No wonder millennials can't afford a mortgage

Cordell

On 30k or whatever median income you'll never be able to afford a house where everyone else wants to afford a house. The sooner you accept this the better.

Dravokivich

draiochtanois wrote: »

No, I'm suggesting living elsewhere in the country.

Eh... Yeah. Shift the lower earners off elsewhere... those lads working in spar in the city should be on 40k.

P_1

I'm wondering if we might see a generational conflict emerge at some point.

Let's not beat about the Bush, our parents generation have shafted us on many occasions and are continuing to do so.

Look at any proposed change for the betterment of society, who objects to it? Middle aged nimbys. Look at the unions looking after their own and shafting the younger generation. Look at who keeps voting the ff fg duopoly back into power, the older generation.

Wanderer78

Asset price inflation, trickle down they said, along with the rising tide, they said, bull**** I say!

mikhail

Cordell wrote: »

On 30k or whatever median income you'll never be able to afford a house where everyone else wants to afford a house. The sooner you accept this the better.

That's a bit of a problem if your job is in Dublin, where after rent and basic living expenses, you'd be doing well to save for a rainy day much less a deposit, and 3.5x your income is 105k + a 12k deposit will buy you exactly nothing within an hour of your job.

I'm lucky enough to have a job that pays well and parents who will put up with me while I save, but I'm looking at the bottom 10% of the housing stock in Dublin for somewhere to buy. People with modest paying jobs, with kids, are stuck. And I'd be okay with that, if rent weren't considerably higher than any reasonable mortgage.

Mongfinder General

Grayson wrote: »

You're attitude seems to be accept your crappy lot and shut up.

The fact is that the previous generation did have it better. Their mortgage as a percentage of their earnings was better. The same goes for the deposit.
And the current rental crises is a fcuking joke. Look at the funny places to rent thread and see the amount people are expected to pay for a sh1thole. Saving for a deposit is getting harder and harder.It's impossible to get a place at an affordable price anywhere near Dublin. I have friends who are both working fulltime jobs and have settled in Enfield or Kilcock. They commute to the city centre every day. Think about that, there's practically nowhere in the entire city they can afford. That's nuts.

I don’t buy that. There’s loads of kipps in Dublin that can be bought cheaply. Darn dale, Finglas South, Ballymun, Jobstown, Killinarden, Ballybrack. It’s just that most of us think we’re better than that and would rather commute for 3 hours each day. Btw, I wouldn’t put an animal in Enfield

jim salter

Things are going to change for the worse in the next 18-24 months and $18 breakfasts will be the least of everyone's worries

P_1

Cordell wrote: »

On 30k or whatever median income you'll never be able to afford a house where everyone else wants to afford a house. The sooner you accept this the better.

Double edged sword if you work in Dublin. Your choices are

A. Pay the eyewatering rents but have some quality of life at the end the day

B. Spent 3 hours or more a day commuting, spend the difference in what youd save compared to renting in Dublin on petrol, have zero quality of life at the end of the day.

Great choice eh

average_runner

Assetbacked wrote: »

If the companies could not grow to supersized level like Google, Apple etc or individuals allowed to amass millions to themselves then there would be more equal distribution of wealth in the Western world which would allow a greater number of people get richer.

Now we are being told that government intervention in the housing market is dangerous and reducing taxes now for workers is suicide but the real cost of not doing this is severe social and political problems.

Reducing taxes will do nothing but push inflation and prices up. House prices are lower than early 2000's, yes there is a stricter mortgage rule which is great, eventually prices will even off and then. But if you want to buy in a popular area then pay the premium

Tigerandahalf

I'd like to see the Central Bank go further and limit couples to only borrowing a certain multiple of the higher salary (not combined), e.g. a couple earning 50,000 and 40,000. Only the 50,000 could be taken into account. That way housing could only reach a certain price and land values could only reach a certain price point.

This would free up money for couples to spend on childcare, put into future pensions, have the possibility of a partner staying home for the early years of their children's lives.

