Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

growleaves

Dav010 wrote: »

I doubt the point being made related solely to consumer prices, more to consumer consumption and the desire to have the latest issue.

Yes but the argument depends on ignoring the deflation of consumer prices relative to the past and relative to asset inflation.

Otherwise how can consumer consumption eat up a person's income to that extent? You have to believe that a normal person would take eight holidays in two years. It wouldn't be possible to hold down a job doing that.

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

Yes but the argument depends on ignoring the deflation of consumer prices relative to the past and relative to asset inflation.

Otherwise how can consumer consumption eat up a person's income to that extent? You have to believe that a normal person would take eight holidays in two years. It wouldn't be possible to hold down a job doing that.

You also have to accept that two expensive holidays may cost more than eight, and someone who changes yearly to the latest iPhone may cost more that a new, older model. So it is about consumption and frequency rather than the unit price falling.

Villa05

Dav010 wrote:

Source please.

National competitiveness council

growleaves

Dav010 wrote: »

You also have to accept that two expensive holidays may cost more than eight, and someone who changes yearly to the latest iPhone may cost more that a new, older model. So it is about consumption and frequency rather than the unit price falling.

It is possible for someone to throw all their money down a black hole, if they are foolish, incontinent and don't look for a good price. I'm sure there are people who do do this.

As a general phenomenon it has no explanatory power on a par with the supply curve and low interest rate fuelled asset inflation among other factors.

Mad_maxx

Villa05 wrote: »

That appears to be the general commentary on the topic, but when you scratch the surface, the fault lines are fairly stark

Firstly, in 2011 much of the required cuts were done all that was left were water charges. That didn't end well

The flagship government project was the children's hospital

The seeds for the recovery were sown by central banks by whatever it takes speech backed up by action. This period of low interest rates was the opportune time to get your house in order

Housing at affordable rates is key to competitiveness in an exporting nation. We started that period in a position of oversupply. The first warnings of a potential issue came in 2013/14 which closely coincided with extra unforseen extra revenue from corporation taxes.

Supply was suppressed through all developers being in Nama and extortionate 14% interest rates on development loans from state owned banks. Even today rates of 7% are quoted for funding for projects that have state guaranteed long term leases for construction projects. Alot of white collar leakage in the cost of building homes.
Couple this with ineffective expensive regulation of construction work when a fully functioning independent system at a fraction of the cost could have been copied from Northern Ireland. Again more white collar leakage

So in terms of housing and property massive opportunities lost to help the competitiveness of our economy

Again the domestic economy is held hostage by rents insurance and legal costs a situation underlined by 1 fg TD advising another in a legal capacity that a fall of a swing was someone else's fault. The scenario shows the level of entitlement and contempt they have for the people they represent.

These costs also crucify working parents with massive childcare costs further damaging competiveness

As for guiding the economy back to where it was. Be very careful what you wish for. House prices might be heading that way but the last time we had significant surplus each year plus the pension reserve fund. We are a long way from that luxury today

the international money markets had to be reassured that Ireland was rolling up its sleeves and getting stuck into our problems , the 2011 government provided enough assurance and our debt yields started dropping sharply from the time we exited the bailout , now granted the ECB buying up debt was a huge factor , however , had the likes of SF been the lead party , we would likely have been at Greek levels of yield on ten year debt

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

It is possible for someone to throw all their money down a black hole, if they are foolish, incontinent and don't look for a good price. I'm sure there are people who do do this.

As a general phenomenon it has no explanatory power on a par with the supply curve and low interest rate fuelled asset inflation among other factors.

Are you arguing that people who have similar pay and spend more on consumer items have the same disposable net income to save/pay a mortgage as those who spend less?

Villa05

Villa05 wrote: »

National competitiveness council

Link please.

growleaves

Dav010 wrote: »

Are you arguing that people who have similar pay and spend more on consumer items have the same disposable net income to save/pay a mortgage as those who spend less?

No, I'm just saying there is no large pool of people who aspire to own a home but squander all their money on consumer goods in lieu of saving imo.

Since people can attain clothes, cheap flights, phonecalls, food etc. at low prices, consumer consumption is only explanatory for individual people who would struggle to control their appetites under any circumstances.

You can't get car insurance cheaply but you do see legions of cyclists about the place.

fliball123

growleaves wrote: »

No, I'm just saying there is no large pool of people who aspire to own a home but squander all their money on consumer goods in lieu of saving imo.

Since people can attain clothes, cheap flights, phonecalls, food etc. at low prices, consumer consumption is only explanatory for individual people who would struggle to control their appetites under any circumstances.

