Housing Bubble Bursting

expediateclimb

I would be very cautious about any figures provided by banks, building societies or estate agents as to the current situation in the market. These people have a vested interest in trying to keep it as buoyant as they can.

And to anyone who bought a house in the past year, I don't feel a bit sorry for you if you now find yourself in negative equity. Interest rates have been on the rise for a while now so you all knew that a slump was a possibility. Tough S***

"also doesn't take into account all the 'extras' that developers are throwing in with new house developments"

Colonel Sanders, does that not tell you something about market conditions at the moment. Developers are so desperate to sell that they are throwing in freebee's. Certainly sounds like the property market is in trouble to me.

Kipperhell

expediateclimb wrote:

Colonel Sanders, does that not tell you something about market conditions at the moment. Developers are so desperate to sell that they are throwing in freebee's. Certainly sounds like the property market is in trouble to me.

Calling a sound business costing desperation is a bit silly if you ask me. If a shop has a sale do you assume they are desperate to sell and the retail market is going to crash?

iguana

Kipperhell wrote:

Calling a sound business costing desperation is a bit silly if you ask me. If a shop has a sale do you assume they are desperate to sell and the retail market is going to crash?

Well actually, at the moment many retail sales are being extended and the reductions are bigger than usual due to panic in the retail sector about decreasing consumer confidence as personal debt grows. It's worked too, as in the UK July sales were far higher than hoped for. But there are shops off Oxford St in London that have been advertising "last week of sale" since 22nd of July.

Glenbhoy

jdivision wrote:

How do you vote against the German economy?

please enlighten me

confuzed

i m a tenant and living with my GF...paying 1300€ for 2 bed house in dublin..
i am not a financial expert but my experience ..

1) newspapers always exagerate the things.. whether rise or fall.. as an integral part of thier maketing to attract people..and thats what herald did.

2) buying a costly property on the basis of good adv. is fulishness....it's buying virtual shares that may rise or fall ...but if u buy a proprty that is worth that value in terms of place, space and overall covered area.. you are on safe side

3) property will not fall up to greater extent as labour costs are rising and so building materail because of inflation...

4) if a new house costs 350,000 and out of that 200,000 is labour cost and cost of material...rest 150,000 how much fall u may expect...

5) no foolish keeps paying 500 extras for 30 yrs...just get a new mortgage....u may loose some money paid...otherwise also u are wasting in rent...

6) there will be platue in price....and selling/ buying will decrease...it is not gud for developers and estate agents but there is unlikely that general public gets cheaper homes.... demand will remian up to an extent due to immigrants influx...

7) property buying is for 25-30 yrs.... rise and fall may occur inbetween but overall there is never fall in any given 30 yrs...


it like you see bad days and gud days in life but you are getting older and never young...

is_that_so

iguana wrote:

Well actually, at the moment many retail sales are being extended and the reductions are bigger than usual due to panic in the retail sector about decreasing consumer confidence as personal debt grows. It's worked too, as in the UK July sales were far higher than hoped for. But there are shops off Oxford St in London that have been advertising "last week of sale" since 22nd of July.

Well for starters we are still in the silly season and newspapers often write any old nonsense to fill pages. Consumer confidence is also a very volatile commodity and while it might suggest trends hardly something to base conclusions on. Next month they could all be happy bunnies.

Many shops are part of larger groups that are listed and are therefore subject to the vagaries of the stockmarket. The weather this summer has probably helped as people sought out retail therapy.

It is often not enough to make a profit. More often than not high single or double digit growth is expected otherwise a company can be viewed as being "in trouble". M&S have been "in trouble" for a few years although I believe they are "coming out of it" now.

Kipperhell

iguana wrote:

Well actually, at the moment many retail sales are being extended and the reductions are bigger than usual due to panic in the retail sector about decreasing consumer confidence as personal debt grows. It's worked too, as in the UK July sales were far higher than hoped for. But there are shops off Oxford St in London that have been advertising "last week of sale" since 22nd of July.

Thus proving my point that it is a valid method of business and not desperation.

expediateclimb

Kipperhell wrote:

Calling a sound business costing desperation is a bit silly if you ask me. If a shop has a sale do you assume they are desperate to sell and the retail market is going to crash?

Kipperhell,

Are you seriously trying to compare the housing market to a shop having a sale. You have got to be kidding me mate, the two are as different as chalk and cheese. When was the last time the housing market had a stock clearance sale? Everything must go including these two bedroom apartments in malahide, buy one get one free!!!!