It would also make it fairer for single people to acquire a home.

average_runner

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I'd like to see the Central Bank go further and limit couples to only borrowing a certain multiple of the higher salary (not combined), e.g. a couple earning 50,000 and 40,000. Only the 50,000 could be taken into account. That way housing could only reach a certain price and land values could only reach a certain price point.

This would free up money for couples to spend on childcare, put into future pensions, have the possibility of a partner staying home for the early years of their children's lives.

It would also make it fairer for single people to acquire a home.

Maybe also limit single people to buying no more than a 2 bed house, this will free up family homes

Tigerandahalf

P_1 wrote: »

I'm wondering if we might see a generational conflict emerge at some point.

Let's not beat about the Bush, our parents generation have shafted us on many occasions and are continuing to do so.

Look at any proposed change for the betterment of society, who objects to it? Middle aged nimbys. Look at the unions looking after their own and shafting the younger generation. Look at who keeps voting the ff fg duopoly back into power, the older generation.

That is very possible. We have seen all the parties bribe the grey vote with pension increases while people linger on trolleys in corridors.

Older people have increasing voting power and if Willie O' Dea comes along and promises a €20 increase in the pension everyone from 50 up would vote for it.

That is why democracy is in trouble going forward unless there is cross party agreement on tackling these issues.

kunst nugget

average_runner wrote: »

Maybe also limit single people to buying no more than a 2 bed house, this will free up family homes

That's a ridiculous suggestion.

Doctors room ghost

jim salter wrote: »

Things are going to change for the worse in the next 18-24 months and $18 breakfasts will be the least of everyone's worries

Yeah you told us that already jimmy.step away from your magic 8 ball

q85dw7osi4lebg

Millennial couple.

Both spend €10 a day on breakfast / lunch / coffee.

Both on average wage.

Own a 4 bed in commuter belt, saved for 18 months prior.

It is possible to have your avocado toast and eat it.

Birneybau

unkel wrote: »

Back 20 years ago we had a 5p bowl of cereal or toast with butter at home and then some free instant coffee at work, but these days it's a $18 "Deconstructed Avocado Toast with Feta Breakfast" plus a $10 Frappuccino :eek:



If you're a millennial, with a full time job and no dependants, how much do you spend a week on breakfast / lunch on work days? Be honest!

Way to take the whole the whole thing out of context:

https://thewest.com.au/news/offbeat/deconstructed-avocado-on-toast-at-melbournes-the-kettle-black-described-as-most-melbourne-dish-yet-ng-b88964087z

The cafe is copping heat on social media after a diner described her outrage over the unique menu item, which is priced from $13.50.

The breakfast is advertised in the cafe as a “seasonal avocado with citrus, toast and local kelp salt”, with and optional $4.50 addition of feta.

jim salter

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

Yeah you told us that already jimmy.step away from your magic 8 ball

But, but, but....

Its my magic 8 ball.... Mine.... All MINE

cajonlardo

[HTML][/HTML]

P_1 wrote: »

I'm wondering if we might see a generational conflict emerge at some point.

Let's not beat about the Bush, our parents generation have shafted us on many occasions and are continuing to do so.

Look at any proposed change for the betterment of society, who objects to it? Middle aged nimbys. Look at the unions looking after their own and shafting the younger generation. Look at who keeps voting the ff fg duopoly back into power, the older generation.

This whingy whiney hand wringing is your biggest problem

I shafted no one.
I worked unreal hours in truly shocking conditions and there was no minum wage. I've worked where men died or were seriously injured. Every last thing I have was paid for in hard earned cash , except the house which was mortgaged and paid off. Ffs, we were married 5 years before we could buy luxuries like cds etc.


My generation is not the enemy.
You lot know well who fcuked you over. Now either confront them and settle your score, emigrate or accept that a small number of very well heeled cnuts own you for life.

TheIrishGrover

LirW wrote: »

Everything follows a different time line now. Young people work hard and face ever-increasing prices, spend their 20s to get on a reasonable pay, couple up later, if ever buy property later and have stability quite late in their life to start a family if they wish to.
I understand why having children is getting less important to people. They spend their lives in demanding jobs yet can't live a lavish life on their income and prefer to keep what they have left for themselves. Can't blame anyone for that.
The millennials get a massive battering. Pressure to get a prestigious education, pressure to stand on their own feet, paying high taxes, paying high living costs, paying ridiculous childcare fees. If money is needed, their pockets are longed into first.

