FG to still just do nothing for the next 5 years - part 2

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

Has it? I recall yourself trying to divert with the same absolute nonsense alright.
What private developer/builder keeps a team of bricklayers, plumbers, carpenters and electricians on salary?
We would hire a developer to build. He would give a price, we would pay it. This would be the costs Blanch.
When you need a plumber, do you keep one on salary or hire when needed?
If you ask someone to build you a house they will either accept the job and give you a price, or they won't.

FG leprechaun economics at play
Maybe that's how FG do it, that would explain a lot.
The tender process requires a detailed costing of materials, labour etc., (I know not FG's strong point, see NCH).
If they factored in what profit they might get selling themselves they'd be told where to go.
The developer would give a price including his/her fee. Everybody gets paid, the state gets a house.

Back to our friend you keep mansplainin' for. He says:



What difference? Selling at profit is selling at profit once costs are covered.

Who is being forced to sell at below market price?

Chap thinks FF had nothing to do with the crash. Hitched your wagon to a dud Blanch.

The bit in bold I have highlighted is the key.

Your naive assumption is that the developer would give us a price which is the same as the cost to him of building the houses!!!!! It is farcical.

The developer would only build houses for the State if he is getting the same profit as if he sold them himself!!! Why else would he do it. Even your suggestion of a "fee" for the developer means the "fee" would equal his previous profit.

There is no saving, in fact your proposal would cost more, because there would inevitably be a whole group of civil servants employed to monitor the developer.

I have no problem with social housing being built in this way, it is just posts that think it can be done cheaper.

James Brown

Truthvader wrote: »

I give up. Either just too thick or running on the Francie principal of just repeating whatever comes into your head again and again in the belief that if you say it often enough it becomes true

Hey, if you got embarrassed and feel you need to runaway..
Sure come back another time and say I'm looking for a cheap house, that'll show me.

Geuze

blanch152 wrote: »

So the State puts out a tender. Developers respond to the tender. A developer will say, I can build a house myself for 200k and sell it for 250k making 50k profit for myself. So I will tender for the government to build houses for 250k because then I will get the same profit. That is how the system works. No developer would ever tender for 200k because they would make nothing for themselves. The only companies capable of responding to the tender are developers. Your proposal doesn't save a penny.

AFAIK, there is a developer's margin, and there is the builder's margin.

The development margin is to compensate for the risk.

Why can't the State contract directly with contractors?

So the development margin disappears, as the risk is now with the State?

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

The bit in bold I have highlighted is the key.

Your naive assumption is that the developer would give us a price which is the same as the cost to him of building the houses!!!!! It is farcical.

The developer would only build houses for the State if he is getting the same profit as if he sold them himself!!! Why else would he do it. Even your suggestion of a "fee" for the developer means the "fee" would equal his previous profit.

There is no saving, in fact your proposal would cost more, because there would inevitably be a whole group of civil servants employed to monitor the developer.

I have no problem with social housing being built in this way, it is just posts that think it can be done cheaper.

You missed:

The developer would give a price including his/her fee.

Japers Blanch, are you pretending to be this uninformed? I hope for your sake you are.
If a developer is building an estate, he'll still need pay everyone, taxes, himself. Does he have that money, can he get that loan, is he arsed?
A tender to build is a tender for paid work. You either accept it as such or you don't. No adult in the real world, (except maybe in FG land) will pay a developer to build and allow that developer include the amount of profit he/she might get if they were building to sell themselves. It does not happen. For it is lunacy.

Paying someone to build is cheaper than buying off market. That's a fact. You've been shown this. Especially so in larger numbers.
You are defying the laws of this reality to justify FG paying 25 year leases and buying to use as social.
If what you say is true, nobody would be building privately either. Complete spin and nonsense.

See here and here.

You've been told, again. No doubt you'll raise this nonsense again down the road claiming I was 'torn apart' :rolleyes:

tobsey

Geuze wrote: »

AFAIK, there is a developer's margin, and there is the builder's margin.

The development margin is to compensate for the risk.

Why can't the State contract directly with contractors?

So the development margin disappears, as the risk is now with the State?

Because the state doesn’t have employees with the knowledge and experience to work with contractors to manage the construction of a large scale house building project. That’s what developers bring. They are experienced at managing large projects. If it was simple to do everyone would be making millions as a property developer.

tobsey

Bowie wrote: »

You missed:



Japers Blanch, are you pretending to be this uninformed? I hope for your sake you are.
If a developer is building an estate, he'll still need pay everyone, taxes, himself. Does he have that money, can he get that loan, is he arsed?
A tender to build is a tender for paid work. You either accept it as such or you don't. No adult in the real world, (except maybe in FG land) will pay a developer to build and allow that developer include the amount of profit he/she might get if they were building to sell themselves. It does not happen. For it is lunacy.

Paying someone to build is cheaper than buying off market. That's a fact. You've been shown this. Especially so in larger numbers.
You are defying the laws of this reality to justify FG paying 25 year leases and buying to use as social.
If what you say is true, nobody would be building privately either. Complete spin and nonsense.

