Poll shows big drop for FF in Dublin

OPENROAD

ballooba wrote:

I have mentioned on this forum before that there is a lot of empty houses knocking around. Section 23 etc.

The figures released by the census today say 15% of housing stock is vacant. That represents 266,000 units.

Was the figure not even higher? Still an incredible amount though.

K-9

ballooba wrote:

Give examples of where public sector pay is lower than private sector for the same work.



Yes there are, again I have to ask, do you live in the real world?

Thankfully I don't have to go trawling through the web. There's an example in today's Indo.
http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1801794&issue_id=15420


To seize the proceeds of crime. How does that conflict with a stance of being tough on crime?

No, CAB as I state again was an excellent idea. Again who was in Govt. at the time it was introduced and why was it introduced? Looks like I'm going to have say it myself, Veronica Guerins murder, gangland crime and law and order where a major issue when FG where in Govt.CAB was introduced because of the fear that the state was under attack at the time.

I stated earlier examples where public sector pay is lower than private sector. Of course there are areas where it's lower. Looks like I'm not the only one not living in the real world:)

On negative equity, that is a sign of the boom being over and normality returning. People have to be careful where they buy in future. Location, location, location as they say. Despite what has happened in the last 10 years Property like the stock market is a long term investment. 12 months is not a long term investment.

Property markets and indeed economies are not going to be booming every year. That is not FF's fault. If you don't agree with 02/03, 1987 was the start of the Celtic Tiger. Courageous decision by Dukes at the time but it was FF who finally dealt with the situation when in Govt.

ballooba

Seanies32 wrote:

Looks like I'm going to have say it myself, Veronica Guerins murder, gangland crime and law and order where a major issue when FG where in Govt.CAB was introduced because of the fear that the state was under attack at the time.

Fine Gael was in government for three years. John Gilligan and his cronies had been around for a lot longer. I'm very proud that Fine Gael introduced a successful measure in the CAB to counter the scourge of organised crime.

Seanies32 wrote:

On negative equity, that is a sign of the boom being over and normality returning. People have to be careful where they buy in future. Location, location, location as they say. Despite what has happened in the last 10 years Property like the stock market is a long term investment. 12 months is not a long term investment.

What kind of tripe are you talking now. :eek:

Here's another Sunday Independent article:

Sunday Independent 25.02.2007 wrote:

On a €1m property, the €90,000 paid to Government will cost about twice that amount over the lifetime of a mortgage if, as is usually the case, it has to be borrowed.

It takes five years, therefore, for an average buyer to see a capital gain that wipes out the cost of stamp duty.

So, it would be 5 years before you could actually afford to sell that house without sufferring negative equity. :eek:

We're not talking investment here. We are talking peoples homes. With rising interest rates people are having difficulty keeping up with repayments. They cannot afford to not sell. Especially those who have lost their jobs.

Seanies32 wrote:

Property markets and indeed economies are not going to be booming every year. That is not FF's fault. If you don't agree with 02/03, 1987 was the start of the Celtic Tiger. Courageous decision by Dukes at the time but it was FF who finally dealt with the situation when in Govt.

Yes, my point was that Fianna Fail failed to capitalise on the boom that happened while they were in power. The debate on who created the boom has been done to death here. Let's not start that old chestnut again.

K-9

ballooba wrote:

Public sector workers earn 35-40% more than their private sector counterparts.

ballooba wrote:

Well, you were the one who thought raising private sector pay in line with public sector pay was a good idea. (hint: inflation)

So as you say there is a pay gap between public and private service, (generally). I take it you don't agree with that as you raised the point.

So if you don't agree with raising private sector pay and you are suggesting a public sector pay freeze, How is the pay gap, which you don't agree with, going to be bridged ? Or do you suggest leaving it the way it is?

ballooba wrote:

What kind of tripe are you talking now.