Every.
Single.
Word.

Of that statement can be said about the previous generation.

P_1

cajonlardo wrote: »

[HTML][/HTML]

This whingy whiney hand wringing is your biggest problem

I shafted no one.
I worked unreal hours in truly shocking conditions and there was no minum wage. I've worked where men died or were seriously injured. Every last thing I have was paid for in hard earned cash , except the house which was mortgaged and paid off. Ffs, we were married 5 years before we could buy luxuries like cds etc.


My generation is not the enemy.
You lot know well who fcuked you over. Now either confront them and settle your score, emigrate or accept that a small number of very well heeled cnuts own you for life.

Indeed should have qualified that to a degree, its largely the middle and upper class of the elder generation so really it's a classist and generational conflict

zapitastas

troyzer wrote: »

I'm a millenial. Depends on the day of course but most days I'd be getting lunch and dinner at around the €10-€15 mark. Weetabix in the morning. Job done.

I make €30k a year. That's why I can't afford a mortgage. You can buy a six pack of avocados in Lidl for €2. I don't know why old farts keep latching onto avocados as the reason why millenials have it ****. And we do have it ****.

Sound for leaving us all of that debt and making it impossible for us to ever leave the nest.

I don't know why people latch onto avacados either as if they were some sort of a majestical elite foodstuff. Are pretty tasty, relatively inexpensive and are a nutrient dense food

Billy86

unkel wrote: »

If you're a millennial, with a full time job and no dependants, how much do you spend a week on breakfast / lunch on work days? Be honest!

I would need to do the maths but its probably €10-12 for me to get around 5,000 calories of good food. That woukd cover boiled eggs on wholegrain toast in the morning, homemade energy bars, protein smoothies with granola bought cheap in aldi, something like a 400g quinoa and black bean salad for lunch and chicken alfredo for dinner with maybe avocado on toast shortly before bed.

I've been trying to put on weight lately though and it's a task! My usual 2-3000 calorie diet would probably set me back about a fiver a day, give or take a euro.

Ireland is pretty great for food prices compared to other places I've lived to be honest.

F*ck all chance of me getting a mortgage though while we're at it. So much so that I'm permanently moving abroad on the 30th.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I spend maybe €15 a week on food and drink in work.

Buying a house isn't even on my radar, too expensive relative to earnings and mortgage rules tightened up after the generations just above me lost the absolute run of themselves. On the plus side though, I can use all that money on their pension rather than my mortgage, so it all worked out :pac:

Home ownership isn't actually a priority for me anyway tbh, but some stability in the rental market would be nice. Any dope who spends an hour on daft can see the rules on rent pressure zones and God knows what other rules are being flouted constantly, can the relative government agencies not spare someone to do that, the way other departments for example check people's social media against their welfare claims?

There's no point introducing rafts of new rules and not following them up. Some rules, ban on not taking RA, ban on bedsits, have worsened the situation for vulnerable renters and those just above them.

Daft provides reliable information on the rental sector too, again beyond the ken of Murphs, apparently.

You could understand a slow start after the last recession, but this is a crisis that has been ongoing and worsening for over half a decade; it's hard not to suspect it's wilful at this point.

My lease is up for renewal in April, and I'm already a bit worried about it. All around the city there are rafts of hotels, offices, retail space flying up...WHERE ARE THESE PEOPLE SUPPOSED TO FCUKING LIVE?? Very high end rip off student apartment complexes are the only other significant development. I don't know if I could face looking for another rental in this city, and I'm close to being priced out anyway.

Fcuk off and let me have the odd fcuking avocado.

mikhail

zapitastas wrote: »

I don't know why people latch onto avacados either as if they were some sort of a majestical elite foodstuff. Are pretty tasty, relatively inexpensive and are a nutrient dense food

I suspect it's because they're relatively fashionable now but largely a strange foreign food to older folks. It's a shorthand for "young people". Throw "millenials" into the pot, and you got yourself a stew going; a stew of bile aimed at them kids nowadays.

jmayo

Grayson wrote: »

You're attitude seems to be accept your crappy lot and shut up.

