Disappointing number of financials plan to come to Dublin post-Brexit

Grayson

salonfire wrote: »

Exactly.

These people want to hoover up more and more wealth, paying as little tax as possible, and to hell with the rest of society.


I know Ireland will never be attractive to them, probably better off without in the long run, lest we turn into a society like the US where people working 2 and 3 jobs is not uncommon.

I agree the 40% at €32k is ridiculous, driven on by the astounding sense of entitlement among certain sections in Ireland (welfare, the public service, refusing to pay for water, etc). That extreme is a different argument for a different thread !

40% wouldn't be as bad if we had cheaper housing. Housing is the biggest single cost for most people. Slash that and you'd have a far better quality of living.

Wanderer78

Grayson wrote: »

40% wouldn't be as bad if we had cheaper housing. Housing is the biggest single cost for most people. Slash that and you'd have a far better quality of living.

but but, 'the market'!:rolleyes:

Mr. teddywinkles

salonfire wrote: »

Exactly.

These people want to hoover up more and more wealth, paying as little tax as possible, and to hell with the rest of society.


I know Ireland will never be attractive to them, probably better off without in the long run, lest we turn into a society like the US where people working 2 and 3 jobs is not uncommon.

I agree the 40% at €32k is ridiculous, driven on by the astounding sense of entitlement among certain sections in Ireland (welfare, the public service, refusing to pay for water, etc). That extreme is a different argument for a different thread !

Don't seem to understand if more become wealthy. Does that not diminish the wealth of others. Isn't that why poverty is acceptable due to not having one without the other. Can no-one else see that.

Wanderer78

Mr. teddywinkles wrote: »

Don't seem to understand if more become wealthy. Does that not diminish the wealth of others. Isn't that why poverty is acceptable due to not having one without the other. Can no-one else see that.

thankfully, we can rely on 'trickle down' to solve our inequality issues!

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

but but, 'the market'!:rolleyes:

Well then...... give us your solution then?

Mr. teddywinkles

Wanderer78 wrote: »

thankfully, we can rely on 'trickle down' to solve our inequality issues!

Convinced there's an extra class in the poverty bracket in this country being created intentionally to make the guy that barely keeps a roof over his families head look like a king. America fook yeaaaaa.

Wanderer78

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Well then...... give us your solution then?

time to move on from neoclassical theory before it destroys our societies and our planet, time for us to realise the dangers of allowing the financial sector to create the majority of our money supply, and that governments to have this ability. time to re-democratise our political institutions, to remove the plutocratic forces that are de-democratising them.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

time to move on from neoclassical theory before it destroys our societies and our planet, time for us to realise the dangers of allowing the financial sector to create the majority of our money supply, and that governments to have this ability. time to re-democratise our political institutions, to remove the plutocratic forces that are de-democratising them.

I mean I want practical solutions to fix the current housing problems, not high faluting rhetoric.

John_Rambo

If people outside Dublin insist on a Dublincentric Ireland, a Dublincentric Ireland will prevail.

Shunning dying cities, towns and villages to build one off houses dotted around the countryside will ensure the continual death of what once were vibrant, successful and populated towns, cities and villages.

Town butchers, drapers, greengrocers, craft shops, bakers, restaurants, post offices, bars, garages, garda stations, surgeries, veterinarians etc... all shutting up shop surrounded by derelict and neglected houses is the direct result of bad planning where the car obsessed one off housing occupants drive to out of town to non Irish owned retailers to shop leaving the towns and villages unattractive to any brexit company trying to relocate to Ireland.

Up to 10 billion a year spills out of Dublin to subsidise the result of this bad planning and neglect of indigenous business that once prospered in dying rural towns, villages and cities that once were and should now be the backbone of rural Ireland.

It's a vicious circle. That 10 billion a year could be used to improve the city with much needed high rise development, underground, metro and improved cycle and public transport.