It is tripe that is going to be very relevant now the construction boom is over.

ballooba wrote:

Originally Posted by Sunday Independent 25.02.2007
On a €1m property, the €90,000 paid to Government will cost about twice that amount over the lifetime of a mortgage if, as is usually the case, it has to be borrowed.

It takes five years, therefore, for an average buyer to see a capital gain that wipes out the cost of stamp duty.

Aggghhhhh!!!!, Sunday Independent tripe.

Lets see:

1. Are they seriously suggesting that there should be no stamp duty on a €1 Ml. house.
2. Is €1 Ml. the average buyer? €428,000 is the average.
3. 5 years? At 7.5% Stamp Duty on the average Dublin house is €32,100. They are predicting house price growth of 1.5% p.a. I know prices for the last 3 months have only rose .3% but is 3 Months a long enough time frame to base an assessment like that? I would wait till the summer months after the slow time ( a recent phenomenoen) for house sales is over. Past performance is not a reflection on future performance as we all should know about house prices now.

Banks are at fault if they have granted mortgages in the last 6 months/year and they have not properly stress tested repayment capacity, not FF.

Again people have to be very careful where they now buy as with the housing price boom over location is now more important than ever before.

ballooba

Seanies32 wrote:

So if you don't agree with raising private sector pay and you are suggesting a public sector pay freeze, How is the pay gap, which you don't agree with, going to be bridged ? Or do you suggest leaving it the way it is?

Obviously I meant freezing public sector pay until private sector pay naturally comes into line. Or if private sector pay is not naturally increasing at a sufficient rate then cut public sector pay.

Seanies32 wrote:

It is tripe that is going to be very relevant now the construction boom is over.

I was referring to your "Location, location, location" tripe. I'll point out what's wrong with your ill-thought-out statement. That means that those who couldn't afford to buy in a good area will be hit the most. You seem to think that's O.K. though, because they weren't well-off in the first place. It doesn't matter if they have their house repossessed.

Seanies32 wrote:

Aggghhhhh!!!!, Sunday Independent tripe.

The article points out that most people are in negative equity from the off.

-So what if they are suggesting abolishing stamp duty? Even people in the party you love so well are calling for stamp-duty reform.
-You maths is incredibly off the mark. I won't embarass you there. I will say that the €32,000 figure you mention cost twice that over the lifetime of the mortgage.

Seanies32 wrote:

I would wait till the summer months after the slow time ( a recent phenomenoen) for house sales is over.

So you are saying that the market is going to take off again, despite rising interest rates and people already struggling to pay mortgages on houses that they can't afford to sell. What planet are you on?

Dr Galen

Obviously I meant freezing public sector pay until private sector pay naturally comes into line. Or if private sector pay is not naturally increasing at a sufficient rate then cut public sector pay.

do u mean this across thw board? can i ask why those of us in the public sector who work our asses off for the benefit of the service should have to have our pay frozen, and suffer, jsut "so the private sector can catch up".
Not meaning to sound cruel here , but its not my fault that elements of the private sector get paid less well that in the public sector. I've had this dedate before with people. I fully support review of public sector pay, but this can't be done on the basis of the freeze everything mentality, jsut because members of the private sector don't like it. Examine everyone in the public sector. Implement proper bonues schemes for those that can work on this kind scheme, though I'd like to see our anyone would plan to performance analyse a teacher......sorry but not enough A's this month Sir, no performance bonus for you then

ballooba

nurse_baz wrote:

do u mean this across thw board?

Ok, I think I may have been a bit blinkered here. In retrospect my view that all public sector workers are overpaid is probably a bit generalistic. I was basing it on my own experience working there.

I know how much nurses make from my brother's wife. She makes buttons compared to the responsibility she has. She is relatively senior and earns only a few grand more than a entry level Bus Driver.

I accept that you can't freeze wages for everyone. I doubt any government would be able to get away with cuts either, unless their was a serious downturn.

nurse_baz wrote:

I fully support review of public sector pay, but this can't be done on the basis of the freeze everything mentality, jsut because members of the private sector don't like it.

