Who will possibly be next housing minister ?

MrMusician18

tabby aspreme wrote: »

When Varadker was questioned on this he give a very misleading answer of under 2%, which is statistically true, but in real terms it's closer to 40%, which he admitted, when pulled up over it , when a cuckoo fund / REIT, purchase a scheme of houses or apartments, irrespective of how many houses are in the scheme , it is recorded as 1 purchase the same as a couple buying a single house.
Coveney wasn't invited to the Bilderberg conference for nothing.

The houses are still being built, it's not as if these investors are stepping in and demolishing them. In fact when investors buy them they add supply to the rental market.

When someone is selling something, they are free to sell it to whomever they want at whatever price they want. Unless we propose changing our constitution, there is nothing any government can do about it.

dxhound2005

This is another subject like Property Tax where we can judge the performance of SF in government. They have done nothing to solve the homelessness/housing problems in the North. I don't see why anyone would expect them to be any better here.

tabby aspreme

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The houses are still being built, it's not as if these investors are stepping in and demolishing them. In fact when investors buy them they add supply to the rental market.

When someone is selling something, they are free to sell it to whomever they want at whatever price they want. Unless we propose changing our constitution, there is nothing any government can do about it.

I agree that every house built is helping the supply issue, irrespective of who buys it.
It's the favourable tax terms the REIT's get I have the problem with

JP Liz V1

Timmy Dooley

MrMusician18

tabby aspreme wrote: »

I agree that every house built is helping the supply issue, irrespective of who buys it.
It's the favourable tax terms the REIT's get I have the problem with

REITs don't pay corporation tax on rental profits but they must pay out 85% of the profits on rental to investors, who must personally pay the taxes due.

The exemption for corporate tax exists in order to prevent double taxation.

I think the above posts on this illustrates the kind of skin deep understanding of politics in Ireland. Most politicians and civil servants generally want the country to succeed, and believe it or not have the interests of the country at heart. I don't think anyone in government is happy with the trolley crisis, housing and any other I'll the country faces - if they're was a silver bullet they'd use it, no hesitation. Schemes like REITs were introduced to address a certain need (not enough investment in commercial property), not to stiff the ordinary taxpayer. There are people who use this ignorance to paint a picture of an elite riding society for their gain, which generally isn't true.

v638sg7k1a92bx

Idbatterim wrote: »

Give incentives for elderly to downsize. You want to provide mountains of housing in no time ? Allow log cabins , can be out up in days, for a pittance compared to house or apartment. Luxury compared to many block built kips people currently living in! There is serious ignorance over just how good they are. Go look at the Instagram pages of places that sell these and the end product, they are gorgeous! Well insulated. Sustainable. And many people can even do a lot of the building work themselves if in any way handy. Cuts down a huge amount on labour problem. Don’t think it would be implemented. But coujd orivide masses of housing in established areas , for a pittance. Or mobile homes or the shipping containers converted , that can be craned in.

The solution is to go and look at Instagram! Wow, I’ve heard it all now, Millennial snowflakes have no idea what and who they have voted for.

Muahahaha

Knox Magnificent Escalator wrote: »

The solution is to go and look at Instagram! Wow, I’ve heard it all now, Millennial snowflakes have no idea what and who they have voted for.

Sinn Fein have the highest vote in every single age group from 18-65. They were voted in by people who work in good jobs but cannot afford high rents & child care and see owning their own home as a pipe dream because of FG policy on housing.

rob316

The problem with social housing is the income limits are a joke. They need to be much higher, social housing should be for all if they want it.

If you put a load of wasters and unemployed into these projects your going to have problems and that's where the stigma is. Social housing = wasters and poor people. In other countries in Europe plenty of working professionals live in mass social housing.

I live in a council house, I work and it's too cheap. 15% of your income is too low, it's needs to be higher so we can fund the building of more social houses combined with affordable houses.

rob316

Billions has been spent on the HAP scheme too since 2014 and before that rent allowance. FG stopped building social housing and instead has pumped money into private landlords for often overpriced and inadequate accomodation for people on the housing list. They have ****ed up the whole thing so bad is astonishing.
Yet we are told no party can fix it. Hmmmm

MrMusician18

Muahahaha wrote: »

Sinn Fein have the highest vote in every single age group from 18-65. They were voted in by people who work in good jobs but cannot afford high rents & child care and see owning their own home as a pipe dream because of FG policy on housing.

