small number of people, much of it through corruption if the various tribunals are anything to go by. At the same time it is impoverishing a generation, and by extension future generations, by robbing them of the opportunity to own their own homes.

The new culture evolving is a culture of greed fuelled by politicians working hand in glove with developers and aided and abetted by avaricious estate agents.

"One-off" housing is the only way a lot of people could ever own there own homes. What is so terrible about it? I wonder is the clampdown on "one-off" housing just a new way to force people into the developers hands?

Surely, Hagar, the point that Bonkey is trying to make is that if 25 floor skyscrapers of apartments suddently started to appear dotted around dublin, they would provide accomodation for a lot more people in a smaller geographical footprint and thus ensure that the services in the area actually become more efficient in that they serve a lot more people. All that being said, and while this would be the case, we, as a people, would appear to be (for no good reason) reluctant to live in such a thing. To quote Baldrick, we all aspire to our nice big Turnip in the Country, but for no good reason

I'm not a lawyer, but there's no obstacle to owning your own apartment. Sure, you don't own the ground that'd (perhaps) be 20 floors down, but then neither does anybody else in your block. But you DO own the four walls within which you live (or have a very very very very long lease) and if you really need to raise money for that spell in the nursing home...heck, you can sell your apartment...

Hagar

grumpytrousers wrote:

Surely, Hagar, the point that Bonkey is trying to make is that if 25 floor skyscrapers of apartments suddently started to appear dotted around dublin, they would provide accomodation for a lot more people in a smaller geographical footprint and thus ensure that the services in the area actually become more efficient in that they serve a lot more people.

They had seven 15 storey apartment blocks in Ballymun and even with all services being funded out of the bottomless taxpayers pocket it turned into a social disaster. They had to be pulled down. Are we really talking about developers providing services for the occupants of these buildings? We would be building time bombs. Realistically only the poorest of society will ever end up in buildings like that. The better off will rent or possibly own in the less oppresive low-rise blocks and the well off will live in houses and own the majority of apartments that the others are living in. That's the way it is here in France anyway and that's the path Ireland is being led down like it or not.

*No offence to anyone living in high-rise developments intended I'm just quoting history

Gurgle

Hagar wrote:

It would appear that in continental Europe the average person cannot aspire to own the home he lives in

And thats why Irish people are buying second homes all over continental europe ?