Well I can't revolutionise the entire world economy much as I would like to so that everyone gets a job, everyone gets to have a great pension, no one pays taxes and everyone gets to live in a nice house exactly where they want.
Call me a realist.

Grayson wrote: »

The fact is that the previous generation did have it better. Their mortgage as a percentage of their earnings was better. The same goes for the deposit.

Ehh did you happen to read how people today have way more ancillary costs that people years ago.
Factor out some of those costs and you find people have a lot more money available for saving.
And yes the percentage of income being spent on accommodation has risen drastically, but if you compared the situation in 1980s to that of 1960s you might even find something similar. In the 1980s it generally needed a couple both in employment to buy unlike say in 1950s or 1960s.
I think a huge retrograde step was following the British thatcher model of removing the state from providing housing to less well off people.

Grayson wrote: »

And the current rental crises is a fcuking joke. Look at the funny places to rent thread and see the amount people are expected to pay for a sh1thole. Saving for a deposit is getting harder and harder.It's impossible to get a place at an affordable price anywhere near Dublin. I have friends who are both working fulltime jobs and have settled in Enfield or Kilcock. They commute to the city centre every day. Think about that, there's practically nowhere in the entire city they can afford. That's nuts.

Hey did I say the current rental and housing market is ok.
I said the seeds for this mess was sown nearly 20 years ago at least.
And it is all about supply.

BTW you are very gung ho about bringing migrants and refugees to this country, but have you ever thought about how we have a housing shortage and how adding thousands of unskilled uneducated migrants will mean less services or higher taxes for those friends of yours?
Think of that next time you are advocating for Ireland taking in migrants.

P_1 wrote: »

I'm wondering if we might see a generational conflict emerge at some point.

Let's not beat about the Bush, our parents generation have shafted us on many occasions and are continuing to do so.

Look at any proposed change for the betterment of society, who objects to it? Middle aged nimbys. Look at the unions looking after their own and shafting the younger generation. Look at who keeps voting the ff fg duopoly back into power, the older generation.

Would these be the same parents' generation that paid high taxes so that you got an education, probably access to a better education than any generation here to fore ?
Would these be the same parents' generation that often sacrificed a lot to make a life for themselves in this cultural and economic wasteland of a state, or emigrated for a while before settling back here, to help create a state that now offers a better chance of education, employment and freedom than they ever had ?

BTW who would you vote into power, one of the myriad of lefties that believes in magic money trees, open borders and twitter dictated shtyology ?

Unions always look after their own and if you haven't figured that out by now I think all those taxes spent on education were a freaking waste. :rolleyes:

zell12

Peopel should be able to rent permanently ~15% of income.
Not have to participate in land speculation, that only makes earlier generations rich.

Deebles McBeebles

Billy86 wrote: »

F*ck all chance of me getting a mortgage though while we're at it. So much so that I'm permanently moving abroad on the 30th.

Some place sunny I hope!

Even for those of us who can get a mortgage, its still almost impossible to buy for a reasonable price in your chosen area. In my town (and lots of others I'd imagine) reasonably priced houses that might need a bit of work are snapped up by private landlords at over inflated prices because they know the rent they can get will be worth it. Why is the government not putting something in place to stop this happening over and over again?

troyzer

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

Every.
Single.
Word.

Of that statement can be said about the previous generation.

No, it can't. My Dad is a skilled but manual worker who left school at 15. He bought a three bed house on a single income 20 minutes from the city centre in 1992, the year I was born. It was £20k which is around €42k in today's money and he was making around £9k a year which is roughly €18.5k in today's money.

The house price/income ratio has absolutely exploded.

Not only that, but my Dad's house is worth the best part of €400k and was worth the same before the crash and before he had even cleared the mortgage.

So assuming the ratios and the house price are the same, for a person of my generation to be as well off they would be on an income of around €180k at 25 having left school after their leaving cert and gone into skilled labour (my Dad doesn't work in construction and didn't do an apprenticeship). They'd buy a house for €400k and by the time they're 40 it would be worth €4m.

andekwarhola

SilverPenney wrote: »

If houses were as affordable they were in my parents time (a 3 bed semi for 21 grand in 1990 and a two bed cottage for 14 grand in 1995, all within 30 minutes of a city), then I'm sure we'd be happily paying a mortgage off.