How is such a liberal demographic able to reconcile their allegedly compassionate values with voting for a party standing a convicted bomb maker as a candidate? The demographic (my demographic) has lost all moral authority tbh.

It isn't FG housing policy that's stopping people from owning their own home, it's slow supply and high demand. And that is a problem that's isn't easily or quick to fix.

Scoondal

I have decided to visit my social welfare office in the morning to claim that I am homeless. Hello Mary Lou, hello weekend getaway.

Scoondal

The citizens have clearly voted Fine Gael out of government. But with 36 or more seats they are now THE opposition. I am going to join Fine Gael if SF becomes Taoiseach. Politically, I am a social democrat. But we need to stand against the un-publicised Sinn Fein real policies.
If Sinn Fein want to rule my country ... do it. But expect huge and persistent opposition from normal people.

Muahahaha

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It isn't FG housing policy that's stopping people from owning their own home, it's slow supply and high demand. And that is a problem that's isn't easily or quick to fix.

When FG took power in 2011 there was over 100,000 empty houses in the state. We've gone from that to nowhere near enough. Thats a failure of 9 years of FG housing policy, no point trying to spin it any other way

Scoondal

Eoin O'Brin .. 100,000 publicly built houses by the government. What a great guy. we don't even have that many bricks in the country.

Bill 2.0

Muahahaha wrote: »

When FG took power in 2011 there was over 100,000 empty houses in the state. We've gone from that to nowhere near enough. Thats a failure of 9 years of FG housing policy, no point trying to spin it any other way

Most of those houses are still there because Jacinta and her cloud of childer aren't willing to accept a free gaff that is further than a 10 minute free-travel-pass bus ride away from a town/city centre.


Working people are expected to buy and pay for property in the commuter belt so that they can spend 2 hours a day in traffic to pay their taxes so the "vulnerable" can live in high value city centre areas whilst they do **** all with their lives generation upon generation.

MrMusician18

Muahahaha wrote: »

When FG took power in 2011 there was over 100,000 empty houses in the state. We've gone from that to nowhere near enough. Thats a failure of 9 years of FG housing policy, no point trying to spin it any other way

You do know that the construction industry was a shadow of itself in 2011, compared to three four, years previous? You are also aware that the population has grown and that during the periods of recession there was hardly any property activity?

When you've a stalled market and an industry that's shipped itself abroad largely and Banks that weren't lending, you end up with no supply.

You can't simply magic up money or workers to build houses. And even if you could, is it a good idea to build social housing estates?

MrMusician18

Scoondal wrote: »

Eoin O'Brin .. 100,000 publicly built houses by the government. What a great guy. we don't even have that many bricks in the country.

I wonder where they are going to construct these deprived areas? Or SF heartlands as they'll likely end up calling them.

Muahahaha

MrMusician18 wrote: »

You do know that the construction industry was a shadow of itself in 2011, compared to three four, years previous? You are also aware that the population has grown and that during the periods of recession there was hardly any property activity?

When you've a stalled market and an industry that's shipped itself abroad largely and Banks that weren't lending, you end up with no supply.

You can't simply magic up money or workers to build houses. And even if you could, is it a good idea to build social housing estates?

FG like FF before them left their entire housing policy to the market and what we have now is a result of that disastrous ideological policy. Read the article posted by Yurt above, even the Tories have realised that allowing buy to let landlords free reign completely distorts the market. Thats were govt. are supposed to step and regulate activity, they didnt and now a couple in their 30s both on the average wage cannot afford average priced houses. The sum of FG housing policy was to get the bank of Mam and Dad to make up that shortfall, just like Leo himself did. Well for some but not everyone has wealthy parents to throw them 100k.