See here and here.

You've been told, again. No doubt you'll raise this nonsense again down the road claiming I was 'torn apart' :rolleyes:

The argument in the first article relies on using state land that was procured years ago at a cheaper price than that available today. If the state builds on land it has today then the real cost is the current value of the land, rather than what they paid for it. If you could sell the land today for 100k but build a house on it instead then that adds 100k to the cost of the house, even if you bought the land for 50k.

The second article is true. It would be better financially in the long term for the state to build instead of supplementing rent. However the state would have to borrow the capital today. We had just stopped borrowing for day to day costs before Covid hit and we have to borrow 30bn extra this year because of it.

Given the state has large public debt and a poor record of completing large construction projects on budget, do you really think it’s the right decision to borrow huge amounts more to build social housing? I don’t. Past experience of social housing shows that the costs are far more than construction costs, when further investment is needed in the long term due issues caused by high unemployment, low levels of education and higher crime rates.

satguy

What does it mean if the voters place your party in third place, and most of your big names scrape through on the 8th or 9th count. ?

Answer = Shut the F@@k UP,, and stay quiet for a while..

It MOST certainly does not mean, turn 38 Fianna Fáil TD's into your puppets and carry on running the country...


I can remember back to the old days when FF TD's had back bones.. What Happened ?

FrancieBrady

satguy wrote: »

I can remember back to the old days when FF TD's had back bones.. What Happened ?

They got rehabilitated by FG. I can see Michael creeping up the popularity ladder, he has been a steady hand so far - even if it pains me to say it. Chaos has reigned but he's holding on and looking far more dignified than Leo tbh.

satguy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They got rehabilitated by FG. I can see Michael creeping up the popularity ladder, he has been a steady hand so far - even if it pains me to say it. Chaos has reigned but he's holding on and looking far more dignified than Leo tbh.

Michael,, he looks like a rabbit caught in the spotlight...

Every morning he does 2 things when he wakes up..

1. Brush his teeth..
2. Practice saying yes ..

markodaly

Bowie wrote: »

If a developer is building an estate, he'll still need pay everyone, taxes, himself. Does he have that money, can he get that loan, is he arsed?
A tender to build is a tender for paid work. You either accept it as such or you don't.

Blanch is correct, we have been down this road many times with your fantasy economics and have been embarrassed and torn to shreds of small details and facts that you simply cannot back up or get away from.
Repeat the same incorrect statements does not make it true.

No adult in the real world, (except maybe in FG land) will pay a developer to build and allow that developer include the amount of profit he/she might get if they were building to sell themselves. It does not happen. For it is lunacy.

Of course it does.
Even for a one off build, do you think the contractors building the house are doing it for free?
What makes you think if a LA or the government tender a build out to a developer they will not do it for a profit? They will of course add their 8-10% to the price, which negates your entire point.

As has been repeated a thousand times to you, the only way really the government can build cheaper is using publicly owned land. Other than that there is really very little in the way of getting houses on the cheap.

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They got rehabilitated by FG. I can see Michael creeping up the popularity ladder, he has been a steady hand so far - even if it pains me to say it. Chaos has reigned but he's holding on and looking far more dignified than Leo tbh.

Interesting call, as the polls are showing the opposite, that MM is doing very badly, while Leo is excelling....

Ill bookmark this post anyway. :pac:

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Interesting call, as the polls are showing the opposite, that MM is doing very badly, while Leo is excelling....

Ill bookmark this post anyway. :pac:

Leo is in freefall...10points down. What wheeze will he come up with to arrest that. Cue some self aggrandising PR

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Leo is in freefall...10points down. What wheeze will he come up with to arrest that. Cue some self aggrandising PR

Why are you so obsessed with Leo Francie. Honest question.

In fact most SF types are obsessed with him.
Like here we are in another FG thread, dedicated to FG, even though we have FF and the Greens in Government, with FF being the bigger party and MM as Taoiseach. No threads on them.....

Yet, its Leo this, Leo that...

I said it before, but there is don't doubt there is a soft unconscious element of xenophobia and homophobia at play on social media and that noise can extend to boards.ie as well.

Its all a bit odd that some lads seem so obsessed with the guy.

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Why are you so obsessed with Leo Francie. Honest question.

In fact most SF types are obsessed with him.
Like here we are in another FG thread, dedicated to FG, even though we have FF and the Greens in Government, with FF being the bigger party and MM as Taoiseach. No threads on them.....

Yet, its Leo this, Leo that...

I said it before, but there is don't doubt there is a soft unconscious element of xenophobia and homophobia at play on social media and that noise can extend to boards.ie as well.

Its all a bit odd that some lads seem so obsessed with the guy.

I comment on the subject of the thread...FG. Leo leads FG.

*Yet again 'homphobia' is brought into the discussion by an avowed supporter of FG...have you guys a bit of a hang-up about Leo's sexual identity? It's 2020 lads, that stuff no longer matters to people who supported equality from the begining. Just saying.

tobsey

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They got rehabilitated by FG. I can see Michael creeping up the popularity ladder, he has been a steady hand so far - even if it pains me to say it. Chaos has reigned but he's holding on and looking far more dignified than Leo tbh.