Wanderer78

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

I mean I want practical solutions to fix the current housing problems, not high faluting rhetoric.

unfortunately this is a deep fundamental problem with our macro economic models and theories, we re actually not the only developed country with this problem, countries such as england and new zealand are showing very similar problems, with no clear solutions. disturbingly, many of our political classes and their advisers are not accepting these failures, opting for more of the same, i.e. the mantra of, 'the market'! i do now believe theres sufficient evidence to show that it actually fails to truly provide us with what we actually need, in this case, housing. leading me to believe, our housing issues are not going to be solved in the short to medium term. yes im aware, im not giving a straight answer, but realise, our politicians and their advisers equally dont know. we first need to accept, our current approaches are failing and will continue to do so. we now need to realise, in the very near future, there will be in excess of 10,000 homeless in this country. we obviously need to some how produce housing for these people for the long term but for the short term, we need to make sure they have a bed in a clean, safe and secure place, before they start pouring out onto the streets.

Beasty

TBH although I think Ireland has missed a trick in not investing more in and around Dublin, I think over the next decade there will be a significant move towards working from home in many areas of the economy.

Ireland has some of the most scenic places in the world and that may attract more people (with money to earn, pay tax and spend on local services and products) to the country. Having said that there remains a blinkered approach to development and accommodating growth in the economy and related growth in population to drive that economy forward

That's not the way things are at present though and the country does need to sort out some of the immediate issues and in particular the demand for decent living accommodation within a reasonable commuting distance of the capital

Ulysses Gaze

Wanderer78 wrote: »

unfortunately this is a deep fundamental problem with our macro economic models and theories, we re actually not the only developed country with this problem, countries such as england and new zealand are showing very similar problems, with no clear solutions. disturbingly, many of our political classes and their advisers are not accepting these failures, opting for more of the same, i.e. the mantra of, 'the market'! i do now believe theres sufficient evidence to show that it actually fails to truly provide us with what we actually need, in this case, housing. leading me to believe, our housing issues are not going to be solved in the short to medium term. yes im aware, im not giving a straight answer, but realise, our politicians and their advisers equally dont know. we first need to accept, our current approaches are failing and will continue to do so. we now need to realise, in the very near future, there will be in excess of 10,000 homeless in this country. we obviously need to some how produce housing for these people for the long term but for the short term, we need to make sure they have a bed in a clean, safe and secure place, before they start pouring out onto the streets.

When it comes to property, our politicians have a vested interest. As do a lot of home owners. And landowners.

Until we can cut through the Irish psychosis around "de land" and owning as much of "de land" as possible, we'll achieve nothing. And if we can't pop this fukcing stupid idea "dat you can only make money through property"....this will not change.

One way to drive down property prices is to essentially fix the market. Something along the lines of that no new house in apartment in a new development can be sold for more than 10%-15% of the build cost. All build costs to be submitted before a project gets approval and properly audited for veracity.

But what is the likelihood of that happening?

We also need to start building up. But after Grenfell, I think that that is less and less likely to happen.

Particularly since our own arsehole Cowboy Developers/Builders can't even build low rise developments within fire safety standards.

Del2005

Wanderer78 wrote: »

unfortunately this is a deep fundamental problem with our macro economic models and theories, we re actually not the only developed country with this problem, countries such as england and new zealand are showing very similar problems, with no clear solutions. disturbingly, many of our political classes and their advisers are not accepting these failures, opting for more of the same, i.e. the mantra of, 'the market'! i do now believe theres sufficient evidence to show that it actually fails to truly provide us with what we actually need, in this case, housing. leading me to believe, our housing issues are not going to be solved in the short to medium term. yes im aware, im not giving a straight answer, but realise, our politicians and their advisers equally dont know. we first need to accept, our current approaches are failing and will continue to do so. we now need to realise, in the very near future, there will be in excess of 10,000 homeless in this country. we obviously need to some how produce housing for these people for the long term but for the short term, we need to make sure they have a bed in a clean, safe and secure place, before they start pouring out onto the streets.

Communism and anarchy don't work so unless you come up with something better than the free market we are stuck with it.

