Protest: Demonstration to protest against Government bail outs of property developers

utyh2ikcq9z76b

Is anyone goint to this protest??

WHAT: Peaceful demonstration to protest against Government bail outs of property developers.

WHERE: Outside the Dail at the junction of Molesworth Street and Kildare Street in Dublin 2

WHEN: Thursday 25th September at 1:30 p.m.

As per this thread:

http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=13560&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

they have a facebook group too

http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=35567892564&ref=nf

jackal

Im going. Half day booked off work.

pwd

in my opinion this will do no good because the government is corrupt

pwd

pwd wrote: »

in my opinion this will do no good because the government is corrupt

Yes but its got to be tried, the future of the country depends on it, no exaggeration.

dodgyme

I think anyone who works in town and ever once moaned about being fleeced by the usual suspects should take there lunch break to coincide with the protest

bugler

I heartily endorse this protest and/or service.

I think anyone who works in town and ever once moaned about being fleeced by the usual suspects should take there lunch break to coincide with the protest

Well put, dodgyme. Now tell your colleagues!

Tigger

pwd wrote: »

in my opinion this will do no good because the government is corrupt

of course they are corrupt

might do some good tho

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/6271/propertydevtvz2.jpg

tHE vAGGABOND

WHAT: Peaceful demonstration to protest against Government bail outs of property developers.

Sorry to be the devils advocate here for a sec - but I think you should be clearer exactly who and what you are protesting against? What bailouts...

I *assume* its the recent aid Cowan announced, which we have a 3 page thread on here. But without giving us details it sounds to me like a Socialist Workers Party rent a crowd demo, which many of us would not be seen dead at.

jimmycrackcorm

I'd go if it was a protest against the eu bailouts of farmers. But I guess those capitalist builders are the fashion these days.

pwd

Tigger wrote: »

of course they are corrupt

might do some good tho

I think your signature describes this situation.

gurramok

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

Sorry to be the devils advocate here for a sec - but I think you should be clearer exactly who and what you are protesting against? What bailouts...

I *assume* its the recent aid Cowan announced, which we have a 3 page thread on here. But without giving us details it sounds to me like a Socialist Workers Party rent a crowd demo, which many of us would not be seen dead at.

Yes, assumption correct. It's about the proposed 'incentives' for FTB's(from media leaks on the subject) which really ends up in the developers pockets instead of reducing the prices.

I doubt there are many Financial services workers of whom many are members of the PIN in the SWP!!

Dalfiatach

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

Sorry to be the devils advocate here for a sec - but I think you should be clearer exactly who and what you are protesting against? What bailouts...

I *assume* its the recent aid Cowan announced, which we have a 3 page thread on here. But without giving us details it sounds to me like a Socialist Workers Party rent a crowd demo, which many of us would not be seen dead at.

I completely understand your concern here, so just to be clear:

This is a protest planned and organised by the posters on the Property Pin, and the posters on the Property Pin alone. And nearly everyone who posts regularly on the Pin works in financial services, manufacturing, IT or the civil service.

This is not a Swimmie/Sticky/People Before Profit/whatever-cover-name-they-are-using-this-week nutjob front. This is a protest by hardworking educated taxpaying citizens. There is absolutely no involvement - overt, covert or otherwise - by any mainstream political party or existing fringe protest rent-a-mob.

This is for taxpayers who have had enough of their hard-earned taxes being wasted, thrown away, trousered and siphoned off to bail out reckless speculators and bandit builders.

loyatemu

how can you protest a policy that hasn't been published yet? no-one knows for certain what Biffo is planning - in which case, as the Vaggabond says above its just going to be a rent-a-crowd "Down with this sort of thing" type demo...

bugler

Then it is a pre-emptive protest.

There are strong indications this has been agreed by the Cabinet. Plus the way the Green TDs are squirming and weaselling in their responses to queries suggests it is a done deal.

Oh rest assured the government will come out with this scheme and lie through their teeth and claim it is not an effort to inflate house prices. But anyone with any intelligence can see that it is.

arctictree

loyatemu wrote: »

how can you protest a policy that hasn't been published yet? no-one knows for certain what Biffo is planning - in which case, as the Vaggabond says above its just going to be a rent-a-crowd "Down with this sort of thing" type demo...