Bill 2.0

Muahahaha wrote: »

FG like FF before them left their entire housing policy to the market and what we have now is a result of that disastrous ideological policy. Read the article posted by Yurt above, even the Tories have realised that allowing buy to let landlords free reign completely distorts the market. Thats were govt. are supposed to step and regulate activity, they didnt and now a couple in their 30s both on the average wage cannot afford average priced houses. The sum of FG housing policy was to get the bank of Mam and Dad to make up that shortfall, just like Leo himself did. Well for some but not everyone has wealthy parents to throw them 100k.

The average house price in Ireland is 235k so if you are looking for 100k from your parents then you are doing something wrong.


Your deposit isn't supposed to be nearly half the price of the gaff.

MrMusician18

Muahahaha wrote: »

FG like FF before them left their entire housing policy to the market and what we have now is a result of that disastrous ideological policy. Read the article posted by Yurt above, even the Tories have realised that allowing buy to let landlords free reign completely distorts the market. Thats were govt. are supposed to step and regulate activity, they didnt and now a couple in their 30s both on the average wage cannot afford average priced houses. The sum of FG housing policy was to get the bank of Mam and Dad to make up that shortfall, just like Leo himself did. Well for some but not everyone has wealthy parents to throw them 100k.

They can't afford an average priced house because demand exceeds supply. Buy to let investors are not demolishing homes so that are still in the market. If you hadn't them participating in the market, rents would be even higher.

It's a very slow process to get it corrected.

I sometimes get the impression that the real issue is one to do with expectation. Someone on the average wage shouldn't be expecting to have their pick of houses in whatever area they want to live in. That's not the way the world works, however such childish understanding of the world is rampant

ygolometsipe

Maybe this is an over simplification but is the housing problem really that hard.

1) setup a dedicated housing building body DHB with compulsory purchase order powers and planning powers.
2) the average build cost is 200k-300k. A bank will make a return of about 4% over 20-30 years so why cant the goverment do the same. Take a hit of 50% of the upfront cost now but reap the interest payment later.
3) the goverment can issue special bonds to pay for the houses with mortgage interest repayments used to pay off the coupon later.
4) build up
5) if necessary, add construction costs to nama debt

Can't believe we just can't build more houses and apartments it baffles the mind. Theirs tonnes of space in cities it's just shocking badly used.

My only conclusion that things like this are not done is because FFG are protecting the wealth inherent in houses when supply is tight and the yield generated from leaching off renters.

I would not be surprised if the vulture funds have some legal under the counter guarantee from the crash time panic to get people to buy from NAMA that yields will be "maintained".

MrMusician18

ygolometsipe wrote: »

Maybe this is an over simplification but is the housing problem really that hard.

1) setup a dedicated housing building body DHB with compulsory purchase order powers and planning powers.
2) the average build cost is 200k-300k. A bank will make a return of about 4% over 20-30 years so why cant the goverment do the same. Take a hit of 50% of the upfront cost now but reap the interest payment later.
3) the goverment can issue special bonds to pay for the houses with mortgage interest repayments used to pay off the coupon later.
4) build up
5) if necessary, add construction costs to nama debt

Can't believe we just can't build more houses and apartments it baffles the mind. Theirs tonnes of space in cities it's just shocking badly used.

My only conclusion that things like this are not done is because FFG are protecting the wealth inherent in houses when supply is tight and the yield generated from leaching off renters.

I would not be surprised if the vulture funds have some legal under the counter guarantee from the crash time panic to get people to buy from NAMA that yields will be "maintained".

All that borrowing would be included in the national debt.

I'm not sure CPO for social Houston would be constitutional. Unlike a road, which can really only go in one place - housing can really go anywhere.

Add in the lack of workers to do this and you see why your simple solution isn't effective.
If there was a silver bullet, it would've been done already. FG haven't sat and watched their support collapse over protecting a few vested interests

ygolometsipe

MrMusician18 wrote: »

All that borrowing would be included in the national debt.

I'm not sure CPO for social Houston would be constitutional. Unlike a road, which can really only go in one place - housing can really go anywhere.