You can't get car insurance cheaply but you do see legions of cyclists about the place.

As I pointed out have a look at the numbers for the following

Amount of holidays a year over the last decade
Amount of new phone purchases
Amount of new car purchases
Average age of marraige
Average age of having kids

All will point to people in their 20s and early 30s wanting to live a bit more bfore debts, kids and responsibility.

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

No, I'm just saying there is no large pool of people who aspire to own a home but squander all their money on consumer goods in lieu of saving imo.

Since people can attain clothes, cheap flights, phonecalls, food etc. at low prices, consumer consumption is only explanatory for individual people who would struggle to control their appetites under any circumstances.

You can't get car insurance cheaply but you do see legions of cyclists about the place.

Retail is based on enticing people to buy items they don’t need, even if they are cheaper now than a year ago. Personally I’ve never paid less for an iPhone than I previously, never paid less for the same model car, rarely pay less for takeaways/cafe fair than I did previously, in fact I’ve rarely noticed prices go down, but that’s just me.

SmokyMo

Mad_maxx wrote: »

however , had the likes of SF been the lead party , we would likely have been at Greek levels of yield on ten year debt

whats ifs, buts, etc.. nonsense.

growleaves

fliball123 wrote: »

As I pointed out have a look at the numbers for the following

Amount of holidays a year over the last decade
Amount of new phone purchases
Amount of new car purchases
Average age of marraige
Average age of having kids

All will point to people in their 20s and early 30s wanting to live a bit more bfore debts, kids and responsibility.

Taking the first list first, it doesn't prove what you think it does. One person might have got return flights to Lisbon for €20. Another paid €30 return to Barcelona.

People buy phones yes. They can get monthly plans for as little as €10 a month. Mine is €15 a month. That is very cheap.

Where is the indication that a large pool of people are buying multiples of each item and/or overpaying for these items?

To take the marriage and kids things, social mores have changed with the fade out of religion. Though in this country there was always a tradition of people marrying late.

The recession of last decade and more recent house price inflation are part of the delay in marrying and raising children.

Villa05

Mad_maxx wrote:

the international money markets had to be reassured that Ireland was rolling up its sleeves and getting stuck into our problems

Are we?
We are bringing housing back to where it was in 2007?
Where are we in comparison to 2007 with quango"s?
I read that we are the 2nd lowest in the eu for road fatalities. All good work from the Irish people, all the rewards for insurance companies

The more things change the more they stay the same

fliball123

growleaves wrote: »

Taking the first list first, it doesn't prove what you think it does. One person might have got return flights to Lisbon for €20. Another paid €30 return to Barcelona.

People buy phones yes. They can get monthly plans for as little as €10 a month. Mine is €15 a month. That is very cheap.

Where is the indication that a large pool of people are buying multiples of each item and/or overpaying for these items?

To take the marriage and kids things, social mores have changed with the fade out of religion. Though in this country there was always a tradition of people marrying late.

The recession of last decade and more recent house price inflation are part of the delay in marrying and raising children.

Sorry we are marrying later and later and having kids later and later as the years progress through both recession and through growth and the main reason is people want a bit of life a bit of freedom before the chains of kids, debts and responsibility tie you down for what could be 30 years+. I am not giving out about it, if I was doing it again I would be doing the same.

You only have to look at the direct flights from Dublin out to areas like Spain/Portugal and any other holiday resort area and the numbers that will show how our population (not just the younger cohort) value holidays as a necessity rather than a luxury. They have sailed through the roof over the last 3 decades. When your on holiday you tend to eat out every day , go on the beer every day when you in the 18-35 age group and you also have to stay somewhere so regardless of a cheap flight your spending cash.

Look at the latest and greatest iphone sales you wont get one of them for 15 a month not a chance.

Look not knocking them its hard to buy a house but this has always been the case.

growleaves

Dav010 wrote: »

Retail is based on enticing people to buy items they don’t need, even if they are cheaper now than a year ago. Personally I’ve never paid less for an iPhone than I previously, never paid less for the same model car, rarely pay less for takeaways/cafe fair than I did previously, in fact I’ve rarely noticed prices go down, but that’s just me.

Nobody perceives it because you have to adjust for inflation (and currency because we changed currency in 2002.)

If you are paying €10 a month phone plan, change that to punts and adjust for inflation to say 1987. Then take minute per call in that year and divide it into the equivalent of €10 now.

Flight prices need no explanation due to the Ryanair phenomenon as the price drop there was so dramatic.