I think this is the perfect time for arranging this type of protest. Let the Govt know that we dont want them implementing any poilicies which will bail out the developers/banks while trying to pretend that it is to help FTB's. Let them know that we are not stupid and we can see through their veiled promises.

What FTB's want is lower house prices, full stop. They dont want elaborate schemes to enable them get higher value loans for overpriced properties.

IMO, if this was done after the budget, it would be extremely difficult to change.

plasmaguy

I am afraid, having put all their eggs into the property market, the government have no choice but to bail out the builders, since a fair percentage of our tax revenue comes from the property sector.

If we weren't so dependent on revenue from the property market, I would say give the market a couple of years to settle at the bottom. Unfortunately that would mean running large budget deficits for a number of years along with cutbacks across all sectors including health. So the choice is between high property prices or high budget deficits.

plasmaguy

plasmaguy wrote: »

I am afraid, having put all their eggs into the property market, the government have no choice but to bail out the builders, since a fair percentage of our tax revenue comes from the property sector.

If we weren't so dependent on revenue from the property market, I would say give the market a couple of years to settle at the bottom. Unfortunately that would mean running large budget deficits for a number of years along with cutbacks across all sectors including health. So the choice is between high property prices or high budget deficits.

Keeping our eggs in the same basket will ruin the economy. All we did was create debt, we didnt bring wealth into the country only debt!

We need to spend this tax money creating a better economy not trying to burden ourselves with more debt.

It was bad enough getting loans for overpriced property but now they want EVERYBODY to pay for the loans.

Enough is enough, spend the money on hospitals of education or starting indigenous business.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1014800.shtml

plasmaguy wrote: »

If these moves by the government loosen the lending criteria any more, then this could have serious long term side effects. We could actually be looking at an Irish Subprime bubble in the making. If those people who avail of these assistance programs are unable to get credit from lending institutions it may be for the very good reason that they don't have the ability to repay.

If the government gives them easy credit which they cannot repay, then longer term we would be looking at subprime problems similar to the US, with foreclosures, builders owed money, financial institutions unable to recover their money. It could cause a crisis in our own banking system.

I think the government should look very carefully at the longer term impact of giving aid to the subprime market.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=57361177&postcount=91

Your contradicting yourself?

El Stuntman

plasmaguy wrote: »

I am afraid, having put all their eggs into the property market, the government have no choice but to bail out the builders, since a fair percentage of our tax revenue comes from the property sector.

If we weren't so dependent on revenue from the property market, I would say give the market a couple of years to settle at the bottom. Unfortunately that would mean running large budget deficits for a number of years along with cutbacks across all sectors including health. So the choice is between high property prices or high budget deficits.

this is arrant nonsense plasmaguy, we need to wean ourselves off the crack cocaine of property speculation (it adds no long-term value and actually detracts from the real economy) and onto the boring Bovril of actually making stuff that people want and selling it to the rest of the world. If that causes some short-term pain for the developers (and their bought political proxies in FF), so be it. Shelter (and that's all that housing is) is not a sound basis to build your economy on and we should be happy that its importance to Ireland's is falling rapidly.

Now all we need to do is sit back, do nothing and let property assume its rightfully diminished role in our economy - anything that attempts to distort this rebalancing is theft of taxpayer's funds (taking money away from the frontline services that you mention and giving it to big property developers\speculators), plain and simple.

People will start buying houses again when the prices deflate to normal levels (i.e. about 200k for a standard 3 bed semi-d in Dublin and maybe 140k for a 2 bed apartment) - prices falling is good news for FTBs!

dodgyme

Now I could be wrong here but this is Ireland so I probably amn't.

