Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The country is going well or disastrously depending on how you look at it

Options
1246711

Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I never said immigration had no effect. The whole premise is coming off the idea that SF will allow immigrants flow in and rush to house them affecting Irish citizens in a worse way than we already are as regards housing. If this is not your claim then we are not in disagreement.

    No. Your response to my statement that SF were pro-immigration created the "premise"that immigrant will flow in. Read back.. I get the feeling you don't reread your own posts after submitting them. And I have no idea whether we are in agreement or otherwise, because we're not arguing the point I made. We're still wrangling over your previous wording, with you jumping around slightly changing it each time.

    I don't see what's wrong with having immigrants come in on an as needed basis. That's pro immigration right? There are levels, yes. I would only be concerned if any party was suggesting a free for all, a policy that is so lenient it causes more problems. Of course.

    Again, we're back to the open borders idea, except you've reworded it. No. No. No. Not what I said or even came close to suggesting. Being pro-immigration when it involves being in favor of multiculturalism is not focused on having skilled labor enter the country. Anyway, any immigration that involved highly skilled labor wouldn't be likely to support SF, since they've marketed themselves as being for the working class... and their own desired initiatives for taxation would directly affect these skilled workers coming in from abroad. The focus remains with immigration from third world nations, where education is dubious, and skills aren't particularly suited for a first world nation. Instead, we're looking at low cost, low waged workers on temporary employment and likely to have difficulty affording any kind of comfortable lifestyle in an expensive country such as Ireland.

    Come on. You profess to know SF and you've sought to defend them here, but where is your understanding of who they seek support from?

    Again, I was originally speaking on the housing crisis. I didn't bring immigrants into the discussion. I don't agree that immigrants are a bigger problem than poor policy and relying on the private market. I don't believe SF will send the crisis into a further spiral by letting more foreigners in which seems to be your point?

    No, I did bring immigrants into the discussion, because they're relevant to the discussion. As for my point, you haven't got it so far, so I think I'll stop trying to make it....

    No. You described FF/FG/Green IMO. They are happy to sit back watch housing and health suffer. We've seen it.

    Meh. And you think SF are somehow different, in some vague way, from them. Yeah. I get it. I disagree.

    As far as the IRA, I accept SF's links. Every party has an unelected body of advisors who colour policy. I've no interest in getting into an IRA debate. They existed for a reason and signed up to peace. Every main party has a similar history AFAIC.

    History yes. The IRA are still very much within SFs present. You might accept their links, but I don't. I'm too old for their BS, and the endless excuses. In any case, while I distrust the Irish political parties, I'm fairly certain they're taking their orders from Irish people. I can't say the same thing for SF... and nothing in my lifetime has ever given me reason to start trusting them.

    I do not believe SF will have all the answers. We need to be rid of FF/FG IMO. SF are the best option currently. That's it really. I would make the same argument for PBP or the SD's in they were in SF's position.

    Best of a bad batch being the reason to choose them? Nah. I'll still encourage other to spoil their vote, generating interest in a party that doesn't have the wide range of negatives that SF or the other parties carry with them. We might be waiting a decade or two, but the interest is here in Ireland now for something different, but not needing to be a nutcase party with dodgy focuses.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    First off, housing prices aren't going to return to any kind of sanity, because they're linked to the cost of living, and the expectation that people have about the actual value in housing. ie. that it's a top tier investment and the traditional expectation for Irish people to reach for when they've earned a fair bit of money. Hence, the housing prices are likely to crash within the next year or so, then regain parity, rise, and crash again. Rinse and repeat. Although each time, that lower point of prices, will be higher than the previous time. (just as living costs have fallen during recessions but have regained, and surpassed previous levels when normality returns)

    The housing problem with prices and availability is an indication towards the overall problems with the country. Someone earlier made the point that housing is a problem everywhere, but that's not actually true. It's a problem in major population centers, and the rural areas typically have plenty of choice available, and so, city people tend to buy and live in the rural areas or smaller cities in the hopes that things won't get expensive for them fast. Which it will, because there are so many inefficiencies within modern economies, and the expectations of the political parties when they gain power.

    All the main services in Ireland have been dying for two decades or more now. It's just in Dublin and the other cities where this has been slowed due to better investment, but there is a decided lack of interest in providing for the rest of the country... which further increases the desire to live in the cities, driving up demand for housing and services, and decreasing investment for the countryside... It's a cycle of stupidity, and based off old economic models where the city was the primary area for productive employment (and accessibility of needed transport links), but with technological advancement those requirements become less important, but the politicians and government bodies continue to reinforce them.