It's not just that I don't like it. It is a completely unfair situation. At the end of the day it is all of our taxes that are paying public sector wages. Including yours and mine.

Another argument I have heard before is "Why don't you go work in the public sector then?". I don't want to work in the pubic sector and I shouldn't have to.

I'm looking forward to Enda Kenny's proposals tomorrow. Let's see what he has to say.

ballooba

ballooba wrote:

Ok, I think I may have been a bit blinkered here. In retrospect my view that all public sector workers are overpaid is probably a bit generalistic. I was basing it on my own experience working there.

Oh God we have an altruist... Were you over paid and how much of it did you give back?

I'm looking forward to Enda Kenny's proposals tomorrow. Let's see what he has to say.

To be honest it's going to be the usual mantra.
I already heard some of it tonight.

[Gift Grub voice] We will end the schaaaaakndal of hosshpital waiting lists-we will fixch the health shhervice [/Gift voice]

They will yeah.... Election promises don't ya just love them.

On a positive note-actually scratch that- on an apathy note,FG really are gearing up on the sick health service NOW but they should have been HAMMERING that point home for years.

I'm very very sceptical though on what they will do,I'd say in government , they'll soon be bogged down.
I've seen it all before.

ballooba

Tristrame wrote:

Oh God we have an altruist... Were you over paid and how much of it did you give back?

Good question. I don't have my bank statements, but I think I was on about €320 a week. Would have worked out about €15,000 a year. That was in 2003. I guess my generalisation was inaccurate.

MontgomeryClift

nurse_baz wrote:

do u mean this across thw board? can i ask why those of us in the public sector who work our asses off for the benefit of the service should have to have our pay frozen, and suffer, jsut "so the private sector can catch up".

You didn't object to becoming overpaid.

http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10006397.shtml

Edit: Though if you personally are not overpaid it's a different story, and you're foolish to be defending the public servants in general, since they're overpaid and you're not.

McSandwich

It would be interesting to see a breakdown of the number of employed public/ civil servants and their roles.

I'd also be very interested in finding out just how much of the good work claimed by, and attributed to, our elected representatives is in reality the result of the hard work of civil/public servants.

K-9

ballooba wrote:

Obviously I meant freezing public sector pay until private sector pay naturally comes into line. Or if private sector pay is not naturally increasing at a sufficient rate then cut public sector pay.

ballooba wrote:

Ok, I think I may have been a bit blinkered here. In retrospect my view that all public sector workers are overpaid is probably a bit generalistic. I was basing it on my own experience working there.

ballooba wrote:

Good question. I don't have my bank statements, but I think I was on about €320 a week. Would have worked out about €15,000 a year. That was in 2003. I guess my generalisation was inaccurate.

ballooba wrote:

I know how much nurses make from my brother's wife. She makes buttons compared to the responsibility she has. She is relatively senior and earns only a few grand more than a entry level Bus Driver.

I accept that you can't freeze wages for everyone. I doubt any government would be able to get away with cuts either, unless their was a serious downturn.

Just because the papers say there is a problem or its the party line, doesn't mean that there isn't exceptions to the rule. Each case needs to be taken by its own merits.

So would you support the nurses unions demands of a 10% pay increase and a 35 hour week?

ballooba wrote:

I was referring to your "Location, location, location" tripe. I'll point out what's wrong with your ill-thought-out statement. That means that those who couldn't afford to buy in a good area will be hit the most. You seem to think that's O.K. though, because they weren't well-off in the first place. It doesn't matter if they have their house repossessed.

Location, location, location was meant toungue in cheek. Obviously, no matter where you live and who's in Govt. everybody has a certain budget. It's about locating in the best area that you can taking account of schools, roads, local services, shops, pubs etc. Has and always will apply.
If as u seem to be saying there is going to be a slump and crash it doesn't really matter where you live.It will affect everybody.

ballooba wrote:

The article points out that most people are in negative equity from the off.