Textiles and clothes left places like Derry (leaving unemployment in their wake) to go to sweatshops in Bangledesh. The savings in production cost arbitrage were passed on to the consumer. €10 for a shirt in H&M or Pennys.

Food prices are arbitraged by in-sourcing labour, or else the costs are cut by large corporate farms producing at bulk on razor-thin profit margins. Adjust for inflation and compare to food prices in the past.

Etc., etc.

C14N

fliball123 wrote: »

As I pointed out have a look at the numbers for the following

Amount of holidays a year over the last decade
Amount of new phone purchases
Amount of new car purchases
Average age of marraige
Average age of having kids

All will point to people in their 20s and early 30s wanting to live a bit more bfore debts, kids and responsibility.

People always bring these kinds of things up, and to some extent it is true that people wait longer to start "settling down" than their parents generation, but I really don't buy consumption having much to do with being able to afford housing. The things that usually get brought up (holidays, avocado toast, new phones) tend to pale in comparison to what you need to get a house, especially if you're on a single income.

I'm sure people in their 20s go abroad more now than in the 90s, but it's also much cheaper to do so now (excluding the 2020-2021 restricted market being what it is). If people were buying new cars regularly like you say, then I'd probably agree, but even having a relatively well-off social circle, I don't know a person under 35 who has ever bought a car new, and second-hand ones are not bought often either.

fliball123

C14N wrote: »

People always bring these kinds of things up, and to some extent it is true that people wait longer to start "settling down" than their parents generation, but I really don't buy consumption having much to do with being able to afford housing. The things that usually get brought up (holidays, avocado toast, new phones) tend to pale in comparison to what you need to get a house, especially if you're on a single income.

I'm sure people in their 20s go abroad more now than in the 90s, but it's also much cheaper to do so now (excluding the 2020-2021 restricted market being what it is). If people were buying new cars regularly like you say, then I'd probably agree, but even having a relatively well-off social circle, I don't know a person under 35 who has ever bought a car new, and second-hand ones are not bought often either.

Maybe the flights are cheaper but what you spend on accommodation and food is not cheap. It does have a big sway in people being able to afford somewhere to live. People would forgo nights out, holidays, new cars, new phones or other gadgets to get onto the ladder.

I know lots of people under 35 buying new cars or upgrading their current car to a new model.

Look it is hard to buy a house as it has always been

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

Nobody perceives it because you have to adjust for inflation (and currency because we changed currency in 2002.)

If you are paying €10 a month phone plan, change that to punts and adjust for inflation to say 1987. Then take minute per call in that year and divide it into the equivalent of €10 now.

Flight prices need no explanation due to the Ryanair phenomenon as the price drop there was so dramatic.

Textiles and clothes left places like Derry (leaving unemployment in their wake) to go to sweatshops in Bangledesh. The savings in production cost arbitrage were passed on to the consumer. €10 for a shirt in H&M or Pennys.

Food prices are arbitraged by in-sourcing labour, or else the costs are cut by large corporate farms producing at bulk on razor-thin profit margins. Adjust for inflation and compare to food prices in the past.

Etc., etc.

None of which makes a difference if the consideration is binary, whether you spent the money on a luxury item, or saved it for a deposit/mortgage.

growleaves

fliball123 wrote: »

Maybe the flights are cheaper but what you spend on accommodation and food is not cheap. It does have a big sway in people being able to afford somewhere to live. People would forgo nights out, holidays, new cars, new phones or other gadgets to get onto the ladder.

I know lots of people under 35 buying new cars or upgrading their current car to a new model.

Look it is hard to buy a house as it has always been

Hmm I do think you have valid points. A person who makes more sacrifices will have a better chance for sure. The very cheapness of, and emphasis on, consumerism has weakened the impulse towards self-denial.

However I think the way it is presented in the media is very glib and confuses people. If there were a way to measure consumer spending as and against asset inflation I'm sure the latter would outstrip the former.

A person who does make a lot of self-sacrifices and is still locked out of the housing market is going to feel a sense of futility.

growleaves

Dav010 wrote: »

None of which makes a difference if the consideration is binary, whether you spent the money on a luxury item, or saved it for a deposit/mortgage.

True. But the implication is that the money wasted on cheap purchases can or will amount to significant savings towards property. That is hard to know but when you see 20% jumps in rent and house prices my instinct says the gap is too wide.

fliball123

growleaves wrote: »

Hmm I do think you have valid points. A person who makes more sacrifices will have a better chance for sure. The very cheapness of, and emphasis on, consumerism has weakened the impulse towards self-denial.