Just like with the mortgage crisis, where some were in dire financial stress and couldn't pay while a substantial amount choose not to pay, how many of the 10k homeless people are there by choice? Waiting for a house to be built next door to your Mammy means that you are voluntary homeless when there are 90k vacant homes in the country.

Beasty

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

We also need to start building up. But after Grenfell, I think that that is less and less likely to happen.

I think it can and should happen. I suspect there is going to be a lot of fallout resulting in extra costs for high-rise accommodation, but I do think this country needs to take building regulation much more seriously than it has in the past.

I don't think it's necessary to go to 20+ stories - it's probably only the likes of London and New York that are so strapped for space to do that. Even going to 5-10 would significantly alleviate the housing crisis.

More construction = more jobs = more tax. The result is more accommodation to attract more people into the country to deliver more growth = more tax = more and better infrastructure and services

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Mr. teddywinkles

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Don't worry trump will sort out yis shortly. Ye will have yer utopia

defrule

I think the problem is if someone were to come to Dublin to work after Brexit, unless they were very well paid then more than likely they would need to find a room in a house share.

I don’t think that is very attractive. Having a small one bedroom apartment that you can call your own place is better.

Mr. teddywinkles

defrule wrote: »

I think the problem is if someone were to come to Dublin to work after Brexit, unless they were very well paid then more than likely they would need to find a room in a house share.

I don’t think that is very attractive. Having a small one bedroom apartment that you can call your own place is better.

Is the rents in London more expensive than Dublin or vise versa. I'm confused. We don't have the office space in the timeline so this is all bull****e anyways.

steddyeddy

defrule wrote: »

I think the problem is if someone were to come to Dublin to work after Brexit, unless they were very well paid then more than likely they would need to find a room in a house share.

I don’t think that is very attractive. Having a small one bedroom apartment that you can call your own place is better.

Which is far worse in London.

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'm willing to bet that, even if the lower paid taxes doubled and the public service halved, those capitalist casino gamblers would still set out to gobble up as much money as humanly possible and pay as little as possible in tax.

And no, not everyone wants to pay as little as possible. Belive it or not, there are people who supported water charges for example and saw the merit of paying their bills.

ROAAAR

Nothing against “the brits” per se but having 20,000 move to Dublin virtually overnight is probably a breaking point.

21Savage

Shock.

Oh 'muh English' 'muh skilled workforce' 'muh similarly culturally'

These kids in Frankfurt have fluent American English and thus are in a better position to understand other non native speakers and communicate together. Time for Ireland to stop coping and get real. The English speaking workforce lark is a loada bollox. It'll be 'grand' Rollseyes.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I completely agree there is a nasty undertone of entitlement among a large section of people in Ireland.

But I reject the notion that practically everyone is like that. There is a cohert of people that accepted increased taxes and got on with it (if you compare the practically non existent opposition to the introduction of the USC compared with the opposition campaigns of public sector unions and the water charges)

If Ireland did reduce high earner taxes, high earners would still avoid paying as much as they could anyway and point over there - "look such a country has a tax rate that is even lower than Ireland's".

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

c_man

Ronaldinho wrote: »

Rates are 40% (up to 150k) and 45% thereafter in the UK so that line of thinking doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.

If we're talking finance guys, then we have to talk about capital gains tax. In the UK you can put away 20k into a stocks ISA, no tax worries. Thereafter the allowance is something like 12k before CGT comes in. Dividends allowance is about 5k.

Ireland has no such ISA measures,CGT coming in at 1270 and no dividends allowance.

Ireland hates investors and the above is a massive tax rise for anyone sensible with their money who's coming from London.

Del2005

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

We also need to start building up. But after Grenfell, I think that that is less and less likely to happen.

Was told in a training course, my company is super safety conscious, about a high rise building fire which had got out of control and the fire department was about to start evacuating nearby buildings in case the building collapsed. Then suddenly the fire went out, a company had recently rented several floors and installed a sprinkler system themselves. The fire which was out of control and couldn't be stopped by several fire appliances, because they were fighting from below, got stopped by a few hundred gallons from above in minutes.