What were you parents earning then though? And what were the interest rates? We now live in a modern economy with much higher wages

While there are many fcuk ups made about housing here, be it poor regulation and a rental crisis by allowing the private sector to replace social housing, whining about not being able to afford to buy houses in a nice postcode near town for the same price as your parents did isn't the government's fault.

It's because lots of other well-paid professionals (in an era of low interest rates) want to live there too. Move into a gentriying area or further out from the city, just like people have to do in every other modern city.

Judging by colleagues and friends, it doesn't seem to affect people that were brought up in more marginal, rural or urban working class areas that much. It's the ones that were brought up in urban middle-class areas that are more likely to think it's still their birthright for property there to remain static forever even when wages have risen a lot.

P_1

jmayo wrote: »

Well I can't revolutionise the entire world economy much as I would like to so that everyone gets a job, everyone gets to have a great pension, no one pays taxes and everyone gets to live in a nice house exactly where they want.
Call me a realist.



Ehh did you happen to read how people today have way more ancillary costs that people years ago.
Factor out some of those costs and you find people have a lot more money available for saving.
And yes the percentage of income being spent on accommodation has risen drastically, but if you compared the situation in 1980s to that of 1960s you might even find something similar. In the 1980s it generally needed a couple both in employment to buy unlike say in 1950s or 1960s.
I think a huge retrograde step was following the British thatcher model of removing the state from providing housing to less well off people.



Hey did I say the current rental and housing market is ok.
I said the seeds for this mess was sown nearly 20 years ago at least.
And it is all about supply.

BTW you are very gung ho about bringing migrants and refugees to this country, but have you ever thought about how we have a housing shortage and how adding thousands of unskilled uneducated migrants will mean less services or higher taxes for those friends of yours?
Think of that next time you are advocating for Ireland taking in migrants.



Would these be the same parents' generation that paid high taxes so that you got an education, probably access to a better education than any generation here to fore ?
Would these be the same parents' generation that often sacrificed a lot to make a life for themselves in this cultural and economic wasteland of a state, or emigrated for a while before settling back here, to help create a state that now offers a better chance of education, employment and freedom than they ever had ?

BTW who would you vote into power, one of the myriad of lefties that believes in magic money trees, open borders and twitter dictated shtyology ?

Unions always look after their own and if you haven't figured that out by now I think all those taxes spent on education were a freaking waste. :rolleyes:

And the same generation that pulled the fcukung ladder up after them.

Party wise, likely the Soc Dems or the Greens. You know parties with sustainable economic and open non racist social policies

jmayo

zell12 wrote: »

Peopel should be able to rent permanently ~15% of income.
Not have to participate in land speculation, that only makes earlier generations rich.

There is a distinct shift now to people having to rent long term so there should be framework in place to protect renters and landlords like in some other countries.
As it is scummy landlords and tenants just get to continue on and the decent ones get screwed over.

But again the first part of our housing problem, be it purchasing or renting is lack of supply.
Fooking about with mortgage amounts/critieria, tax incentives for purchasing, etc until supply comes near to meeting demand is just making things worse.

Grayson

jmayo wrote: »

Well I can't revolutionise the entire world economy much as I would like to so that everyone gets a job, everyone gets to have a great pension, no one pays taxes and everyone gets to live in a nice house exactly where they want.
Call me a realist.



Ehh did you happen to read how people today have way more ancillary costs that people years ago.
Factor out some of those costs and you find people have a lot more money available for saving.
And yes the percentage of income being spent on accommodation has risen drastically, but if you compared the situation in 1980s to that of 1960s you might even find something similar. In the 1980s it generally needed a couple both in employment to buy unlike say in 1950s or 1960s.
I think a huge retrograde step was following the British thatcher model of removing the state from providing housing to less well off people.



Hey did I say the current rental and housing market is ok.
I said the seeds for this mess was sown nearly 20 years ago at least.
And it is all about supply.