However I think the way it is presented in the media is very glib and confuses people. If there were a way to measure consumer spending as and against asset inflation I'm sure the latter would outstrip the former.

A person who does make a lot of self-sacrifices and is still locked out of the housing market is going to feel a sense of futility.

I agree but there was always a cohort of people who were locked out of the market through the years, its just the spotlight was not as focused as it is now. People would move further a field or emigrate. These 2 options are still there.

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

True. But the implication is that the money wasted on cheap purchases can or will amount to significant savings towards property. That is hard to know but when you see 20% jumps in rent and house prices my instinct says the gap is too wide.

I suspect there is a significant proportion of the population who have noticed an increase in savings as a result of not spending on luxuries over the past 15 months. Certainly CB reports have noted an increase in savings in accounts.

What you are failing to grasp is the comparison between those who do waste their money, and those who do not. It would seem obvious to most that those who do not, can save more. You also have to factor in timeframe and the cost of the property being bought/amount of deposit needed. To be honest, I’m struggling to see how anyone could argue that those who save more don’t have a better chance of reaching their deposit threshold.

growleaves

Dav010 wrote: »

What you are failing to grasp is the comparison between those who do waste their money, and those who do not. It would seem obvious to most that those who do not, can save more. You also have to factor in timeframe and the cost of the property being bought/amount of deposit needed. To be honest, I’m struggling to see how anyone could argue that those who save more don’t have a better chance of reaching their deposit threshold.

Nah I'm not failing to grasp it, you're just speaking past me now. Yes of course people who save more have a better chance of meeting their deposit threshold.

However if asset inflation and restricted supply continue to widen that threshold many multiples of what the average person earns then cutting back on the lattes becomes an irrelevance.

The (media) focus on personal spending on cheap consumer items as and against major macroeonomic distortions paints a misleading picture imo.

growleaves

I suspect there is a significant proportion of the population who have noticed an increase in savings as a result of not spending on luxuries over the past 15 months.

If you accept the redefinition of almost every aspect of life as a luxury then yes.

Absent lockdowns few would live a totally Spartan existence never going to a wedding, never spending on petrol to drive out to see other people etc.

C14N

fliball123 wrote: »

Maybe the flights are cheaper but what you spend on accommodation and food is not cheap. It does have a big sway in people being able to afford somewhere to live. People would forgo nights out, holidays, new cars, new phones or other gadgets to get onto the ladder.

I know lots of people under 35 buying new cars or upgrading their current car to a new model.

Look it is hard to buy a house as it has always been

Even the accomodation has gotten cheaper too. It's very easy to get good deals with online comparisons and sites like Air BnB, especially if you share with some friends. Most European countries have restaurants and drinks much cheaper than you can get in Dublin. Before the lockdown, I went on holidays regularly enough, but they were always reasonably priced, and had I skipped all and saved the money I wouldn't be in that different a position than I am now. I have enough for a deposit, so if I gave up all my short holidays, an extra €2000-3000 in the pocket from over the years wouldn't really give me much more buying power.

You can say it's always been hard to buy a house, but the reality is that they are harder to buy now than they used to be. They just cost more now relative to median salaries than they used to, and rules around salaries mean that there's a hard ceiling on how much you can really spend. When my parents bought their first house in Dublin (at roughly my age), the value was just 2x their combined salary, and that was for a 115sqm new-build semi-D. That just doesn't happen now, no matter how austere a lifestyle you live.

To some extent, that is down to Ireland being a victim of its own success. The country in general is better-off now than in the 80s/90s and has more opportunities. Fewer young people are emigrating permenantly to find work, and more young people and families are immigrating here to find work instead, especially in Dublin. We have more people, concentrated even more in urban areas, and haven't had more housing to keep up with it.

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

Nah I'm not failing to grasp it, you're just speaking past me now. Yes of course people who save more have a better chance of meeting their deposit threshold.

However if asset inflation and restricted supply continue to widen that threshold many multiples of what the average person earns then cutting back on the lattes becomes an irrelevance.

The (media) focus on personal spending on cheap consumer items as and against major macroeonomic distortions paints a misleading picture imo.

Again, it is not simply lattes, that is just the media soundbite you are using to make a point. Not all consumer items are cheap, not all are just occasional purchases, and not all properties require €60k deposits. The more you save, the better chance you have of reaching to deposit threshold. Some will argue that denying yourself luxuries is not living, others consider spending on luxuries as a barrier to achieving their goal to own a house, somewhere in between may be the norm. But arguing that spending more/saving less helps you buy a house, seems at odds with economic principles.