I don’t think anyone, anywhere, has agreed with a word you’ve just said there. Nobody says FG did anything for FF, or that MM is performing better the LV. What you said there is a fantasy in your own head

FrancieBrady

tobsey wrote: »

I don’t think anyone, anywhere, has agreed with a word you’ve just said there. Nobody says FG did anything for FF, or that MM is performing better the LV. What you said there is a fantasy in your own head

FG rehabilitated or allowed the rehabilitation of FF because they need them. Otherwise they lose control of who is in power. And the power swap is all about holding on to power.
I'm not the fist to say that...where have you been?

I also never said anything about MM performing better. Try actually reading and understanding the posts made. You guys and the misrepresenting!

smurgen

FG getting fact checked again. Christ these lads are an embarrassment. No idea what's really going on. Just wear suits, parrot the party line and maybe just maybe you'll sound believable.

https://twitter.com/Aidan_Regan/status/1314517390986809344?s=19

christy c

smurgen wrote: »

FG getting fact checked again. Christ these lads are an embarrassment. No idea what's really going on. Just wear suits, parrot the party line and maybe just maybe you'll sound believable.

https://twitter.com/Aidan_Regan/status/1314517390986809344?s=19

And what are Ireland rates now? And what were they in the years gone by? Why the difference?

Amazing what the SF fans will swallow if it suits their agenda.

smurgen

christy c wrote: »

And what are Ireland rates now? And what were they in the years gone by? Why the difference?

Amazing what the SF fans will swallow if it suits their agenda.

Record rate cuts by the ECB. You have no idea how this works do you?

christy c

smurgen wrote: »

Record rate cuts by the ECB. You have no idea how this works do you?

Unable or unwilling to answer the three questions I asked, unsurprisingly. Typical BS.

Bishop of hope

christy c wrote: »

Unable or unwilling to answer the three questions I asked, unsurprisingly. Typical BS.

Smurge doesn't answer questions, just posts twitter snippets and asks questions.

smurgen

christy c wrote: »

Unable or unwilling to answer the three questions I asked, unsurprisingly. Typical BS.

The interest rates are due to the ECB. What part don't you understand? FG are taking credit for anything positive that happens under their watch. Thing that have nothing to do with them.

smurgen

Could be squeeky bum time for Simon "Covid18" Harris though. Looks like the deaths in the care homes is being looked into. All those unanswered calls emails and letters. The clown all but had his out of office on.

https://www.thejournal.ie/nursing-homes-inquiry-committee-5228750-Oct2020/

christy c

smurgen wrote: »

The interest rates are due to the ECB. What part don't you understand? FG are taking credit for anything positive that happens under their watch. Thing that have nothing to do with them.

I understand perfectly, seems you are posting tweets without looking beyond your nose.

Afraid to answer my questions because you will end up looking like an even bigger clown.

christy c

smurgen wrote: »

Could be squeeky bum time for Simon "Covid18" Harris though. Looks like the deaths in the care homes is being looked into. All those unanswered calls emails and letters. The clown all but had his out of office on.

https://www.thejournal.ie/nursing-homes-inquiry-committee-5228750-Oct2020/

You're on a roll this morning.

You calling someone a clown after saying Boris Johnson was making them look bad? It seems your lack of self awareness is only matched by your stupidity.

smurgen

christy c wrote: »

I understand perfectly, seems you are posting tweets without looking beyond your nose.

Afraid to answer my questions because you will end up looking like an even bigger clown.

You always do this stuff. Making up the avoidance of questions.i answered your question. You ignored. I suppose that's type of nonsense is necessary or to be expected if if you're of the limited intellectual capacity to think FG drive the European wide interest rates lol.

christy c

smurgen wrote: »

You always do this stuff. Making up the avoidance of questions.i answered your question. You ignored. I suppose that's type of nonsense is necessary or to be expected if if you're of the limited intellectual capacity to think FG drive the European wide interest rates lol.

I asked you three questions, which you have run away from. You even said you answered my question singular.

I dont think that FG drive EU wide rates, that's your imagination.

smurgen

christy c wrote: »

I asked you three questions, which you have run away from. You even said you answered my question singular.

I dont think that FG drive EU wide rates, that's your imagination.

So you're in agreement so? Neale Richmond made a stupid comment?

christy c

smurgen wrote: »

So you're in agreement so? Neale Richmond made a stupid comment?

Haha, how on earth could you possibly have thought we are in agreement?

As usual legging it from my questions

Bishop of hope

smurgen wrote: »

Could be squeeky bum time for Simon "Covid18" Harris though. Looks like the deaths in the care homes is being looked into. All those unanswered calls emails and letters. The clown all but had his out of office on.

https://www.thejournal.ie/nursing-homes-inquiry-committee-5228750-Oct2020/

Just more expenses for the lads these committee's.