BTW you are very gung ho about bringing migrants and refugees to this country, but have you ever thought about how we have a housing shortage and how adding thousands of unskilled uneducated migrants will mean less services or higher taxes for those friends of yours?
Think of that next time you are advocating for Ireland taking in migrants.



Would these be the same parents' generation that paid high taxes so that you got an education, probably access to a better education than any generation here to fore ?
Would these be the same parents' generation that often sacrificed a lot to make a life for themselves in this cultural and economic wasteland of a state, or emigrated for a while before settling back here, to help create a state that now offers a better chance of education, employment and freedom than they ever had ?

BTW who would you vote into power, one of the myriad of lefties that believes in magic money trees, open borders and twitter dictated shtyology ?

Unions always look after their own and if you haven't figured that out by now I think all those taxes spent on education were a freaking waste. :rolleyes:

Jaysus, you had to get a dig in about migrants didn't you. If you go back through my posts, find a place where I said we should bring in thousands of migrants. Find one single post. I did once say (about two years ago I think) that the country could accept 10k migrants without affecting our demographics but that we didn't have the ability to do so because we simply didn't have the housing etc for it. That's the only time I ever mentioned a figure.
It's just not possible for us to take that many however willing we are. When I'm arguing about migrants, I'm arguing against the negative views people have about them, I'm not saying we should take thousands more. So either you remembered one post I made, but forgot the rest of that post, or you're reading into my posts something I'm not saying.

I know you weren't replying to me but the education boom in Ireland occurred mainly because of the ESF, the European Social Fund. They funded all the RTC's (Now known as IT's) and provided a lot of grants to students. Those funds actually accounted for something like 4% of our GDP and we invested a load of it in universities/RTC's.

As for the rest, you did seem to be saying that people should suck it up, yet you admit that the rental situation is untenable. We both agree on the need for social housing. I think the government also needs to insure that a certain number of units built are affordable and sold to provide individuals and not people who are buying a second property. And that's before we get to the matter of infrastructure. We need better roads, trains etc so that people can live further out and not spend hours going to work and hours returning.

c6ysaphjvqw41k

This post has been deleted.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

troyzer

andekwarhola wrote: »

What were you parents earning then though? And what were the interest rates?

We now live in a modern economy now with much higher wages

While there are many fcuk ups made about housing here, be it poor regulation and allowing the private sector to replace social housing, whining about not being able to afford to buy house iin a nice postcode near town for the same price as your parents did isn't the government's fault. It's because lots of other well paid professionals (in an era of low interest rates) want to live there too.

Wages haven't gone up nearly as much as house prices. The average wage in today's money back in 1995 was about €490 a week. It's about €750 now.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-hes/hes2015/aiw/

It's a bit harder to calculate how much house prices have changed because the CSO doesn't go back that far but I would imagine for most millenials of my age whose parents bought in the early 90s, £20-£30k is the typical figure bandied about. That was the case for my parents anyway.

£25k is about €55k today. Good look getting a gaff in suburban Dublin for €55k.

I'm sick of people saying they had it hard as well. No, you didn't. Not like today. You also bought on the cusp of an economic boom where your property values skyrocketed and your mortgage might as well have been written off it was that little compared to the value of the house.

LirW

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

Every.
Single.
Word.

Of that statement can be said about the previous generation.

I don't know, the average age of first time mothers was never as high as it is now. It was easier surviving on one salary. There wasn't as much pressure on the job market to have a degree because you'd still find something suitable for your level of education and you'd still do reasonably well and buying a house wasn't absolutely impossible. People were able to stay in their jobs throughout their career.

You can manage in certain parts of the country on a low wage, but not where the well-paying jobs for professionals are.

Varta

There is no such thing as generational differences. People are born every day and every day things change. There is one simple reason why property and so many other things are so expensive and out of the reach of most people, but most people don't like to acknowledge it. And the reason is the double income family/couple. Women were not encouraged into the workforce so that families and couples could have a better quality of life, or to liberate women; they were encouraged into the workforce so that more money could be made off their labour. Prices will always be based on what the market believes people can pay. Consequently, the price of property is now set at a rate that double income families can afford. What else did people expect.