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

If you accept the redefinition of almost every aspect of life as a luxury then yes.

Absent lockdowns few would live a totally Spartan existence never going to a wedding, never spending on petrol to drive out to see other people etc.

I posted that to illustrate to you that cutting out luxuries can lead to significant increases in savings. I am not advocating a Spartan lifestyle, and yet for some that is what they do to save for a home. Lockdown did not redefine every aspect of life, but certainly it affected the purchase of the luxuries we treated ourselves to.

Eclectic Econometrics

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

You dug around the previous page of this thread you mean!

LOL. No, I didn't realize it had been posted already.

growleaves

Dav010 wrote: »

Again, it is not simply lattes, that is just the media soundbite you are using to make a point. Not all consumer items are cheap, not all are just occasional purchases, and not all properties require €60k deposits. The more you save, the better chance you have of reaching to deposit threshold. Some will argue that denying yourself luxuries is not living, others consider spending on luxuries as a barrier to achieving their goal to own a house, somewhere in between may be the norm. But arguing that spending more/saving less helps you buy a house, seems at odds with economic principles.

I used a shorthand in that post yeah but the real examples I gave were phone charges, flights, textiles and food prices. I'm not just banging on about avocados or whatever.

Lockdowns were unique. I don't consider getting married a luxury for instance.

You could define anything apart from bread, water, clothing, shelter and heating (only in wintertime) as luxuries since these are all that is needed for technical survival.

I'm saying that macroeconomic factors that push out the demand curve on housing should be the main focus for anyone who is genuinely trying to understand what is happening. I don't believe this is a crisis of squandered disposable income in general.

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

If you accept the redefinition of almost every aspect of life as a luxury then yes.

Absent lockdowns few would live a totally Spartan existence never going to a wedding, never spending on petrol to drive out to see other people etc.

I saved a lot more during the past year. At least 50% more than before.

Ace2007

Deleted User wrote: »

I saved a lot more during the past year. At least 50% more than before.

Exactly, a lot of people have realized how much money they wasted when working in an office, and eating out, be in the coffees or whatever. It all adds up.
Does it make a big difference? Probably not - but if you need an extra 10/20k to buy a house that you want - sacrificing stuff for a couple of years might be what gets you over the line.

C14N

growleaves wrote: »

I used a shorthand in that post yeah but the real examples I gave were phone charges, flights, textiles and food prices. I'm not just banging on about avocados or whatever.

Lockdowns were unique. I don't consider getting married a luxury for instance.

It really shouldn't be, but from what I know from couples who are getting married, it's increasingly being priced like one. If you want to have even a small wedding reception in some kind of a venue, prices generally seem to be going for at least €20k, which is an insane sum of money. I'd be years saving for that. Just like housing, inflation on wedding costs seems to have outpaced inflation on most luxuries.

Ace2007

C14N wrote: »

It really shouldn't be, but from what I know from couples who are getting married, it's increasingly being priced like one. If you want to have even a small wedding reception in some kind of a venue, prices generally seem to be going for at least €20k, which is an insane sum of money. I'd be years saving for that. Just like housing, inflation on wedding costs seems to have outpaced inflation on most luxuries.

What's your definition of small wedding? and what type of venue are you looking at. You can literally pick your price point - from 40 quid a head to 300 quid a head in different venues - Just like buying a house - you can buy cheap or buy dear.

PommieBast

Dav010 wrote: »

Again, why would you take the seller’s word on something as important as the searches solicitors conduct on behalf of the buyer? The cost of the searches is minuscule in proportion to the value of the property you are buying.

The costs add up when you have to go round the loop multiple times. I think it is pretty damning of the whole sector that people have to assume EAs are outright crooks, who will inevitably "forget" some critical detail until after you've wasted a grand or two on surveyors and solicitors.

jill_valentine

growleaves wrote: »

Hmm I do think you have valid points. A person who makes more sacrifices will have a better chance for sure. The very cheapness of, and emphasis on, consumerism has weakened the impulse towards self-denial.

However I think the way it is presented in the media is very glib and confuses people. If there were a way to measure consumer spending as and against asset inflation I'm sure the latter would outstrip the former.

A person who does make a lot of self-sacrifices and is still locked out of the housing market is going to feel a sense of futility.

I think the correlation and causation is more complicated than people often want to grant. In Korea they call it f*ck it money, when asset ownership is so implausibly beyond reach that saving is pointless, so they spend it on something frivolous they can at least enjoy now.