-So what if they are suggesting abolishing stamp duty? Even people in the party you love so well are calling for stamp-duty reform.

Stamp duty reform off course is a good idea but it has to be well thought out which was why Cowen delayed it. Now, with house price inflation slowing down is the time to do it. There is less chance of the reduction going straight to builders who would just increase the house prices generally, thus lining the builders pockets with the money rather than actual house buyers saving.

Builders at the minute would be very slow in adding 7.5/9% to a house price. So, an example of Cowen calling it correctly ahead of McDowell and indeed the opposition.

ballooba wrote:

-You maths is incredibly off the mark. I won't embarass you there. I will say that the €32,000 figure you mention cost twice that over the lifetime of the mortga

Maths doesn't come into it. €32,000 is stamp duty which has to self financed. Banks will lend u 90 - 100% of the Purchase Price or Market Value which does not include the stamp duty. The €32,000 is not or should not be mortgaged, so interest doubling the amount does not come into the equation. Very ill-informed of the Sindo. Unless banks have started doing 107/108% mortgages it will not cost twice over the period of the mortgage.

ballooba wrote:

So you are saying that the market is going to take off again, despite rising interest rates and people already struggling to pay mortgages on houses that they can't afford to sell. What planet are you on?

No, but I'm not suggesting they are going to crash or drop. A surveys results printed in the Sunday Times on consumers says they are predicting growth of 3.5-7.5% this year. These are prospective buyers saying what they think.

Saying there is going to be growth of 1.2/1.5% based on the market of the last 3/6 months maximum is not being realistic. As all estate agents, house buyers/vendors know, in a normal market, Winter/Early Spring are slow times of the year. I'm saying instead of having a knee jerk reaction wait until the Summer before making predictions on the market. It will give a fairer/truer reflection of the market.

Actually, on election promises FF have had the most imaginative and original proposals yet IMO of the election. The PRSI proposals are excellent and go a long way to addressing inequalities in the system. It mighn't be a vote winning or "sexy" politics but very well thought out, practical and socially equitable. And before people say its just electioneering, they have started reform of PRSI in the last 2/3 years, so this is just an extension of that policy. Just shows you, being in opposition for 10 years doesn't necessarily mean you have the vetoe on imaginative policies.

McSandwich

Seanies32 wrote:

Maths doesn't come into it. €32,000 is stamp duty which has to self financed. Banks will lend u 90 - 100% of the Purchase Price or Market Value which does not include the stamp duty.

Speaking of which, wouldn't it make sense to publish house prices which include tax? If I go into a garage tomorrow to buy a car, the quoted price will include VRT and VAT. Why should property be any different?

Seanies32 wrote:

The €32,000 is not or should not be mortgaged, so interest doubling the amount does not come into the equation. Very ill-informed of the Sindo. Unless banks have started doing 107/108% mortgages it will not cost twice over the period of the mortgage.

It will because without the burden of stamp duty, the house buyer could put the 32K towards the house and then take out a smaller mortgage.

It might be fairer if stamp duty was paid as a fixed amount monthly during the mortgage term. For example, over 30 years, 32K stamp duty would become €88 per month. This way, the tax is not paid in full until the buyer owns the house. If they sell after say 5 years then they either (a) Owner occupiers stop paying stamp duty on the house, assuming they will be buying another house. (b) Investors, or those cashing in on property, pay the remaining stamp duty as a lump sum.

ballooba

McSandwich wrote:

Speaking of which, wouldn't it make sense to publish house prices which include tax? If I go into a garage tomorrow to buy a car, the quoted price will include VRT and VAT. Why should property be any different?

Simple, because different people have to pay different stamp duty.

WRT Stamp Duty being paid up front and not being mortgaged. The 32K that is spent on Stamp Duty would have been available as capital if it weren't for stamp duty. So effectively the buyer has to borrow an extra 32K to cover it.

McSandwich

ballooba wrote:

Simple, because different people have to pay different stamp duty.

