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

Do you think property will crash again?

Options
1…5678911»

Comments

  • Options
    #302
    Arthur Daley
    Registered Users Posts: 4,464 ✭✭✭Arthur Daley


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    conservative spending, i.e. saving for a rainy day etc, have largely failed, and continue to do so, and we re not positively reacting to this.

    When have they been tried. in the history of Ireland?


  • Options
    #303
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 29,428 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Arthur Daley wrote: »
    When have they been tried. in the history of Ireland?

    great question, has it ever been done? my point being, you can see the elements of conservationism within our most recent governments, theres a severe lack of political will to try solve our most pressing social issues, this is very evident in relation to housing. policies such as rent controls are truly only gestures to solve these issues, but they actually dont really want to rock the boat regarding 'the market', even though their policies are having a negative effect and possible a net negative effect on the market. basically, ive no confidence in our current government to try resolve these issues, as they actually dont truly understand the fundamentals of these systems and structures.


  • Options
    #304
    CalRobert
    Registered Users Posts: 133 ✭✭CalRobert


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    .... as they actually dont truly understand the fundamentals of these systems and structures.


    Sure they do. But they also know that FG voters own homes, people who own homes LOVE rising house prices, and anyone else can sod off.


  • Options
    #305
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    Arthur Daley wrote: »
    When have they been tried. in the history of Ireland?

    The SSIA was one such attempt. Charlie McCreevey also set up the NPRF and bought in buildings which the government had been renting. He was, of course, sent off to Europe for such behaviour. The money could have been spent on salary increases for Tds and civil servants or better still, given to farmers.


  • Options
    #306
    Villa05
    Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    CalRobert wrote:
    Sure they do. But they also know that FG voters own homes, people who own homes LOVE rising house prices, and anyone else can sod off.


    This is where the stupidity theory goes full circle. A house is your home it doesn't really matter if it rises or falls.

    Home owners have children who need homes. A stable affordable housing markets benefits children of home owners. Why would parents want to make life difficult for there children

    Like all problems break it down into small parts and the solution is staring you in the face


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #307
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    CalRobert wrote: »
    Sure they do. But they also know that FG voters own homes, people who own homes LOVE rising house prices, and anyone else can sod off.

    It’s odd. Most people won’t really get much benefit from rising prices.


  • Options
    #308
    Arthur Daley
    Registered Users Posts: 4,464 ✭✭✭Arthur Daley


    It isn't ten years since we had high house prices, big mortgages, and needed high wages to pay them off. Then jobs started heading everywhere, very quickly. India, China, eastern europe, everywhere but Ireland. The same people who basked in the glory of booming house prices, told us how expensive we were relative to the far east, Poland, Germany, even many parts of the UK. Meantime we had to bend over backwards to accomodate bondholders and big developers.

    It reminded me a bit of CJ Haughey and his 'living beyond our means speech'. I don't think it is right to risk this same scenario yet again, when this was all within the last generation or two.


  • Options
    #309
    CalRobert
    Registered Users Posts: 133 ✭✭CalRobert


    Villa05 wrote: »
    . Why would parents want to make life difficult for there children

    Because it makes themselves richer in a manner just abstract enough to let them ignore their own responsibility for it. This is pretty much page one in the baby boomer playbook.


  • Options
    #310
    CalRobert
    Registered Users Posts: 133 ✭✭CalRobert


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    It’s odd. Most people won’t really get much benefit from rising prices.

    It benefits people who own their home, are in or nearing retirement, and in the back of their heads, think "well if the pension's not enough I could always sell this place and have half a million to live off of".

    Of course, high rents will negate the benefit of that to a large extent, but psychologically it's still very comforting to own an asset you could sell for many years' worth of income.

    Sucks for everyone else though.


  • Options
    #311
    Villa05
    Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    CalRobert wrote:
    It benefits people who own their home, are in or nearing retirement, and in the back of their heads, think "well if the pension's not enough I could always sell this place and have half a million to live off of".
    Not really as you have the threat of the bubble bursting at any time. If you have housing at stable price levels only rising at the pace of general inflation it becomes the perfect pension investment always tracking general cost of living with the opportunityof a cash lump sum if required

    If your retirement coincides with the bubble bursting your in trouble. Given retirement now spans 20 years plus, this will be a very likely scenario


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #312
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 29,428 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Arthur Daley wrote:
    It reminded me a bit of CJ Haughey and his 'living beyond our means speech'. I don't think it is right to risk this same scenario yet again, when this was all within the last generation or two.