I think we're there, pretty much. I've been saving forever and I find myself frequently a bit sorry I did. Just a waste of time and experiences I missed out on and a lot of skimping and hard work, for nothing. I'm really no closer to buying anything than if I'd just lived it up all those years instead. Might as well have had the coffees, the avocados, the gigs, the holidays, at least I'd have had some memories to show for it. Meanwhile the whole deposit I spend all that time pulling together is only the difference between asking price and winning bid now.

I'd feel stupid advising my younger brother to do the same as I did at this stage. Save all through the best years of his life, for what? He'll end up living the same lifestyle when he has pay rent with his pension anyway. Why start now?

Underground

jill_valentine wrote: »

I think the correlation and causation is more complicated than people often want to grant. In Korea they call it f*ck it money, when asset ownership is so implausibly beyond reach that saving is pointless, so they spend it on something frivolous they can at least enjoy now.

I think we're there, pretty much. I've been saving forever and I find myself frequently a bit sorry I did. Just a waste of time and experiences I missed out on and a lot of skimping and hard work, for nothing. I'm really no closer to buying anything than if I'd just lived it up all those years instead. Might as well have had the coffees, the avocados, the gigs, the holidays, at least I'd have had some memories to show for it. Meanwhile the whole deposit I spend all that time pulling together is only the difference between asking price and winning bid now.

I'd feel stupid advising my younger brother to do the same as I did at this stage. Save all through the best years of his life, for what? He'll end up living the same lifestyle when he has pay rent with his pension anyway. Why start now?

Yeah I see a lot of myself here. I'm 30 and living at home with the folks. When I was 19 I dropped out of college. I went back at 20, got a degree, a masters, some professional qualifications and am on a pretty okay salary now for someone my age and have been saving upwards of 50% of it per month for years now.

More and more these days I find myself thinking, what if I didn't go back to college that time and just coasted through life working a sh*t retail job and spending every cent I made on nights out at the weekend, where would I be now? Answer : exactly where I am now despite having gone through the stress of exam after exam after exam and squirreling away money like mad, stuck living at home with my folks with no sight of that changing anytime soon.

The house deposit is there saved but at the rate prices are increasing it's just losing real value on a weekly basis at this stage. Just feels absolutely pointless.

Underground

Underground wrote: »

Yeah I see a lot of myself here. I'm 30 and living at home with the folks. When I was 19 I dropped out of college. I went back at 20, got a degree, a masters, some professional qualifications and am on a pretty okay salary now for someone my age and have been saving upwards of 50% of it per month for years now.

More and more these days I find myself thinking, what if I didn't go back to college that time and just coasted through life working a sh*t retail job and spending every cent I made on nights out at the weekend, where would I be now? Answer : exactly where I am now despite having gone through the stress of exam after exam after exam and squirreling away money like mad, stuck living at home with my folks with no sight of that changing anytime soon.

The house deposit is there saved but at the rate prices are increasing it's just losing real value on a weekly basis at this stage. Just feels absolutely pointless.

The best investment is children and education
You are on right way
Your time simply didnt came.
Keep saving
Many of us who did not have mummy and daddy financial support are on same boat.
I was enjoying reading your comment.You did hard but right job.Well done !

Amadan Dubh

The above three posts with their likes are quite telling. I've not seen 7 likes in a post in this thread let alone 16. The silent majority of educated, honorable, responsible, disconnected younger people? Likely.

It's been set out in various forms but it comes back to the whole argument about buying into the system, having a stake in society etc. David McWilliams touches on this in one or two podcasts but i feel his medium maybe leads to it getting overlooked. He is spot on IMO and perhaps the volume and medium of the podcast distill the value of this message but it is existential for those impacted negatively. Is there a mainstream voice or even a relatable persona to reflect the disconnection, frustration etc at the situation? Probably not.

Then we have brutally honest, real world posts that appear in this forum that speak from more than the person but are representative of a group of people or even a generation. This is the voice that cannot be easily reflected in financial accounts, that cannot be measured in GDP or anything like that, that wants to buy into the system, that wants a stake in society and isn't looking for something for nothing.

I am a serial poster and often get caught up in hyperbole or post excessively but I share the sentiment 100%. I'm glad to see posts like these and am bolstered in my views that others are equally or more frustrated at the whole thing. Here is a photo of me commuting home today, it is a beautiful city with a great people who have made me feel so welcome and glad to be Irish and part of this community, albeit a disconnected and frustrated community.