If the government want to bail out the builders, one measure they will do is pretend to help the FTB in the budget. Basically without government intervention the FTB is in a really strong position in a falling market however in ireland the market only determines the price when the developers is fleecing the jackass. When this is not happening the developer and its FF minders need to pull the wool over our eyes. By helping the FTB, the markets is then possibly stimulated and the prices start to stop falling at a decent rate and thus helps the builders get a better price for the development. The gov will say this measure will help FTB and retain jobs and wealth etc. My attitude is that when things were going up no one helped those getting fleeced. The gov didnt protect anyone then nor should they now. I dont care if the taxes go up as a result, it cant be worse then cosy cartells. Thats why the protest is important. It shows the feeling on the street.

swiss

I will make an effort to attend this (work committments may get in the way), but I would encourage anyone concerned about the impact of this proposed bailout to show up and lend their support to this protest. Its more effective than complaining about the situation on a bar stool, it actually shows to the government and the media that you care enough about the situation to make your opposition to it known.

Pa ElGrande

In case there is any doubt about the governments intention to attempt to put a floor on house prices, here are the press snippets from the last few weeks.

Building industry will lobby State to aid first-time buyers
Barry O'Halloran, Thursday, September 4, 2008

Mr Parlon said that the new date would allow lobby groups such as the CIF to put their case to Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan.
The federation intends to ask the Government to encourage first-time house buyers into the property market through a joint ownership scheme, under which the State could take equity in new homes for a period of seven to 10 years in return for subsidising the purchasers' deposits.
He explained that in the current climate, banks are only willing to lend 80 per cent of a property's value. This means that anyone wishing to buy a house priced at €300,000 needs €60,000 up front, which many first-time buyers cannot afford.
The CIF is suggesting that the State, through the Department of the Environment's Housing Finance Agency, takes a 10 per cent share in the property when it is bought, cutting the buyer's deposit to €30,000, which Mr Parlon said is affordable. After seven to 10 years, the purchaser can then begin to repay this.
"The big carrot for the Government is that they get €35,000 to €40,000 in VAT when the house is bought," Mr Parlon added.

Budget will not weaken house market - Lenihan
Ronan McGreevy, Friday, September 5, 2008

Ms Coughlan said: " . . . we have seen a decline in house prices which is what a lot of young people wanted to hear, but the difficulty is the access to mortgages that were previously available.
"All of that is being considered by the Minister for Finance and the Government. The Minister spent a considerable period of time with the construction industry over the weekend and he will be taking into consideration many of these issues, not just for first-time buyers, but those who are moving on and expanding."

Cowen's resolve will be tested again in coming days
Stephen Collins, Saturday, September 6, 2008

One powerful vested interest that will have to be resisted at all costs is the construction industry. Any hint that taxpayers' money is being used to bail out the country's fat-cat developers, under the guise of helping first-time buyers, will undermine the Government's credibility. It will also do nothing for the economy, except prolong the downturn up to and beyond the next election.


What we'd do to get good times rolling once again
By Nick Webb and Shane Ross, Sunday September 07 2008

Mick Bailey, managing director of Bovale Properties, may be a member of Fianna Fail but is "more interested in ensuring that the national interest is protected in the current crisis".
"We are one of the best economies in the EU but the big swing towards building in the last 12 years has been accompanied by huge hype. I would like to see three measures to boost confidence.
"The first-time buyer should be put on the [property] ladder again. We should also limit ourselves to building 35,000 houses a year, max.
"The government should eliminate VAT for all first-time buyers. They should remove all local authority levies from those striving to get on to the property ladder.
"And the banks who are responsible for the boom/bust should guarantee them seven-year mortgages at 2.75 per cent. They should also offer all purchasers 90 per cent mortgages. That should give the construction industry the kick-start it now needs."

How will the Budget impact first-time buyers?
Tuesday September 09 2008

The minister may also wish to focus on increasing the level of mortgage interest relief for first-time buyers.
However, the aforementioned changes may not be enough to reignite the first-time buyer market. The minister may have to look further afield at non-tax issues to relieve the strain, particularly in relation to obtaining an apt level of mortgage finance.

Desperately seeking salvation from rubble of the downturn
Sunday, September 14, 2008 By Cliff Taylor

The key issue here - in the short term at least - is not land supply, but whether the government could introduce some kind of financing scheme which would attract low and middle-income first-time buyers. Buyers are holding off for two reasons. First, many still cannot afford to buy a house - even at the lower prices which now prevail.