You must be having a laugh :rolleyes:

D'Peoples Voice

Tom123 wrote:

It doesn't matter whether the valuations stand.

The people have paid €70,000 -€100,000 more than their house are now worth. This money will have to repaid over 20-35 years so it is going to cost them anything between €120,000 and €200,000.

Even assuming that most of these people are on €100,000pa they have just given away 2-3 of after tax income to the developer that they could have kept for themselves!

to hell with those living in the house for 30 years,
imagine what this is doing to the investor market!

Tom123

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

to hell with those living in the house for 30 years,
imagine what this is doing to the investor market!

And wait until all the investors try and exit at the same time.
Thats when the real falls will start

The_Conductor

One thing which is not being appreciated properly here is the difference in absolute prices and real prices. Absolute prices look at headline figures alone, and compare one purchase or sale that happened with another (at a different point in time). Real prices factor inflation into the equation. So- Mr. X may be bragging that his property that he bought 18 months ago has not fallen in value- its actually about 6% higher than he paid for it (based on an identical one which has just sold in the vicinity). When you factor inflation of almost 8% over the last 18 months into the equation- his property has in actual fact fallen by 2% in real terms.

The obtuse way of looking at this is- the money that we all borrowed to buy these shoeboxes is also being devalued by inflation- when you factor a net inflation rate identical to the interest rate, one pretty much offsets the other (of course we don't think like this though- as the interest is a monthly expense that must be paid as we go along- whereas the overall picture is irrelevant until such time as the property is being liquidated).

littlesurfer

i heard that story yesterday.... i would be devestated if I found myself in that situation. I think new developments are going to hold that risk in the next year or two. If i was buying at the moment my interest would be definately in the more established areas...even if the property isn't of the same quality...its going to be location location location

jdivision

Glenbhoy wrote:

please enlighten me

The main reason all confidence in the housing market is gone is that interest rates have gone up so much. Low interest rates fuelled the property boom here. Why are interest rates now rising? Because the German economy is improving. You think that people will vote against the instigators of the fall in house prices. The main instigator is an improvement in the German economy - interest rates were only low to stimulate growth there.

Colonel Sanders

expediateclimb wrote:

Colonel Sanders, does that not tell you something about market conditions at the moment. Developers are so desperate to sell that they are throwing in freebee's. Certainly sounds like the property market is in trouble to me.

that was my point. Even if prices paid for houses have only dropped by 2.6% you are not comparing like with like. A house last year cost x. Now a house + many many extras cost x -2.6%. Therefore house price indices aren't a reliable barometer of whats going on in the mkt.

Colonel Sanders

jdivision wrote:

The main reason all confidence in the housing market is gone is that interest rates have gone up so much. Low interest rates fuelled the property boom here. Why are interest rates now rising? Because the German economy is improving. You think that people will vote against the instigators of the fall in house prices. The main instigator is an improvement in the German economy - interest rates were only low to stimulate growth there.

you are asuming the electorate are rational, they are anything but. I have overheard many people blame the government for interest rate rises.

Tom123

Tom123 wrote:

It doesn't matter whether the valuations stand.

The people have paid €70,000 -€100,000 more than their house are now worth. This money will have to repaid over 20-35 years so it is going to cost them anything between €120,000 and €200,000.

Even assuming that most of these people are on €100,000pa they have just given away 2-3 of after tax income to the developer that they could have kept for themselves!

You're still assuming that these buyers borrowed a huge chunk of the cost of the property, and that they have lengthy mortgages.

The valuation of my own property at 100,000 more than I paid for it two years ago means nothing except a lower interest rate for me (loan to value ratio) because I'm not selling.

A property is only worth what someone will pay for it....

jdivision

Colonel Sanders wrote:

you are asuming the electorate are rational, they are anything but. I have overheard many people blame the government for interest rate rises.