Please post these honest and direct accounts more, they are being heard.

Mad_maxx

Underground wrote: »

Yeah I see a lot of myself here. I'm 30 and living at home with the folks. When I was 19 I dropped out of college. I went back at 20, got a degree, a masters, some professional qualifications and am on a pretty okay salary now for someone my age and have been saving upwards of 50% of it per month for years now.

More and more these days I find myself thinking, what if I didn't go back to college that time and just coasted through life working a sh*t retail job and spending every cent I made on nights out at the weekend, where would I be now? Answer : exactly where I am now despite having gone through the stress of exam after exam after exam and squirreling away money like mad, stuck living at home with my folks with no sight of that changing anytime soon.

The house deposit is there saved but at the rate prices are increasing it's just losing real value on a weekly basis at this stage. Just feels absolutely pointless.

when people like you who " did the responsible thing " feel disenfranchised , thats dangerous

Beigepaint

fliball123 wrote: »

I know lots of people under 35 buying new cars or upgrading their current car to a new model.

We see this talk over and over in this thread.

Even if you know some (or many!) middle class thirty somethings that enviably burn through money on conspicuous consumption, it still is within the range of behaviour drawn by the data.

It does not, however, contradict the trend where phones, holidays, cars are cheaper than ever and houses relatively very expensive.

It is however some fun anecdotal evidence and ideal fodder for winding up your nieces and nephews because they hit life milestones like houses and kids five to ten years older than you did.

We see this again and again in this thread, and really it’s just avocado toast in disguise.

Beigepaint

Beigepaint wrote: »

It does not, however, contradict the trend where phones, holidays, cars are cheaper than ever and houses relatively very expensive.

Which phones/cars/holidays are cheaper then they were? I ask this as I’ve just changed my iPhone, same model new car, and never paid less for a holiday in the same place as I have previously.

MacronvFrugals

I’d be fairly similar to the above posters.

Mid twenties on fairly good money around 65k after on-call is taking into account, I know I’m extremely lucky but have given up countless weekends studying and adding additional certifications on top of my degree from 19 until now that helped with these promotions.

Spending wise, I have an old iPhone, use Gomo which gives me calls,texts and internet for 9.99 per month, Apple Music a 10er and the odd takeaway.


Iv roughly 70k saved up from living like a pure hermit with my folks, I cycle so no car and save about 80% of my wages after bike to work, health insurance and pension contributions are removed.


I sometimes regret not living a bit more tbh, especially after getting overbid by investors for 2 gaffs(Finglas) and four 2 bed apartments(on the LUAS line(around D8 and D18)


It’s probably good most young people don’t live like me otherwise the economy would fall off a cliff from lack of consumption!

Ace2007

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

The above two posts with their likes are quite telling. I've not seen 7 likes in a post in this thread let alone 16. The silent majority of educated, honorable, responsible, disconnected younger people? Likely.

[/IMG]

Should anybody have the right to buy a property in the area of the country that they want to - be in Dundrum, Drumcondra, Dun Laoghaire, Dingle or Dundalk?

The situation right now is that many could afford to live in Dingle or Dundalk if they wanted to, but many more would prefer to live in Dundrum or Drumcondra and hence house prices in these areas are going through the roof.

There are many areas of Dublin that house prices are reasonable (in comparison to other areas), but people won't live in buy houses in them, be in a social stigma, the amount of work involved, they don't have the luxury kitchen's etc or a rake of other reasons related to family and friends.

You look back 40 years ago and many people have to leave their home counties in the countryside because there was no work, they had no choice. Fast forward 40 years and we have people talking about emigrating because they can't afford a house in Dublin, but yet if they moved 100 miles outside of Dublin they could probably get exactly what they want.

Ace2007

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

I’d be fairly similar to the above posters.

Mid twenties on fairly good money around 65k after on-call is taking into account, I know I’m extremely lucky but have given up countless weekends studying and adding additional certifications on top of my degree from 19 until now that helped with these promotions.

Spending wise, I have an old iPhone, use Gomo which gives me calls,texts and internet for 9.99 per month, Apple Music a 10er and the odd takeaway.


Iv roughly 70k saved up from living like a pure hermit with my folks, I cycle so no car and save about 80% of my wages after bike to work, health insurance and pension contributions are removed.


I sometimes regret not living a bit more tbh, especially after getting overbid by investors for 2 gaffs(Finglas) and four 2 bed apartments(on the LUAS line(around D8 and D18)


It’s probably good most young people don’t live like me otherwise the economy would fall off a cliff from lack of consumption!