This is partly due to the tightening of bank lending rules and the disappearance of the 100 per cent mortgage. The second, more prosaic, reason is that buyers are expecting prices to fall further, and many feel it is better to wait it out.

The first step to be announced looks likely to be a major expansion of the local authority loan scheme. Local authorities provide loans to lower to middle-income earners with funds provided by the Housing Finance Agency and raised by the NTMA. The eligibility criteria will be loosened significantly with a view to helping significant numbers of first-time buyers who are currently struggling to raise bank finance.

A report published earlier this year, entitled Increasing Affordable Housing Supply, is also now being studied to try to map away forward. The report, commissioned by the AHP and to which a number of government departments contributed, provides a detailed review of how the various schemes have operated and offers a range of recommendations.

However, the report also looked at how the state could develop a more effective financing mechanism, a factor which is likely to be the central point of any new initiative.

To replace the various shared ownership and reduced price structures used in current schemes, the report recommended a simple equity arrangement. Under this, the state - through the local authority - would pay for a shareholding in the house being purchased. The amount involved would vary, but might typically range from 15 to 40 per cent.

The purchaser would fund the rest, normally through an ordinary bank mortgage. Mechanisms would be established to allow home owners to buy out the state equity if they wished over a period of years. The state stake would then have to be repaid when the house was sold, at the prevailing market conditions at that time.


Cabinet plans new loans for first-time buyers
Sunday, September 14, 2008 By Ian Kehoe, Cliff Taylor and Niamh Connolly

A major expansion of local authority mortgage lending to low and middle-income first-time buyers is expected to form the first step in a government programme of economic initiatives.
The move, which will be announced shortly, comes after the government established a high-level cabinet committee to tackle the deepening economic crisis and develop a range of new policies to stimulate the economy. The group, chaired by Taoiseach Brian Cowen, will be responsible for ‘‘initiatives to stimulate economic recovery’’.
A select number of senior members of cabinet, including Mary Coughlan, the Tánaiste and enterprise minister, and Brian Lenihan, the Minister for Finance, will also sit on the committee.


Davy says case for public intervention in Irish mortgage market is persuasive; At least 40,000 new completed unsold units
By Finfacts Team, Sep 15, 2008

Target is to clear overhang of unsold housing stock

Davy says it is crucial that sales pick up to clear the excess stock. It estimates that there are at least 40,000 new completed unsold units (houses and apartments) on the market with a total value of close to €10bn. In 2008, about 5,000 new units have been sold: for the full year we are heading for total sales of only 10-15% of the 2005 and 2006 level.


Parties prepare economic cures
Sunday, September 21, 2008 By Niamh Connolly, Political Correspondent

Ahearne also advised the parliamentary party against state agencies subsidising low-interest home loans while house prices were falling. Cowen and finance minister Brian Lenihan had previously announced plans to offer help to low-paid first-time buyers for affordable and local authority housing.
Both Lenihan and Cowen insist that the move would not interfere with the necessary correction in the housing market. But some backbenchers have privately voiced concern about state subsidies or low-interest credit that would discourage developers from lowering their prices further.
A persistent view expressed by backbenchers is that the public believes prices are falling to sustainable levels and the government should not interfere to bail out the construction industry.

Primetime
September 23, 2008

Pat Carey and Richard Bruton on Primetime lastnight. Bruton saying the property market should be completely left alone. Carey mumbled that it was not possible to do nothing.

Be in no doubt about the motives of a political party that is strongly influenced by the construction industry by way of funding and decision making. This is a bailout wrapped up as helping first time buyers, it's true intention is to put a floor on property prices, by dipping into the taxpayers pocket without their permission (this was not on the governments election manifesto in 2007). It should be resisted.

dodgyme

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

is a bailout wrapped up as helping first time buyers, it's true intention is to put a floor on property prices, by dipping into the taxpayers pocket without their permission .