Chinasea

Kivaro wrote: »

Maybe the Millennial generation cannot afford a mortgage because the Irish aggressive tax scheme forces Irish workers to pay more in taxes than 10 years ago.

On the flip side, for those whose concept of working is alien to them, billions will be spent on social housing in the coming years so that they will get a forever home, and welfare spending will increase, so their free money will also increase.

How fair is that?

100 + %.

I am forced via my tax to sponsor dysfunctional lifestyle choices. I have no problem paying tax (to support the genuine in need percentage), but I have an issue with supporting our over generous welfare system which is encouraging irresponsible perpetuating lifestyles.

TheIrishGrover

May I ask where all these 21K houses near a city were in the 1990s? Seems EVERYONE got them.

troyzer

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yeah. Except we're not talking about 500 years ago. We're talking about a time when Nirvana was releasing albums.

So comparing the time periods is actually relevant.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

I love guac because all the ingredients work together but other than that, I don’t really get avocado. There, I said it.

unkel

unkel wrote: »

........
If you're a millennial, with a full time job and no dependants, how much do you spend a week on breakfast / lunch on work days? Be honest!

€250/month covers me for breakfast, lunch, dinner & snacks. I bring my own food to work. That includes various other household items too..........tinfoil, kitchen rolls etc etc etc

I'm just about a millennial :pac:

Franz Von Peppercorn

jmayo wrote: »

And yes the percentage of income being spent on accommodation has risen drastically, but if you compared the situation in 1980s to that of 1960s you might even find something similar. In the 1980s it generally needed a couple both in employment to buy unlike say in 1950s or 1960s.

No it didn’t. Housing was cheap in the 80s. Could be bought with one income.

LirW

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

May I ask where all these 21K houses near a city were in the 1990s? Seems EVERYONE got them.

My in-laws bought a large 3-bed semi in Glasnevin for 40k in today's money. They said it was a struggle the first few years but they don't regret going all broke to buy in a really good area. She owned a house in Tallaght before that would be 12-15k in Euros today.
But they both worked and were both civil servants.

Hector Bellend

Hector Bellend wrote: »

I'm 41. I'm on my third college degree, have a good job and still have great difficulty getting a mortgage.

After the first degree you might have been better off doing a level 9 or something else. 3 qualifications at the same level is rarely hugely conducive to lining ones pocket.

Billy86

[Deleted User] wrote: »

for €2.57 each?

Where do you shop?

I'm guessing their portions are in the smaller side but maybe not too much so. You'd be surprised how far money can stretch making stuff from scratch. I've priced bolognese/pasta (about 500g each portion) and a 9" pizza (including cheese and sauce) at less than €1 to make each for an example.

Franz Von Peppercorn

draiochtanois wrote: »

My great great great great great great great great great great grandfather Peter Minuit bought the island of Manhattan from the Lenape Indians for $24 worth of glass beads and trinkets.

Not sure of the relevance of that. You don’t seem to be able to argue without sneering.

That was in response to a guy who’s father bought a house 20 minutes from the city as a manual labour in 1992. Which isn’t that long ago.

The op seems to think the reason millenials can’t buy is because of avocado purchases. No, it’s obviously price rises.

jmayo

P_1 wrote: »

And the same generation that pulled the fcukung ladder up after them.

You see this is the thing that started around time of bubble and is a load of shyte dreamed up by people just trying to con people out of their money.
How many people bought overpriced "flats" in the ar**hole of a suburb with no services just to get on this "property ladder".
You have a go at people of previous generations, the same people who actually bought a house with the idea they would live their for decades, not that they would flip in 5 years to move up the ladder.

Party wise, likely the Soc Dems or the Greens. You know parties with sustainable economic and open non racist social policies

Yes the Soc Dems seem to have lots of ideas but how will they all be funded ?
As for the greens, they are pile of gobshytes who if you are in the market for assigning blame for how the country has huge issues should be one of those front and centre for blame.

They went into government with a fianna fail that created the bubble, had fueled the bubble and then when the shyte was hitting the fan were more worried about a fooking hunt in Meath than fact Irish taxpayers then, now and into the future were being royally hung out to dry.