So you can basically afford anything up to 300k max?

2 bed, 2 bath in Northwood Santry at 275k: https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/272-parklands-northwood-santry-dublin-9-d09ay89/4492175

3 bed apt in heart of city
https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/apt-27-52-mountjoy-square-mountjoy-square-dublin-1/4488746

As for outside of Dublin, well 300k would go a long way...

AlmightyCushion

Dav010 wrote: »

Which phones/cars/holidays are cheaper then they were? I ask this as I’ve just changed my iPhone, same model new car, and never paid less for a holiday in the same place as I have previously.

A €200 phone is much, much better than a €200 phone was 10 years ago and will last much longer before being too slow as a result. Higher end phones have gotten more expensive but budget phones have gotten much better. Second hand cars are much better, nicer, more reliable, and look less dated than the second hand cars I remember when I was a kid.

Regardless, none of this really matters. Yes, there are people in their 20s and 30s that are wasting loads of money on luxuries like new cars every 3 years and a brand new €1,000+ phones every year but equally there are lots of people in their 20s and 30s who aren't wasting every cent they earn and are saving. Lots of those people are still not able to buy because prices are so high.

Ace2007

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

A €200 phone is much, much better than a €200 phone was 10 years ago and will last much longer before being too slow as a result. Higher end phones have gotten more expensive but budget phones have gotten much better. Second hand cars are much better, nicer, more reliable, and look less dated than the second hand cars I remember when I was a kid.

Regardless, none of this really matters. Yes, there are people in their 20s and 30s that are wasting loads of money on luxuries like new cars every 3 years and a brand new €1,000+ phones every year but equally there are lots of people in their 20s and 30s who aren't wasting every cent they earn and are saving. Lots of those people are still not able to buy because prices are so high.

You mean they aren't able to buy a house where they want to, because prices are so high???

Someone with 300k and struggling to buy a house is say Dublin, could easily buy a 4 bed house less than 1 hour from Dublin if they wanted and probably still have change left over.

Ace2007

Dav010 wrote: »

Which phones/cars/holidays are cheaper then they were? I ask this as I’ve just changed my iPhone, same model new car, and never paid less for a holiday in the same place as I have previously.

IF you bought an iphone 11 new when it first came out, and went to replace it with a brand new iphone 11 today, it would be cheaper today then when you bought it originally.

AlmightyCushion

Ace2007 wrote: »

So you can basically afford anything up to 300k max?

2 bed, 2 bath in Northwood Santry at 275k: https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/272-parklands-northwood-santry-dublin-9-d09ay89/4492175

3 bed apt in heart of city
https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/apt-27-52-mountjoy-square-mountjoy-square-dublin-1/4488746

As for outside of Dublin, well 300k would go a long way...

Northwood is a grand spot. Bit far outside the city centre for someone who has to commute to the south side though. If you work in the city centre or somewhere on the 41 bus line it is a grand spot. Mountjoy is cheap for a reason. I rent close enough to Mountjoy and it is a pretty bad area. I definitely wouldn't buy around there.

Those are asking prices. As we have seen properties are going for way about asking prices at the moment so those places will likely sell for a lot more.

Ace2007

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Northwood is a grand spot. Bit far outside the city centre for someone who has to commute to the south side though. If you work in the city centre or somewhere on the 41 bus line it is a grand spot. Mountjoy is cheap for a reason. I rent close enough to Mountjoy and it is a pretty bad area. I definitely wouldn't buy around there.

Those are asking prices. As we have seen properties are going for way about asking prices at the moment so those places will likely sell for a lot more.

Yea there is actually a decent amount of available in Northwood, the price may seem expensive but as you say it's one of the better areas around

https://www.myhome.ie/residential/dublin-9/apartment-for-sale-in-santry

There should be no reason why someone who can buy up to 300k can't get a 2/3 bed apartment in nice area. Does a 25/30 year single buyer need a 3/4 bedroom family house in Dublin?

growleaves

Mountjoy is cheap for a reason. I rent close enough to Mountjoy and it is a pretty bad area. I definitely wouldn't buy around there.

When I was working around the corner from Mountjoy on a construction site, we were being threatened with violence by locals because the company was Northern Irish (Protestant) owned. This was about three or four years ago.

No one wants to raise children where local drug gangs will try to sell to them or recruit them. Or where there is a lot of violence. Methadone clinics nearby also a no.

There are sometimes bargains to be found in areas which have a lingering social stigma which is no longer deserved.