A nice summary of the point I made rather awkwardly above.

bugler

Karl Deeter aka MortgageBroker from www.mortgagebrokers.ie/blogs will be on Q102 this evening at 6.30 pm discussing the protest.

plasmaguy

Deleted User wrote: »

Keeping our eggs in the same basket will ruin the economy. All we did was create debt, we didnt bring wealth into the country only debt!

We need to spend this tax money creating a better economy not trying to burden ourselves with more debt.

It was bad enough getting loans for overpriced property but now they want EVERYBODY to pay for the loans.

Enough is enough, spend the money on hospitals of education or starting indigenous business.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1014800.shtml



http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=57361177&postcount=91

Your contradicting yourself?

Nope...I am in favour of some way of stimulating the housing market because unfortunately at the present time for good or bad, we depend on it for a large part of our tax revenue.

I wouldn't be in favour of helping the subprime market with cheap money because that creates a subprime bubble.

I would however be in favour or something like stamp duty reform.

Like I say we are presented with a real (not armchair economist) choice between high budget deficits and relatively high property prices. I didn't create this problem, FF, speculators and builders created it, so please don't go giving out to me for telling it as it is.

plasmaguy

El Stuntman wrote: »

this is arrant nonsense plasmaguy, we need to wean ourselves off the crack cocaine of property speculation (it adds no long-term value and actually detracts from the real economy) and onto the boring Bovril of actually making stuff that people want and selling it to the rest of the world. If that causes some short-term pain for the developers (and their bought political proxies in FF), so be it. Shelter (and that's all that housing is) is not a sound basis to build your economy on and we should be happy that its importance to Ireland's is falling rapidly.

Now all we need to do is sit back, do nothing and let property assume its rightfully diminished role in our economy - anything that attempts to distort this rebalancing is theft of taxpayer's funds (taking money away from the frontline services that you mention and giving it to big property developers\speculators), plain and simple.

People will start buying houses again when the prices deflate to normal levels (i.e. about 200k for a standard 3 bed semi-d in Dublin and maybe 140k for a 2 bed apartment) - prices falling is good news for FTBs!

OK fair enough let the property market fall slowly and very slowly ie approx .8% a month to a level where people feel comfortable coming back in again.

However it may take 3 years of such slow decline before the market picks up. That means 3 years of approx 10 billion deficits which equals 30 billion of debt.

That is the simple alternative...do you think 30 billion extra of a national debt over 3 years is a positive thing? I know I don't.

Like I say, for good or bad, the government have put themselves in a corner and are now left with no choice but to prop up the property sector.

It's too simplistic and facile to say let the market collapse...that would mean people with 100,000s of negative equity around their necks as well as massive annual budget deficits meaning closures of hospital beds and hospitals and cutbacks in services to the vulnerable and needy.

The national interest is served unfortunately in this case by keeping property prices at a stable level and demand at a stable level to get tradesmen, blocklayers, etc off the dole.

plasmaguy

However I would add that if we as a nation are to learn anything from the last 10 years it's that every government should be compelled by all means possible to keep the annual rise in house prices in line with or below the rate of inflation.

Because when you have house prices that rise 3-4 times the rate of inflation and with the knowledge that eventually these house prices will come down again, then you are putting half the country in danger of a negative equity situation.

SimpleSam06

plasmaguy wrote: »

Nope...I am in favour of some way of stimulating the housing market because unfortunately at the present time for good or bad, we depend on it for a large part of our tax revenue.

This is the part about government handouts/tax relief/whatever that makes no sense. None. They want to increase the tax revenue by giving first time buyers grants out of... tax revenue. Hmm. So the only ones that will really benefit will be developers and builders? Hmm.

plasmaguy wrote: »

I wouldn't be in favour of helping the subprime market with cheap money because that creates a subprime bubble.

We're way beyond a subprime bubble at this stage.

plasmaguy wrote: »

Like I say we are presented with a real (not armchair economist) choice between high budget deficits and relatively high property prices.

This is a temporary situation, and the long term benefits of removing the property crutch from the economy far outweigh whatever short term deficits might exist.

plasmaguy wrote: »

OK fair enough let the property market fall slowly and very slowly ie approx .8% a month to a level where people feel comfortable coming back in again.

