Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Government responsible for collapse of economy.

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Welease
    Registered Users Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Well, no-one forced me to say "no" when the bank offered me twice what I could afford. But I did.

    However, the Government forced me to pay money to a corrupt bank, so in hindsight I may as well have gotten something out of it.

    It's a downright disgrace.

    Absolutely, but they are seperate issues.. The OP is proposing that you pay ANOTHER tax on top (along with NAMA) to bailout people who's houses are not worth what they want them to be worth. A position that I 100% disagree with for the reasons stated.


  • Options
    #93
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Welease wrote: »
    Absolutely, but they are seperate issues.. The OP is proposing that you pay ANOTHER tax on top (along with NAMA) to bailout people who's houses are not worth what they want them to be worth. A position that I 100% disagree with for the reasons stated.

    And I agree.

    However, the unfairness kicks in when you have people who have less income due to the levies being paid (indirectly) to the banks, and who have lost their jobs due to the actions of the banks. We'll also have additional taxes on the way in the form of water rates and septic tanks and so-called "green" taxes.....with absolutely no way of paying them.

    So I would almost suggest that anyone who took on a reasonable amount and didn't go mental should be protected, while anyone who borrowed €350,000 or more should not.

    People who lived within their means should not be punished for the crimes and fvck-ups of Ahern, the bankers and the developers.

    I'm sick to death of hearing FF and their apologists trot out the lie that everyone lived beyond their means, etc. If someone did, they should expect a hit.

    But those of us that didn't have been ridden without a condom by the Galway Tent brigade.


  • Options
    #94
    MaceFace
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭MaceFace


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    And I agree.

    However, the unfairness kicks in when you have people who have less income due to the levies being paid (indirectly) to the banks, and who have lost their jobs due to the actions of the banks. We'll also have additional taxes on the way in the form of water rates and septic tanks and so-called "green" taxes.....with absolutely no way of paying them.

    So I would almost suggest that anyone who took on a reasonable amount and didn't go mental should be protected, while anyone who borrowed €350,000 or more should not.

    People who lived within their means should not be punished for the crimes and fvck-ups of Ahern, the bankers and the developers.

    I'm sick to death of hearing FF and their apologists trot out the lie that everyone lived beyond their means, etc. If someone did, they should expect a hit.

    But those of us that didn't have been ridden without a condom by the Galway Tent brigade.

    Is there any of us that did not contribute to this unholy mess?
    Ever pay more than €6 for a pint?
    Ever pay more than €1000 for a TV?
    Ever pay more than €1 for a coffee?
    Ever buy any property post 1999?
    etc
    etc

    Truth is, we all spent way more than we should have and demanded pay increases to afford them, and thus lost our competitiveness.

    You can't put a figure on how much was a reasonable amount. €350k might be a reasonable mortgage to you, but €800k might be reasonable to me (it's not).

    However, the only other people I blame besides everyone is the government. They should have stopped us - so yes, they are to blame.


  • Options
    #95
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    MaceFace wrote: »
    Is there any of us that did not contribute to this unholy mess?
    Ever pay more than €6 for a pint?
    Ever pay more than €1000 for a TV?

    Absolutely not on both of those.
    MaceFace wrote: »
    You can't put a figure on how much was a reasonable amount. €350k might be a reasonable mortgage to you, but €800k might be reasonable to me (it's not).

    I was suggesting the concept of a base figure, and I think it stands.

    Reasonable-but-basic houses were available from €165,000 - €220,000, and whatever baseline they want to suggest as a necessity to have a roof over people's heads should not be penalised. You can make it the first €100,000 if you want - just allow SOMETHING based on the necessity.


  • Options
    #96
    ballinatray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭ballinatray


    MaceFace wrote: »
    Is there any of us that did not contribute to this unholy mess?
    Ever pay more than €6 for a pint?
    Ever pay more than €1000 for a TV?
    Ever pay more than €1 for a coffee?
    Ever buy any property post 1999?
    etc
    etc

    Truth is, we all spent way more than we should have and demanded pay increases to afford them, and thus lost our competitiveness.

    You can't put a figure on how much was a reasonable amount. €350k might be a reasonable mortgage to you, but €800k might be reasonable to me (it's not).

    However, the only other people I blame besides everyone is the government. They should have stopped us - so yes, they are to blame.
    finally, were getting places and an odd person sees the part played or not played by government in this debacle........


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    ballinatray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭ballinatray


    Welease wrote: »
    Sorry but what are you on about? No legislation available to allow people to rent??????

    People all over this country rent properties and have done so for the last 100 years..

    You can continue to blame everyone and their dog.. but the simple fact is, and a lot of people need to wake up to it.. nothing that anyone did during the boom years was forced upon them.. THEY ALONE DECIDED THEIR COURSE OF ACTION... (and that goes for public sector, private sector, house owners, business owners, unemployed, government, regulators).

    Well thank you for once, you have answered in the positive in that if noone was forced to borrow and should have used easonable prudence in reaching a decision then surely the same applies to the " Lender "....


  • Options
    #98
    ballinatray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭ballinatray


    Welease wrote: »
    Sorry but what are you on about? No legislation available to allow people to rent??????

    People all over this country rent properties and have done so for the last 100 years..

    You can continue to blame everyone and their dog.. but the simple fact is, and a lot of people need to wake up to it.. nothing that anyone did during the boom years was forced upon them.. THEY ALONE DECIDED THEIR COURSE OF ACTION... (and that goes for public sector, private sector, house owners, business owners, unemployed, government, regulators).

    In rental situations I am referring to long term Fixed Tenure Rentals..ie 20 years. 30yrs .40 yrs.....does not exist..


  • Options
    #99
    Welease
    Registered Users Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    ballinatray wrote: »
    Well thank you for once, you have answered in the positive in that if noone was forced to borrow and should have used easonable prudence in reaching a decision then surely the same applies to the " Lender "....

    Absolutely! noone forced the lender to lend.. whats your point?


  • Options
    #100
    Welease
    Registered Users Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    ballinatray wrote: »
    In rental situations I am referring to long term Fixed Tenure Rentals..ie 20 years. 30yrs .40 yrs.....does not exist..

    Really? My gran rented her house for the best part of 40 years.. Don't Guinness have a 1000 year lease? How many of the businnes's on Grafton St. have been leasing those buildings for years?

    I am not aware of any law that prevents you signing a lease for 20, 30 or 40 years. (I'm not an expert though, so feel free to show me one :))


  • Options
    #101
    ballinatray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭ballinatray


    Welease wrote: »
    Absolutely! noone forced the lender to lend.. whats your point?

    Surely its obvious, Bail nobody....But safeguard savings only ....You shooould comment on the opposite thread title "Nama who cares,taking it lying down "

    Your viewpoint is valid tooooooooooooooooo.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    ballinatray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭ballinatray


    Welease wrote: »
    Really? My gran rented her house for the best part of 40 years.. Don't Guinness have a 1000 year lease? How many of the businnes's on Grafton St. have been leasing those buildings for years?

    I am not aware of any law that prevents you signing a lease for 20, 30 or 40 years. (I'm not an expert though, so feel free to show me one :))

    Leases are standard in business.. Guinness are clearly lucky too..Benevolent employers in ages past also built and housed employees on life long leases, But try to obtain one today in any private residence other than local authority and I assure you, you will fail...


Advertisement