The problem with Grenfell was that they rejected retro fitting sprinkles because they thought that the building was fire proof.

All that needs to be done is require sprinklers in every building and then fire risk is drastically reduced. It's most likely not going to be implemented for low rise but after watching videos of how quickly fires spread if I'm ever building my own home I'll be putting in sprinklers. As the instructor said when teaching me CPR I'm most likely to do it on someone I know rather than a stranger. A fire in the family home is were most people die in fires which sprinklers extinguish quickly, with very little collateral damage because once the fire brigade comes on scene they'll be thousands of gallons of water pumped into your home

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Which is far worse in London.

London has far more realistic options for commuting in to the city though.

Ulysses Gaze

Del2005 wrote: »

Was told in a training course, my company is super safety conscious, about a high rise building fire which had got out of control and the fire department was about to start evacuating nearby buildings in case the building collapsed. Then suddenly the fire went out, a company had recently rented several floors and installed a sprinkler system themselves. The fire which was out of control and couldn't be stopped by several fire appliances, because they were fighting from below, got stopped by a few hundred gallons from above in minutes.

The problem with Grenfell was that they rejected retro fitting sprinkles because they thought that the building was fire proof.

All that needs to be done is require sprinklers in every building and then fire risk is drastically reduced. It's most likely not going to be implemented for low rise but after watching videos of how quickly fires spread if I'm ever building my own home I'll be putting in sprinklers. As the instructor said when teaching me CPR I'm most likely to do it on someone I know rather than a stranger. A fire in the family home is were most people die in fires which sprinklers extinguish quickly, with very little collateral damage because once the fire brigade comes on scene they'll be thousands of gallons of water pumped into your home

I wouldn't trust any of our Cowboy Developers/Builders to even implement that.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Mr. teddywinkles

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

There's out for yourself to survive and get by but then there's out to serve ones self in gettin this year's latest model BMW.

JupiterKid

Dublin is only a very minor player in the Global financial system and although we have the IFSC in the docklands, it is really mainly lower level operations and back office functions, and has only been in place for 20 years. London has been a pre-eminent world financial hub for centuries and this has only intensified in the last 30 years, particularly after the "big bang" of the mid 1980s. I don't see Brexit changing this, at least overnight. Inertia is a very powerful force in economics and commerce.

Dublin would do well to attract a few big finance operations - but I suspect it would be their lower-level operations. The big decisions will still be made at HQ level in London, Frankfurt, Paris and elsewhere. Plus, our infrastructure - particularly public transport - fares very poorly to other European capital cities. We still don't have a direct rail link from the airport to the city centre which in 2017 is an utter disgrace. Lack of existing human capital, an acute housing shortage and the failure of planning to embrace high rise development in key parts of the city are all factors against the attraction of Dublin.

So, I don't think Dublin will benefit from Brexit as much as some have hoped. If there is a big exodus of operations from London post-Brexit, they will naturally gravitate to other EU cities which have the key infrastructure, operations and human resources already in place, such as Frankfurt, Paris or Milan. Lets not forget the importance of Zurich in global finance, a European city that is not in the EU.

Dr Crayfish

There’s simply nowhere for people to live in Dublin and the government is doing nothing about it. Skilled employees might live in Dublin at a push but everywhere else is a one horse town really.

Mr.Micro

We have not a rail or tram link to the airport yet.

smurgen

It's 100% down to the IDA's lack of proactive lobbying of companies.our company selected cork for it's international centre of excellence .it was selected due to brexit and also as it had an airport and two 3rd level institutions.the IDA contacted my boss after the office had been set up the throw a jobs announcement and picture opportunity in the guinness storehouse at our companies expense.the minister for enterprise said the IDA had helped get the jobs to Ireland,an absolute joke!my boss couldn't get over the brass neck of them.

smurgen

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

Highly skilled, highly educated, and highly remunerated finance professionals (such as myself) don't want to live in some parochial backwater like Cork, Limerick or Galway. The type of place where the cultural highlight of the year is a Macnas parade, or where a local is likely to recommend a fish and chip shop as a dining destination. It just isn't going to happen.