My point exactly. One poster said he hoped people would vote against the instigators of the property price crash in the next election.the housing market was always going to be hurt when interest rates rose and for once we can't blame politicians for that, unless we're going to vote against them for agreeing to join the euro:)

iguana

jdivision wrote:

My point exactly. One poster said he hoped people would vote against the instigators of the property price crash in the next election.the housing market was always going to be hurt when interest rates rose and for once we can't blame politicians for that, unless we're going to vote against them for agreeing to join the euro:)

There were plenty of things the government could have, and should have, done to stop the house price boom. They introduced higher levels of taxation for investors, which they almost immediately went back on. They could have made it law that banks had to stress test borrowers for IR rises of 3/4/5%. It was no secret to anyone that the IRs were artificially low to stimulate the German economy and it was our governments responisibilty to ensure that the country was prepared for the time when they would rise.

miju

Deleted User wrote:

You're still assuming that these buyers borrowed a huge chunk of the cost of the property, and that they have lengthy mortgages.

if you read the article you would actually see the quote from the people which was along the lines of "if we sold our house tomorrow we'd need to find another 100k to pay off our mortgage"

SimpleSam06

Tom123 wrote:

And wait until all the investors try and exit at the same time.
Thats when the real falls will start

Insofar as buying houses go, investors have already exited the market, except for a few isolated pockets where prices are still rising. This knocks out 40% of the buyers for houses, which is going to put extra pressure on those who are trying to sell. As for those unlucky or unwise enough to still be in posession of investment properties, the stampede will come in about five months, when the year on years for 2007 come in, IMHO.

smccarrick wrote:

So- Mr. X may be bragging that his property that he bought 18 months ago has not fallen in value- its actually about 6% higher than he paid for it (based on an identical one which has just sold in the vicinity). When you factor inflation of almost 8% over the last 18 months into the equation- his property has in actual fact fallen by 2% in real terms.

An interesting point about inflationary effects on house prices, so long as you are going to use the equity in your house to buy another house, inflation doesn't matter, since the house you are buying is subject to the same inflation effects. Its like a mini economy inside the actual economy.

Its when you try to use the money from your house sale to buy something besides a house that you really feel that pinch.

Tom123

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Insofar as buying houses go, investors have already exited the market, except for a few isolated pockets where prices are still rising. This knocks out 40% of the buyers for houses, which is going to put extra pressure on those who are trying to sell. As for those unlucky or unwise enough to still be in posession of investment properties, the stampede will come in about five months, when the year on years for 2007 come in, IMHO.

With the current CSO indicating that nearly 15% of all properties in Ireland are vacant I think there are still a significant number of investors left in the market.

Pa ElGrande

Confuzed,

Please take this as constructive criticism. Your spelling and use of grammar is atrocious and you need to improve. Your post is unreadable to a non-native English speaker and even people who learned English prior to mobile phone texting. It could present a problem for you in work or examinations and even impair promotion, you will not be able to effectively express yourself and you will be frustrated when people do not understand what you are trying to say, or, your true intentions are misinterpreted.
If I may suggest, type your message in a text editor like notepad and then cut and paste the contents to a free online spelling, grammar checker such as http://www.spellchecker.net/spellcheck/

I am going to try and reply to the points you made and I may retype them to better understand what I think you are trying to say.

confuzed wrote:

1) newspapers always exagerate the things.. whether rise or fall.. as an integral part of thier maketing to attract people..and thats what herald did.

1) Newspapers always hype stories, in this case the rise or fall of house prices. This is an integral part of their marketing to attract people and that's what the Herald did.

My opinion is the data they based the story on is factual and is not an exageration. It is more correct to say they sensationalised the story to whip up interest in selling papers. Which I think is what you are trying to say and if so I agree.

confuzed wrote:

2) buying a costly property on the basis of good adv. is fulishness....it's buying virtual shares that may rise or fall ...but if u buy a proprty that is worth that value in terms of place, space and overall covered area.. you are on safe side

2) Buying an overvalued property on the basis of well intentioned advice is foolishness. It's buying virtual shares that may rise or fall, but, if you buy property that is worth that value in terms of place, space and overall covered area, then you are on the safe side.

Everybody is an expert when the market is going up, the same happened in the dot com share craze and is a common feature of asset bubbles driven by easy lending conditions.
I assume your advice is that people should avoid shoebox houses/apartments and buy based on location (close to work or family and services) and have sufficient space to meet their anticipated future needs (e.g. growing family) rather than buying on the edge of the commuter belt because the price is lower. If this is the case you are correct to make the distinction between price and value and one of a handful of people in this debate to do this.

confuzed wrote:

3) property will not fall up to greater extent as labour costs are rising and so building materail because of inflation...

3) Property prices will not fall by any substantial amount as construction costs such as labour and building materials continue to rise.