    This isn't the problem with any one political party. They're all in this together, because it encourages the dependency of the electorate on the government to provide for them. It's an exercise in power.. which is why Dublin continues to remain the primary focus for all investment, and attention, even though it would make more logical sense to diversify the economy so that each corner of Ireland would have an equally productive zone, but as things stand, while those corner focus points exist, they remain pale shadows of Dublin.

    Basically, we're repeating all the same retarded notions of European nations, even while they've already reached realisation of the consequences, and begun moving people and investment away from the traditional focus points.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,423 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    What exactly do you think is great about SFs housing ideas.


    And last question, who's going to build all these social houses they say they will build?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    You seem to be irked or caught up on some perceived slight.

    I notice you are not addressing my comments here, however changeable you may find the text.

    What nationality do you think are influential in SF policy?

    I know FG use the same elections advisers the UK Tories do but I would assume all Irish parties have Irish people at the helm.

    Nope. I like their plans for housing. Of the parties who I think have good ideas about housing, SF are best placed to get in. I've never given SF my No.1 by the way.

    FF/FG would rather you spoiled your vote if not voting for them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    Building instead of buying or leasing.

    The same companies and people building for the cuckoo funds.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,423 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    So these companies will build at a discount for the government?


    These companies are builders. So the government will hire these builders to build apartments and houses?

    So how much profit will these companies(builders) want to build 100,000s of social houses for the government? It would have to be more than they could make on the private market(cuckoo funds) or else why would they bother?


    Have you any sort of cost analysis for this??



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,440 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    As long as we can not control our borders we will not be of the absolute ability to control and enable the wellbeing of our citizens... ‘uncontrolled’ immigration has too much negative impact on society here, on our economy, our health and quality of life.



  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    But then why have rents doubled in 5 years in places where the cost of living has been basically flat over the same period?

    Rents shot up because of demand and in areas with little demand HAP put a floor on rents which pushed everything up massively. As rents increased so did returns for landlords, particularly those not paying 51% tax on income. Then Covid came along and people (outside Dublin) realised they could pay 1200 a month in the worst parts of town or cover a mortgage for a property worth €300k so demand (and help to buy nonsense) increased loads as people (esp couples) could save a shitload because of Covid.

    I don't see demand falling without an economic collapse. HAP is going to keep rents inflated, plenty of people the world over will come and live 6 to a room in Dublin, all those people who feel oh so awful about their kids not being able to get on the ladder would spit feathers if their own house fell in value by 10k even if they're never going to sell it and the value is purely abstract to them. Ah well.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    I wouldn't expect so.

    Yes.

    Why?

    I imagine they'll charge the same. Do you think the cuckoo funds don't make any profit?

    You've an odd idea on how things work. A job is priced and tendered. It'll still be a better deal than buying off market.

    I know building en masses is cheaper than buying or leasing, especially if the lease is 25 years with no option to buy. If we had start building ten years ago or even five years ago in any meaningful numbers we wouldn't be were we are now and not as reliant on hotels and the like.

    Do you think the way we tackle it is working? If not what do you suggest?



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,423 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    But these builders want to build for the private market as there is more profit.


    Why would they build for the government if the price is lower?


    You have some utopia that the government can hire companies to build houses cheaper than if it was for the private market and these builders will do it because they are some charity.


    Once again have you a cost analysis????



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    Why do you think that? Why would there be more money building for a cuckoo fund than building for a council or government?

    Why would the government be paying them less than a cuckoo fund?

    This is your contention not mine.

    You've answered none of my questions.

    What cost analysis are you looking for? Something that shows building is cheaper than buying or a cost analysis for a certain amount in a certain location?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    haha... I have bolded each of your points, and addressed them individually. I do love the irony contained within your responses, where you say I'm doing (or not doing something) when it perfectly describes your own behavior.

    In any case, we're done here because you've consistently failed to counter the points I've made, except to deflect towards something else.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Where has the cost of living been flat for a period of five years?

    Ahh the Dublin logic on rents being applied everywhere. Want to know why the rents towards my tenants increased? Because my costs to the government and the banks increased, and I needed to cover the difference while paying my mortgage, and also paying off the debts accrued when I experienced negative equity (and while the rents were low). That's the same story for every other landlord in my estate (in Cork) who are renting out their properties. Yes, there are some people making a killing off rents... there's also a lot of people who are, this year, facing their first bit of real profit, compared with consistent losses since the property crash. I've recently arranged the sale of my property (Thank God) and I'm barely making a profit over the losses of the last period.. and no, it wasn't an expensive property, but one well within my means, and one I'd originally intended living in myself, but circumstances forced me to rent it out. I could have held out for an increased price, since the market is going that way, but I have learned to cut my losses while I still can. I'll never buy a property in Ireland again... at least not while the current Irish attitude to property exists. It's just too expensive, and prone to risk.