Even Dublin is a very tough sell. It's fine for low-end back office grunts and drones, but you're not going to attract much of the type of work that is so sought after by other more attractive destinations such as Paris and Amsterdam.

Yer talking ****e buddy.I've worked in Switzerland and Luxembourg and I can say that both have less events,less restaurants of high and middle standards than Cork let alone Dublin.We're not gonna attract the type of people who can afford a high standard of living in Paris or London but we should be doing alot better than we're doing at the moment.The housing situation is a massive issue.Higher rents will filter down into higher salary demands.

Arthur Daley

It looks very unlikely any kind of brexit worth taking about will happen within the next 15 months.

But anyway, finance firms have been shedding jobs and vacating buildings in London en masse. Because of the high costs of rents, and expensive employees driven by super expensive housing costs. There is a hell of a lot of stuff that can be run from poland, India or south africa at a fraction of the cost. When it comes down to it there are not many jobs that must reside physically in the city of london or dublin or frankfurt etc. It is an extremely transcient trade now and must be treated as such.

JupiterKid

My first post of 2018...

I’ve heard very little about the IDA bringing in any big company or industry of note to Ireland since the crash of 2007/8. In any case, the provincial cities need to up their game in promoting and selling themselves to FDI which is increasingly mobile and discerning in terms of where to locate. Local authorities and Chambers of Commerce need to refocus their economic strategies towards encouraging inward investment, as increasingly it is not countries that are competing against one another for limited investment, but their cities.

There was a time in the 1970s and 80s when the IDA would try to push investment into every rural town and build advance factories. This strategy ultimately failed and these days investors want to locate in the major urban centres where the human capital is concentrated.

This is a trend that has been happening since the late 1980s. I remember writing an essay on city promotion and the emerging “entrepreneurial” planning environment that seeks to facilitate investment and development via urban regeneration as an urban geography undergrad in the 1990s.

Andrew Beef

c_man wrote: »

If we're talking finance guys, then we have to talk about capital gains tax. In the UK you can put away 20k into a stocks ISA, no tax worries. Thereafter the allowance is something like 12k before CGT comes in. Dividends allowance is about 5k.

Ireland has no such ISA measures,CGT coming in at 1270 and no dividends allowance.

Ireland hates investors and the above is a massive tax rise for anyone sensible with their money who's coming from London.

People coming here are likely to be Non-Doms and therefore only taxed on their investments to the extent that income or gains are brought into Ireland.

So they’d probably be better off here rather than worse off.

Capt'n Midnight

John_Rambo wrote: »

If people outside Dublin insist on a Dublincentric Ireland, a Dublincentric Ireland will prevail.

Shunning dying cities, towns and villages to build one off houses dotted around the countryside will ensure the continual death of what once were vibrant, successful and populated towns, cities and villages.

If you had one word to demonstrate the failure of this it would be - decentralisation.

People guaranteed good jobs in cheap places to live and they stayed away in droves.

nice_guy80

Improve the transport links (rail) to the likes of towns in Kildare, Meath, Louth, Westmeath and people can commute in.

an hours + commute is the norm in London

rossie1977

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Improve the transport links (rail) to the likes of towns in Kildare, Meath, Louth, Westmeath and people can commute in.

an hours + commute is the norm in London

Transport links are decent enough. You have motorway connecting athlone, portlaoise, newbridge, naas with Dublin and mullingar, tullamore are close to the motorway. The trains can travel at 100 mph from heuston until portarlington. The do need to improve the line past portarlington but it's 1 hour 16 minutes from athlone to heuston in the morning which isn't bad.. obviously they need more frequency.

professore

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

Highly skilled, highly educated, and highly remunerated finance professionals (such as myself) don't want to live in some parochial backwater like Cork, Limerick or Galway. The type of place where the cultural highlight of the year is a Macnas parade, or where a local is likely to recommend a fish and chip shop as a dining destination. It just isn't going to happen.