Here is where I disagree with you, classical economists say that price is set by input costs plus profit, however, the rise in costs does not totally explain the rise in Irish house prices, otherwise why would private sector debt be so high? Did you know Irish private sector debt has risen at the fastest rate compared with anywhere in the world for the past ten years. There is a limit to how much debt a person can take on.
If you look at the number of planning applications you will notice there is a dramatic downward trend since 2006, some areas are 50% down on 2005 figures. This means there will be less houses built this year and for the next few years, it means there will not be enough work for the builders in this country i.e. there is a surplus of labour, which means they must drop their price if they want to stay in employment in the future or they must leave the country, signing on the dole is not a practical option what you have a mortgage to pay. The material producers will also need to drop their prices in order to sell in a shrinking market, otherwise their competitors do likewise and take their market share. Interest rates will also continue to rise to cover the banks losses, and, banks will not be as generous with loans (there will be no 100% loans next year, banks will want to see money down). Many developers and builders have also borrowed to fund developments and are now experiencing cashflow problems because of falling number of house sale transactions, the banks will be inclined to pull these loans in and some will go bankrupt. There may be inflation elsewhere in the economy such as food and energy prices, but construction labour rates are currently falling, due to lack of demand for the same levels of labour and increased competition for scarce work.

confuzed wrote:

4) if a new house costs 350,000 and out of that 200,000 is labour cost and cost of material...rest 150,000 how much fall u may expect...

4) For example, if a new house is advertised for sale at €350,000 and out of that €200,000 is labour cost and cost of material, then the developer in theory has scope to cut the price by €150,000 and breaking even.

You don't know these figures so it's best to show this is an example. In today's market it costs a ballpark €70 per square foot to build a house. Out of the builders profits they have to pay interest and loans for land and equipment plus settle with the revenue comissioners. In some areas of the country e.g. Longford where they have been building section 23 tax break properties, demand has evaporated as property investors have moved on, the builders are shuttering sites as they cannot sell at any price.

confuzed wrote:

5) no foolish keeps paying 500 extras for 30 yrs...just get a new mortgage....u may loose some money paid...otherwise also u are wasting in rent...

I cannot make any sense of this. What point(s) are you trying to make?

confuzed wrote:

6) there will be platue in price....and selling/ buying will decrease...it is not gud for developers and estate agents but there is unlikely that general public gets cheaper homes.... demand will remian up to an extent due to immigrants influx...

6) There will be a plateau in house prices. The number of property transactions will decrease. This is not good for property developers and estate agents, but, it is unlikely that the general public will get cheaper homes. Demand for housing will remain high to an extent due to the influx of immigrants.

You have made a number of blanket statements here without explaining the reasoning behind why you expect this to be the case, would you care to expand? The new property owners in Delgany certainly got cheaper homes compared with those that closed several weeks ago. The number of property transactions has already fallen and continues to fall, we know this because mortgage lending is down, building sites are closing, estate agents are being made redundant and the number of properties for sale continues to rise. If prices were going to plateau they would have done so by now, instead they are continuing to fall. Why will immigrants keep coming here?

confuzed wrote:

7) property buying is for 25-30 yrs.... rise and fall may occur inbetween but overall there is never fall in any given 30 yrs...

7) Property buying is for 25-30 years, a rise and fall in prices may occur in between but overall there is never a fall over a thirty year time frame.

What evidence do you have to support this and what is the point of this statement? is it meant in the context of property investors or home owners?

SimpleSam06

Tom123 wrote:

With the current CSO indicating that nearly 15% of all properties in Ireland are vacant I think there are still a significant number of investors left in the market.

Indeed, its going to get bloody. I would be interested to see a graph correlating the

a) number of houses sold to investors over the last three years (these are the people who will be in the most trouble).

b) number of those empty houses built / completed in the last three years.

This will give us some idea of the extent of the carnage, what we can expect to see flooding the market. First time buyers and buy to letters, as well as those trading up are all looking for a place to live to some extent, so will be far slower to sell, although many of those stuck in shoebox commuter hell might panic and try to cut their losses as much as possible.

miju

miju wrote:

if you read the article you would actually see the quote from the people which was along the lines of "if we sold our house tomorrow we'd need to find another 100k to pay off our mortgage"

I did read the article. There was a quote from one guy who said: "If I go to sell my house tomorrow I won't get close to recouping the price I paid for it."