    Steve keen has some interesting insights into the whole idea of 'balancing the books', effectively it's nonsense and I suspect he's right, but with the current structure of the EU, it's impossible to do what he recommends, leading him to believe, this could be one of the main issues that collapses the EU.


  • Options
    #313
    CalRobert
    Registered Users Posts: 133 ✭✭CalRobert


    Villa05 wrote: »
    If your retirement coincides with the bubble bursting your in trouble. Given retirement now spans 20 years plus, this will be a very likely scenario

    Very true, but humans have not shown themselves to be the rational beings we might hope.


  • Options
    #314
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 29,428 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    CalRobert wrote:
    Very true, but humans have not shown themselves to be the rational beings we might hope.


    But but, what about 'rational expectations'!


  • Options
    #315
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    That’s the thing. High house prices aren’t really good for any “normal” owner-occupiers except in specific situations which are often down to luck with timing of life stages (let’s say you bought five years ago and your life today takes you abroad, you can sell with a hefty profit and move on).

    BUT they make many of these owner-occupiers feel good about it!


  • Options
    #316
    Arthur Daley
    Registered Users Posts: 4,464 ✭✭✭Arthur Daley


    So, in theory this is where civic, political leadership is supposed to step up. On paper a government is not supposed to allow a country become hugely uncompetative, and address concerns around price levels. Housing costs included.

    Some of the multinationals have been warning about this lately.

    Noonan publicly stated he wanted/needed high house prices. But this was against 2012/2013 levels. We have gone beyond the point now where housing costs 'needed' a bit of a boost to cheer up the consumer, or ensure nama got it's sales away. Enough is enough. Fiscally money should be taken out of the economy to cool the high rents and high house prices. That would be real leadership and a change away from the disasterous policies of fianna fail in the past.


  • Options
    #317
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 29,428 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Arthur Daley wrote:
    Noonan publicly stated he wanted/needed high house prices. But this was against 2012/2013 levels. We have gone beyond the point now where housing costs 'needed' a bit of a boost to cheer up the consumer, or ensure nama got it's sales away. Enough is enough. Fiscally money should be taken out of the economy to cool the high rents and high house prices. That would be real leadership and a change away from the disasterous policies of fianna fail in the past.


    By removing this 'fiscal money', what do you think will probably happen to critical public services such as our health service?


  • Options
    #318
    Arthur Daley
    Registered Users Posts: 4,464 ✭✭✭Arthur Daley


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    By removing this 'fiscal money', what do you think will probably happen to critical public services such as our health service?

    So we may never pay down the public debt. Because, the health service.

    There are loads of supports for the property bubble that can be looked at before you start to look at core/essential health service activities.


  • Options
    #319
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 29,428 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Arthur Daley wrote: »
    So we may never pay down the public debt. Because, the health service.

    There are loads of supports for the property bubble that can be looked at before you start to look at core/essential health service activities.

    some very interesting debates are arising over the idea of public debt, and id have to largely agree with them, i.e. they aint really that important, private debt is actually where the 'debt burden' is. its also important to realise we have developed a highly complex debt based monetary system, i.e. our debts are actually our money supply, i.e. by reducing our debts, we actually introduce further complexity, one being the reduction of the 'velocity' of money, but there are other complications to.

    apologies, im not sure what you mean by your second statement?


  • Options
    #320
    Arthur Daley
    Registered Users Posts: 4,464 ✭✭✭Arthur Daley


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    apologies, im not sure what you mean by your second statement?

    The state pays huge amounts of money to landlords in various guises. As such it is a market maker and can unquestionably determine rents, to some degree. Then there are effective tax rates for Reits and other landlords. If the state wanted lower rents, they can be achieved. They choose not to.

    Let me try to second guess the next response in someone's mind: "if the state drop rents and supports for the property market, more people will be on the streets"

    Really? Are you sure. Will this lead to the demolishing of housing. I don't think so somehow.


Advertisement