Even Dublin is a very tough sell. It's fine for low-end back office grunts and drones, but you're not going to attract much of the type of work that is so sought after by other more attractive destinations such as Paris and Amsterdam.

Amsterdam? Apart from legalised prostitution and weed and public transport that works I don't see the attraction. And Paris is full of Parisians.

professore

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

John_Rambo wrote: »

If people outside Dublin insist on a Dublincentric Ireland, a Dublincentric Ireland will prevail.

Shunning dying cities, towns and villages to build one off houses dotted around the countryside will ensure the continual death of what once were vibrant, successful and populated towns, cities and villages.

If you had one word to demonstrate the failure of this it would be - decentralisation.

People guaranteed good jobs in cheap places to live and they stayed away in droves.

That's because they had kids with schools and mortgages already, and they couldn't be fired. Very different than attracting in young go getters. And Cork is a great city to live in. Not from there originally and love it myself, as do lots of young European go getters I know. It's quietly getting on with becoming rival city to Dublin it's pretended to be in the past.

Dinarius

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Decentralisation was a pie in the sky vote getter plan by McCreevy that he worked out on the back of a fag packet in the dail bar.

Totally agree.

It was an FF vote-buying scam on a par with the abolition of domestic rates.

Decentralisation has simply ended up creating duplicates of lots of departments.

If they had created a few decentralised hubs, and you could get to any one of them in an hour via high-speed train, it would have been a triumph. But, as with everywhere (Dublin included) the infrastructure is the last thing they think about. It’s invariably about keeping their construction industry paymasters happy.

D.

4068ac1elhodqr

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Improve the transport links (rail) to the likes of towns in Kildare, Meath, Louth, Westmeath and people can commute in.

an hours + commute is the norm in London

Hyperloop (or similar).

Surely e.g. if the technology was fully proven/available, in the UK instead of their HS2/3 rail (200mph max), it would be easier/cheaper to install?

The latest Estimate for HS2 is £56bn.

With a very small footprint (compared to rail), a few magnetic vacuum tubes (800mph) could be four-times better than old railway technology.

Think the journey time for Belfast-Dublin would be an astonishing 17.5mins.

Fann Linn

Dinarius wrote: »

Totally agree.

It was an FF vote-buying scam on a par with the abolition of domestic rates.

Decentralisation has simply ended up creating duplicates of lots of departments.

If they had created a few decentralised hubs, and you could get to any one of them in an hour via high-speed train, it would have been a triumph. But, as with everywhere (Dublin included) the infrastructure is the last thing they think about. It’s invariably about keeping their construction industry paymasters happy.

D.

Remember that 'Welcome to Parlon Country' sign. Coincidentally the same Parlon is now head of the Construction Federation.
Only in Ireland.

Andrew Beef

Part of the issue is that public sector employees are given a choice; in the private sector, people just get on with an office move; however, in the public sector it’s an entirely different story once “de unionz” get involved.

Fann Linn

Andrew Beef wrote: »

Part of the issue is that public sector employees are given a choice; in the private sector, people just get on with an office move; however, in the public sector it’s an entirely different story once “de unionz” get involved.

Or ye could say part of the issue is relevant ministers wanting to bring home the bacon to their own constituencies.

Dinarius

Dinarius wrote: »

Totally agree.

It was an FF vote-buying scam on a par with the abolition of domestic rates.

Decentralisation has simply ended up creating duplicates of lots of departments.

If they had created a few decentralised hubs, and you could get to any one of them in an hour via high-speed train, it would have been a triumph. But, as with everywhere (Dublin included) the infrastructure is the last thing they think about. It’s invariably about keeping their construction industry paymasters happy.

D.

Some good points there but I dont really see how you can allege that its keeping "keeping their construction industry paymasters happy".

Its more about keeping the local voters happy. They are the ones who decide if the TDs keep their seats. No one else.