Reinforces the point that a property is only worth what someone will pay for it, and it means shag-all unless you're "selling tomorrow".

The_Conductor

Interesting article in today's Sindo......

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cowen-house-slump-is-not-unwelcome-1070012.html



Sunday, September 02 2007



Finance minister denies policies to 'cool down' overheating housing market have backfired - Cowen: house slump is not unwelcome

Sunday September 02 2007

Bullish Finance Minister Brian Cowen has said that the current turmoil in the property market is "neither unwelcome nor surprising" despite plummeting house prices around the country.

In comments which will renew questions over his stewardship of the nation's finances, Mr Cowen has rejected claims that his policy of "cooling down" the property market has badly backfired.

This is despite emerging evidence that house prices, particularly in the greater Dublin area, are falling faster than anticipated, that the number of repossessions is growing and that the prospect of negative equity is looming.

In July Mr Cowen introduced the abolition of stamp duty for first-time buyers, in what many property experts now say was an inadequate measure.

At the time, Mr Cowen said: "I believe that these proposals before you today to introduce targeted stamp duty reform aimed at benefiting first-time buyers will restore stability and certainty to this market."

If anything, there is now even greater instability and uncertainty in the property market here, and the credit squeeze is making loans difficult to get.

The difficulties in the Irish property market were highlighted last week at a new housing development in Delgany, Co Wicklow, where people who bought houses for €700,000 have been shocked to learn that new houses of similar design on the same estate are now being sold for €595,000 -- a drop of €105,000.

But in a provocative defence of his policies, Mr Cowen told the Sunday Independent that prospective buyers should not be discouraged by those who seem to portray easing in house prices in a negative way.

He declined to talk about individual cases but dismissed the grave disquiet over the property market.

"For most people, the value of their house is a constant factor. It is a home to live in, not an investment to be tracked like price changes on the stock market," he declared.

Mr Cowen claimed there is now much better value both in the new and secondhand market than a year ago.

"A climate of price moderation is a far more comfortable place for buyers than a market driven by hype.

"Even home owners trading up or down who may take longer to sell will be in a better position as buyers than in an overheated market," he asserted.

What many householders regard as a drastic and frightening decline in the property market is a good thing, the minister insisted.

"The recent turnaround from unsustainable house price escalation in 2005/2006 should be neither surprising nor unwelcome.

"We are now seeing a transition to a more balanced and mature market.

"It is in everyone's interest that the housing market should evolve to an orderly and sustainable growth pattern, in terms of prices, lending and output," he added.

Mr Cowen added: "The positive overall view is, indeed, reflected in the Central Bank's most recent quarterly bulletin, which sees recent data as pointing to a better balance between supply and demand in the market over the medium term and stability in the market.

"Easing in prices should bring more buyers into the market, helping to ensure its continued strength.

"Housing demand is strongly underpinned by economic performance and a range of demographic factors -- population, age structure, reducing household size, immigration and a housing stock that is still below EU norms," Mr Cowen said.

He added that housing output figures for the first seven months of 2007 were showing over 44,000 completions.

"While recent trends clearly suggest an easing back on recent record levels, the final out-turn will depend on activity by builders through the rest of the year," he added.

Latest figures from the Central Bank show that growth in residential mortgage lending was the slowest for five-and-a-half years in July.

The annual rate of growth was 17.9 per cent, down from 19 per cent in June.

The €1.6 billion increase in mortgage lending in July was down more than 30 per cent on the same month last year

"The figures confirm that the slowdown in the property market continues," said Ulster Bank chief economist Pat McArdle.

Meanwhile, Fine Gael TD Charles Flanagan has warned vulnerable house buyers to steer clear of troubled sub-prime mortgages.

It follows last week's report in the Sunday Independent that thousands of householders are facing difficulties paying back mortgages -- including many vulnerable people who took out sub-prime loans at high interest rates.

Mr Flanagan said that the Independent Mortgage Advisers' Federation confirmed that sub-prime lenders are increasing interest rates on home loans.

Interest rates of 8 per cent and over are now the reality for some families.

He said hard-pressed families look to sub-prime "predators" to help solve their loan or debt problems, but the very high interest rates can leave people worse off than ever, and sometimes without even a roof over their heads.

The head of the Financial Regulator, Patrick Neary, has called for sub-prime lenders to be brought under the control of the Consumer Protection Code (CPC) .