Didn't think of that..

ballooba wrote:

WRT Stamp Duty being paid up front and not being mortgaged. The 32K that is spent on Stamp Duty would have been available as capital if it weren't for stamp duty. So effectively the buyer has to borrow an extra 32K to cover it.

That's what I though I said

ballooba

McSandwich wrote:

That's what I though I said

That was in response to Seanies26+6

K-9

ballooba wrote:

That was in response to Seanies26+6

Seanies32 has nothing to do with 26+6. You're presuming or generalising again;)

McSandwich wrote:

It will because without the burden of stamp duty, the house buyer could put the 32K towards the house and then take out a smaller mortgage.

Agreed. As are most of the parties. Cowen did agree with reforming SD in the budget but disagreed with the timing which IMO with subsequent events he has been proved right.

I'm just pointing out that the Sindo article is technically wrong. The €90,000 that they quote is paid by the purchaser to the Govt. not by the Mortgage Company.

On you're point about paying SD monthly over you're mortgage term I don't think this has to be done. SD was reformed 2 years ago but unfortunately house price inflation overtook the limits. Any new Govt. will adjust the limits for 1st time buyers. With prices going back to normal levels it won't then be as much of an issue. It will take a lot longer for the new limits to be surpassed.

McSandwich wrote:

Speaking of which, wouldn't it make sense to publish house prices which include tax? If I go into a garage tomorrow to buy a car, the quoted price will include VRT and VAT. Why should property be any different?

Again agreed. VAT and SD should be shown for consumer purposes.

Ballooba wrote:

Simple, because different people have to pay different stamp duty.

And different people pay different VRT from 25% up. There is different rates of SD as well as VRT. Could easily be incorporated on an invoice from the construction Co. or estate agent.

Ballooba wrote:

WRT Stamp Duty being paid up front and not being mortgaged. The 32K that is spent on Stamp Duty would have been available as capital if it weren't for stamp duty. So effectively the buyer has to borrow an extra 32K to cover it.

Yes, but not factually correct. But when did the facts get in the way of a story for the Sindo:rolleyes:

ballooba

Seanies32 wrote:

Seanies32 has nothing to do with 26+6. You're presuming or generalising again;)

Just testing.

Seanies32 wrote:

And different people pay different VRT from 25% up. There is different rates of SD as well as VRT. Could easily be incorporated on an invoice from the construction Co. or estate agent.

That would only be relevant for new houses and new cars.

K-9

New cars yes, but not just new houses. Actually the estate agent could advise or publish some information on it (i.e.SD), whether new or 2nd hand. Give them sone new work to do rather money for old rope! Could be easily done.
Even an information sheet from the internet would do. Some people don't realise the SD implications when they're buying.

One thing FF did do was remove the distinction between a first time buyer buying a new or second hand house which was ridiculous. Should it have mattered whether a 1st time buyer buys a new or 2nd hand house?

ballooba

Seanies32 wrote:

Even an information sheet from the internet would do. Some people don't realise the SD implications when they're buying.

Ah now, come on. What buyer is not fully aware of SD implications?

K-9

You're generalising again. I know people who have been caught before. It's not as confusing as it used to be and it's more of an issue than it used to be alright. Still no reason why the agent couldn't attach a sheet to the property details.

Central Bank are saying the interest may actually be a good thing for the overall market.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=184&si=1805154&issue_id=15449

ballooba

Well, I won't say those buyers deserved it.

I hope the Central Bank are right. I don't exactly see how there can be a soft landing if the housing market slows down though. The dynamics at play mean knock on effects are pretty much inevitable.

K-9

Agreed, but the National Development Plan, if planned and administered properly would go a long way to offsetting that.

Múinteoir

Seanies32 wrote:

Agreed, but the National Development Plan, if planned and administered properly would go a long way to offsetting that.

Not before the election it won't. And that's the big issue at this point. How the electorate perceive things to be going.

K-9

Agreed, and things do seem to be going against the Govt. on that front. Latest Tax return figures are interesting.