Do you think anyone can tell the market how fast or slow to rise or fall?

plasmaguy wrote: »

However it may take 3 years of such slow decline before the market picks up. That means 3 years of approx 10 billion deficits which equals 30 billion of debt.

On the other hand if sweeping reforms are brought into the public sector, expenses could be considerably reduced. I like that solution better.

plasmaguy wrote: »

That is the simple alternative...do you think 30 billion extra of a national debt over 3 years is a positive thing? I know I don't.

The whole bubble was largely a transfer of debt from public to private hands in effect anyway. Meh.

plasmaguy wrote: »

Like I say, for good or bad, the government have put themselves in a corner and are now left with no choice but to prop up the property sector.

There are always alternatives. That the current crop of wahoos who suckled at charlie's teat are unable to see them is no surprise.

plasmaguy wrote: »

It's too simplistic and facile to say let the market collapse...that would mean people with 100,000s of negative equity around their necks as well as massive annual budget deficits meaning closures of hospital beds and hospitals and cutbacks in services to the vulnerable and needy.

Hahah, ah me oh my, we've been pumping the public sector with cash for the last eight years with no appreciable improvement in services or healthcare. They could stand to have a few billion lopped off here and there. As for negative equity, you reap what you sow, and you can't balance the scales on the backs of the rest of the country who wasn't stupid enough to go blowing the next thirty years of their life on getting on "the ladder".

plasmaguy wrote: »

The national interest is served unfortunately in this case by keeping property prices at a stable level and demand at a stable level to get tradesmen, blocklayers, etc off the dole.

This is the same nonsense I see in the US, and its completely unsustainable. You cannot, mid or long term, pay off private debt with public debt. You increase inflation, for the mildest of starts, and destabilise your own economy. Also, do you think Brussels is going to appreciate actions like that?

What you are advocating is stopping the fall in prices and then letting them rise with inflation, using the public debt boogeyman to scare up support, a completely insane plan by any measure. Might I ask you, do you have a property that is currently or will soon be in negative equity?

Dalfiatach

Plus, plasmaguy is worried about the 30bn in deficits we'll run up while the Morkesh settles to it's true level.

How much will this bailout cost? Oh, about €35bn...which will achieve absolutely nothing to keep house prices high, and is only designed to bail out the bankrupt builders so they can offload some of their stock and pay off some of their megadebts to the banks.

House prices will still continue to fall however. You can't re-inflate a burst bubble. All a bailout will do is maybe stabilise prices for 6 months. That's it. They'll still keep falling to their true level, because that's just the iron rule of the market.

Where is the bailout money going to come from? Instead, the Government should let the market fall naturally to a point where FTBs can get sane mortgages again, because it's then and only then that the housing market will start moving again. Use the next couple of years to reorganise and trim the massive waste that occurs in the public sector, end the gouging and price-fixing scams throughout the economy, and use the money that they were going to spend on bailing out builders on encouraging and developing real productive export-led industry instead. Because it is only in productive export-led industry that this country is ever going to make sustainable wealth.

Japan showed what happens when the politicians, builders and banks collude to try and bailout a burst property bubble.

It doesn't work, and you lose a decade and countless billions trying.

It's stupid, stupid, stupid.

SkepticOne

People if they are in the area should make an effort to attend this protest. The economic problems faced by the country have been caused a massive bubble in house prices. As prices rose banks became used to lending larger and larger amounts comfortable in the belief that the properties they were lending for would increase in price. I think we can all see that, inevitably, this would have to come to an end. Credit can't, and indeed should not, expand indefinitely. The earlier and quicker prices correct themselves the less overall pain for the country.

What the government is proposing is to prolong the damage and encourage more people into debt for overpriced properties by further expanding credit, the very thing that caused the damage in the first place. And they are going to do this damage at the tax payers expense.

The consequences will be:
1. More people will end up with unnecessarily high debt.
2. Prices will take longer to settle prolonging the pain.
3. Public finances will be further strained. Other services will have to be cut back to pay for it.