On Thursday, Mr Cowen said he was aware that some lending activities fall outside the scope of the CPC so borrowers do not benefit from the additional safeguards which the code provides.

Mr Cowen promised action in the next Dail term.

In the US, President Bush said he would help those sub-prime borrowers who are in trouble. He will allow the Federal Housing Administration, which insures mortgages for low-income borrowers, guarantee loans for borrowers not meeting their repayments.

ECB Governor Jean-Paul Trichet has now been summoned by the European Parliament for a hearing this month about the recent chaos in the financial markets.

The hearing will take place on September 11 before the Parliment's Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee.

BendiBus

smccarrick wrote:

ECB Governor Jean-Paul Trichet

:rolleyes:

Good to note that maintaining artificially high prices is not now considered a good thing by Government. Making homes more affordable is now more important. Treating houses as homes rather than investments.

Presumably that's because they know prices (and SD revenues) won't remain so high anymore, so they have to paint the falling prices thing as good.

So, confirmation from Government that things are heading down for the next while?

Victor

smccarrick wrote:

One thing which is not being appreciated properly here is the difference in absolute prices and real prices. Absolute prices look at headline figures alone, and compare one purchase or sale that happened with another (at a different point in time). Real prices factor inflation into the equation. So- Mr. X may be bragging that his property that he bought 18 months ago has not fallen in value- its actually about 6% higher than he paid for it (based on an identical one which has just sold in the vicinity). When you factor inflation of almost 8% over the last 18 months into the equation- his property has in actual fact fallen by 2% in real terms.

Of course, you are 18 months down the line with a roof over your head and a modest amount of capital paid off.

Colonel Sanders wrote:

that was my point. Even if prices paid for houses have only dropped by 2.6% you are not comparing like with like. A house last year cost x. Now a house + many many extras cost x -2.6%. Therefore house price indices aren't a reliable barometer of whats going on in the mkt.

House price indicators are like poverty indicators - both suffer specification inflation. Expectations change. 100 years ago, someone with a car was rich. These days its normal.

Twenty years ago, having an en-suite was the exception, now it is normal. Alarms were uncommon, now they are practically mandatory. Most of what has changed is specification inflation - the houses aren't available without the extras.

Glenbhoy

jdivision wrote:

My point exactly. One poster said he hoped people would vote against the instigators of the property price crash in the next election.the housing market was always going to be hurt when interest rates rose and for once we can't blame politicians for that, unless we're going to vote against them for agreeing to join the euro:)

I disagree totally, however I expect to see this line that the end of the boom was caused by the ECB being propounded increasingly by the government and their sympathisers.
The ECB themselves advised the irish govt several years ago that whilst interest rates would not be changed to suit irish needs, there were a number of other measures that the irish govt could take to reduce inflationary pressures in the irish market.
As Iguana pointed out, these include the abolishment of tax breaks, the implementation (and retention) of the Bacon report, reuctions in mortgage interest relief, enforcing stricter stress testing requirements, changes in stamp duty and capital gains tax legislation etc etc. But no, they didn't bother, instead they allowed the market to run along unchecked (indeed this time last year, at the height of the boom, Bertie was advising people to buy now, since history showed that those who put off buying would lose out in the long run). Maybe they actually believed that the Irish experience would be different, we would be the one example of an asset bubble that ended in the 'soft landing', Bertie would be extolled in economics text books for years to come as the man who deflated the bubble in a manageable fashion.

Gurgle

Sarsfield wrote:

Does that 0.9% rise account for inflation?
Or are we looking at yoy fall of 4% in real terms?

No, it doesn't include inflation.
And yes, thats a fall of inflation minus 0.9% in real terms.
(What was the inflation figure from June 2006 to June 2007? I didn't think it was 4.9%)

So thats an overheated market beginning to correct itself without the average homeowner being in a situation of negative equity.

aka a soft landing.

*puts on flame-proof overalls*

faceman

Glenbhoy wrote:

I disagree totally, however I expect to see this line that the end of the boom was caused by the ECB being propounded increasingly by the government and their sympathisers.
The ECB themselves advised the irish govt several years ago that whilst interest rates would not be changed to suit irish needs, there were a number of other measures that the irish govt could take to reduce inflationary pressures in the irish market.

the ECB failed to consider irish culture and dismissed any emotive responsibility for the long term goals of irish people.