Might get all the parties, who are all guilty of it, to actually discuss the benefits of cutting tax rates.

gurramok

Seanies32 wrote:

Agreed, but the National Development Plan, if planned and administered properly would go a long way to offsetting that.

No it won't.

Machines didn't build houses and furnish them, manpower did.

Machines build roads manned by hugely less manpower.

Anyway, there wont be much of a NDP when the housing market tumbles, all that stamp duty drifted away and more unemployment from the 90% Irish who are involved in construction.

K-9

gurramok wrote:

No it won't.

Anyway, there wont be much of a NDP when the housing market tumbles, all that stamp duty drifted away and more unemployment from the 90% Irish who are involved in construction.

I take it you have some facts to base this assumption on.

gurramok

Seanies32 wrote:

I take it you have some facts to base this assumption on.

23% of GDP based on construction compared to EU average of 12%.

http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10009014.shtml
http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10009014.shtml

Most of it based on housing, machines don't build houses, manpower does, common sense there.
Brickies, plasterers, electricians, plumbers, carpenters etc can't work on roads!!

When that 23% drops back to 12%, a hell of alot of construction workers will be let go, experts reckon 100,000 workers are employed in construction where there will be no need for them.
Most are Irish(http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10006756.shtml)

Residential construction accounted for two thirds of total building and construction output in 2005, same can be said for now.

Stamp duty on property transactions amounted to €2 billion in 2005 alone.
'Some 17% of the private sector workforce are in the construction sector but we cannot engineer a permanent building boom'

'In 2006, Goodbody Stockbrokers said that direct property taxes accounted for 17% of tax revenue. When sectors dependent on the property boom are factored in, it may well account for a third of tax revenue.'

We don't need 90,000 housing units a year as over 200,000 are vacant already including 120,000 new builds in last 5 years, alot held by speculators plus we don't have the population to afford it.

As the housing bubble is bursting, stamp duty, capital gains tax etc revenues will tumble to where it should be to a normal level.

Its a blooming financial timebomb.

K-9

Interesting article by Robert Watt in the Business Post to. (Not on online though).

But he points out a lot of the reaction to the lastest economic figures is very surprising and lacks balance. People seem to be amazed there could actually be a slowdown or there is a cycle to economic activity.

Some of the figures people are predicting economic crashes on are:

1. Economic growth going from 7/8% to 5.4% this year and 3.9% in 2008.
2. Exchequer receipts up 10.2% for the 1st quarter is considered bad. (These include all taxes, SD, CGT, Corporation tax, PAYE/PRSI)
3. House prices flat for last few months. They have actually grown 9.5% in last year. AIB and other surveys are expecting something like 4-6% which I think is more realistic than minus figures or 9.5%.

The property market is adjusting at the minute. There is a predicted 10/15% drop in house starts etc. A 15/20,000 drop in construction workers will not adversely effect the economy as a whole.

There are also advantages to the property market slowing. People have been used to short term capital appreciation which is not a realistic expectation in a normal market. Smaller house price increases will help affordability and help 1st time buyers especially with interest rates rises. The increase in mortgage interest relief also has helped as Permanent TSB are now taking this into account for affordability.

The Capital that has been pumped into house construction will also be released into other construction sectors and other industries. Construction workers will not get the massive wage increases that they have got in the last 7/8 years which will help the Govt. with its costs for the National Development Plan and Capital Building programme.

These wage increases also affected wages across the econonomy and thus competitiveness in general.

The Capital that has been invested in Construction for the last 5/6 years will be freed up and invested in other industries.

I'm not saying everything going to be rosy but I don't believe the doomsayers either.

K-9

M&#250 wrote: »

Not before the election it won't. And that's the big issue at this point. How the electorate perceive things to be going.

Can work both ways.

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=VINCENT+BROWNE-qqqs=commentandanalysis-qqqid=22518-qqqx=1.asp

I know it's Vincent Browne and he does exaggerate a little but he does make some good points.