Grayson wrote: »

Jaysus, you had to get a dig in about migrants didn't you. If you go back through my posts, find a place where I said we should bring in thousands of migrants. Find one single post. I did once say (about two years ago I think) that the country could accept 10k migrants without affecting our demographics but that we didn't have the ability to do so because we simply didn't have the housing etc for it. That's the only time I ever mentioned a figure.
It's just not possible for us to take that many however willing we are. When I'm arguing about migrants, I'm arguing against the negative views people have about them, I'm not saying we should take thousands more. So either you remembered one post I made, but forgot the rest of that post, or you're reading into my posts something I'm not saying.

Fair enough.
BTW we can't afford to accept 10 never mind 10k.

Grayson wrote: »

I know you weren't replying to me but the education boom in Ireland occurred mainly because of the ESF, the European Social Fund. They funded all the RTC's (Now known as IT's) and provided a lot of grants to students. Those funds actually accounted for something like 4% of our GDP and we invested a load of it in universities/RTC's.

Yes, but a lot of families scrimped and saved to put their kids through third level.

Grayson wrote: »

As for the rest, you did seem to be saying that people should suck it up, yet you admit that the rental situation is untenable. We both agree on the need for social housing. I think the government also needs to insure that a certain number of units built are affordable and sold to provide individuals and not people who are buying a second property. And that's before we get to the matter of infrastructure. We need better roads, trains etc so that people can live further out and not spend hours going to work and hours returning.

Hey I was/am saying most people need to suck it up that they will probably never have it as good as the preceeding generations re employment opportunities, wage growth, residential choices, pension and retirement opportunities.

It is like how most young Americans need to cop on they aint going to be living the American dream.

The world is changing and that much vaunted globalisation we are always being sold is a double edged sword.
We get cheaper products, but we lose jobs.

I am not saying people should not demand changes to our planning and changes to allow people rent long term and the ability to live somewhere close to where they work without signing up their life to penury or that they can easily commute to work.

Billy86

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Some place sunny I hope!

Uhm. Uuhhh.... ermm... Canada. :pac:

To be fair though I like their winters. Very sunny for the most part and nice and still, once you've got your thermals for the -20 weather you're laughing!

Ireland actually trounces Toronto in terms of value for money on food, though at the same time I'd be able to get a mortgage a lot easier there than in Dublin.

andekwarhola

troyzer wrote: »

Wages haven't gone up nearly as much as house prices. The average wage in today's money back in 1995 was about €490 a week. It's about €750 now.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-hes/hes2015/aiw/

It's a bit harder to calculate how much house prices have changed because the CSO doesn't go back that far but I would imagine for most millenials of my age whose parents bought in the early 90s, £20-£30k is the typical figure bandied about. That was the case for my parents anyway.

£25k is about €55k today. Good look getting a gaff in suburban Dublin for €55k.

I'm sick of people saying they had it hard as well. No, you didn't. Not like today. You also bought on the cusp of an economic boom where your property values skyrocketed and your mortgage might as well have been written off it was that little compared to the value of the house.

A friend of mine bought a place in a central working class area of Dublin (now a bleated hit with professionals) in the early 90s and I think it was around 60k or 70k. And he had to extend it on top of that. Will ask him though to confirm. Also interest rates in the 80s and well into the early 90s were in the mid-teens unlike now.

It's unfair to say that I was crowing. Our house in Dublin cost about 4 times our then joint income around 13 years ago. A modest house in a normal suburb on the outskirts of Dublin. Hardly a kings ransom. I'm not moaning about being 'priced out' of Sandymount, take note.

The only point I was making was that people can't expect to live in the places that their parents did by default. You have to buy where you can afford. Plus buying a house isn't and never will be a right and some people won't be able to do it for various reasons. The controls around mortgage lending these days are actually sensible enough. For example, 300k will still get you plenty of places in Dublin (albeit not trendy areas) with a joint income of 77k (not far off two avergae salaries) and a 10% deposit.

That's obviously why social housing and the availablity of rental property is a far bigger issue than people that can afford houses buying those houses.