Add in the lack of workers to do this and you see why your simple solution isn't effective.
If there was a silver bullet, it would've been done already. FG haven't sat and watched their support collapse over protecting a few vested interests

I don't like the idea of CPO of housing either or adding to national debt but it could be a one time thing until 100k houses are built. To alieviate the pressure.
Sites could be selected on standatised fair criteria i.e large sites, close to public transport e.t.c.
It really would only increase the national debt if a bonds issue was unsuccessful.
Also it's only debt until the repayment interest covers the initial upfront cost. Then it's profit generating.

Padre_Pio

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I sometimes get the impression that the real issue is one to do with expectation. Someone on the average wage shouldn't be expecting to have their pick of houses in whatever area they want to live in. That's not the way the world works, however such childish understanding of the world is rampant

While I agree with this sentiment, there is not an even spread of houses that would cater for people on different incomes.

Firstly, the majority of new builds are 3 or 4 bed semi-ds. Hardly any apartments or single bed houses are built.

Secondly, there's a huge compression of houses in the 250-350k bracket. The good, the bad and the ugly are all there. You would expect fixer uppers in the 150-250k, but they're just not there. Land and planning permission is worth so much of the asking price.

Out housing market is broken, simple as.

ygolometsipe

I just checked and CPOs for housing is already legal as far as I can tell.

https://www.mhc.ie/latest/insights/planning-update-compulsory-purchase-orders-and-local-authorities

Yurt2

Scoondal wrote: »

The citizens have clearly voted Fine Gael out of government. But with 36 or more seats they are now THE opposition. I am going to join Fine Gael if SF becomes Taoiseach. Politically, I am a social democrat. But we need to stand against the un-publicised Sinn Fein real policies.
If Sinn Fein want to rule my country ... do it. But expect huge and persistent opposition from normal people.

If you're a social democrat then join a social democratic party - you have the Greens, Labour who are broadly social democratic, and the SDs to choose from. Joining a Tory-boy party when you are centre-left because you are again' SF (and who are mostly centre-left) makes very little sense.

bilbot79

Funnily enough if SF had been elected during the crash we probably wouldn't have a housing crisis. Bondholders would have been burnt and homeowners and landlords made destitute while house prices would have floored low instead of rising to artificial prices by Michael Noonan deliberately constraining supply. The financial forest fire would have made us healthier in the long run and everybody could then afford a house.

I remember being willing to vote SF then because their ideas were actually sound or go Icelandic, take the pain and reap the benefit later however now that we went on the 'raise our house prices to get people out of negative equity' path I can only see them making an absolute hash of it. They don't have the competence to steer a normal country and their voter base don't have a notion.

I would say for them to build 100000 houses we'll get left with 100000 sub par shells of shoddy workmanship, replete with pyrite and the like.

FG did alright with what they were given.

handlemaster

This is going to car crash government if SF are in it. The promises and ideology doesn't fit with modern ireland. But it is what people voted for just like the people voted for Brexit..

frillyleaf

tabby aspreme wrote: »

When Varadker was questioned on this he give a very misleading answer of under 2%, which is statistically true, but in real terms it's closer to 40%, which he admitted, when pulled up over it , when a cuckoo fund / REIT, purchase a scheme of houses or apartments, irrespective of how many houses are in the scheme , it is recorded as 1 purchase the same as a couple buying a single house.
Coveney wasn't invited to the Bilderberg conference for nothing.

That is just typical of how things are concealed. It’s similar to how Murphy claims X amount of social houses came onto the market when being asked how many were built. They are mainly new tenancies with Hap hence squeezing market further!

frillyleaf

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The houses are still being built, it's not as if these investors are stepping in and demolishing them. In fact when investors buy them they add supply to the rental market.

When someone is selling something, they are free to sell it to whomever they want at whatever price they want. Unless we propose changing our constitution, there is nothing any government can do about it.

The trouble with this is the houses are being bought by cuckoo funds for profit when there are families trying to get onto housing market and can’t due to lack of supply. These cuckoo funds add to the rental market at extortionate rates eg €1500 per month for a two bed apartment - in a town not near city centre. This means it costs €18,000 just on rent. Three beds are as high as €2000 per month. Families can’t afford this type of rent.