    The true problem with renting and property in Ireland is the focus on housing units. The lack of apartments (not the squalid little two/three story apartments) means there's no way to relieve pressure on the demand for housing, and so, rents increase because of the value assigned to properties. Having apartments would serve to release that pressure since apartments, typically (not always) are worth less than housing units. It's this insane demand for everyone to have their own house that causes the problem. For Dublin, that pressure is doubled because of the demand for houses within the city limits, where typically, you would see apartment towers for the majority, and houses for the truly wealthy... but that's somehow unacceptable. And so, property and rental prices/rates are inflated.. naturally enough, all things considered.

    Demand isn't going to fall with an economic collapse, because the people will remain in Ireland, and will still need somewhere to live. Prices will drop considerably for a short time, but they'll jump up again due to the demand that will continue to exist. There's a cycle to our property market now, set by past recessions/bubbles, reinforced by government schemes and the banks.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The government will simply seek to take from the private market, similar to how the councils have done for the settled travellers and social housing. Sure, some direct contracts will be done by construction companies with the "right" connections, but the majority will be taken from the market, and away from those who can afford to buy.,

    But you're right. there's no reason to believe that any government contract for the building of houses would be cheaper than a private market contract. Invariably, where the government is involved, costs are higher, and if not higher, then the quality will be significantly lower.



  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Cost of living has been pretty much (not completely) flat in Ireland for over a decade at this stage. See below.

    Have you got a reading difficulty btw? Because I very specifically didn't apply Dublin logic to everywhere. Like seriously, I mention that Dublin is different to everywhere else and that the reasons for increases outside of Dublin aren't purely demand-based. Where I am the HAP limit is 1100 a month. But around a third of all people are getting an increased "discretionary" payment. That's a floor on renting a house being set at 1300 a month or 81% of take home pay for someone working full time on minimum wage. It's not normal historically and all over the developed world we're seeing historically high rent:income ratios.

    I don't know your personal circumstances but Jesus Christ you're going straight off with the persecution complex. In my town rents have doubled in the last 5/6 years in many places. Looking at the graph above (which includes housing, strip housing out and the cost of living has been below flat funnily enough) there's nothing there to cause rents to double. Interest rates haven't gone up, I'm not aware of any new payments the government demand from landlords that would lead to doubling the rent. Feel free to let me know. You're now able to charge more so you're charging more. I have zero issue with that.

    Maybe get off your cross and realise I'm talking about markets as a whole. Of course people will charge what they can for something they're providing. Asking why they can charge 2X when 5 years ago they could only charge X isn't an attack on you. If food prices doubled in the space of 5 years I think we'd all wonder WTF happened.

    One question I have though, a kinda general one I wonder with a lot of landlords, when you talk about profit and loss do you think only in terms of cashflow or does the equity come into it at all? I keep hearing people who paid a deposit on a house and they say the rent "barely" covers the mortgage as if they're getting nothing out of the deal. Other than the house at the end that is. There's a 4/5 year window of purchasing that people are in negative equity from and if in the last 15 years they could pay anything at all off the principal then they're out of negative equity.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    Do you think SF will make housing worse by letting in more immigrants? Is this your point?

    I told you immigration is a part of the problem but it is beneath bad policy and relying on the private market. Apart from seemingly being bitter about something what do you want?



  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Getting an error trying to edit above post. Here's a nicer graph from the CSO's CPI data. They rather helpfully indexed 100 in December 2011 so we've pretty much a decade of data.


    Til the start of this year prices had increased a total of 2% in 9 years (and never more than 4%). It's fairly flat like. This year we're starting to see more than negligible inflation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    Do you remember what the situation was like 10 years ago? At the end of 2010 the IMF were called in. We were not in a situation to be investing in housing or anything else at the time.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Pussyhands


    It's not even the rich, it's just regular people aswell. Anyone who has bought a house has gained wealth relative to those who haven't.

    Someone I know bought a house 5 or 6 years ago at this stage. How much have prices boomed by since then? What is it, 40-50%?

    So myself and themselves would be similar age, work etc. But let's say their house was 260k, they've saved basically 130k+ and all that they've spent on rent. Now if I'm buying the same house I have to spend 130k more.

    I really don't know what's going to happen with housing, it surely can't keep going up 5-10% each year?



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Pussyhands


    Que all the people saying "JUST PAY THEM MORE!" despite there not actually being enough workers to fill the jobs.

    Then the same people will be complaining about the cost of living when prices go up. If your local shop hires 10 people and they all demand 1 euro per hour more, then the company needs to make 10 euro an hour extra through price increases.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Not all houses have increased in value. I live in a rural area in a 100 year old cottage that has had an extension added. About 20 years ago, we considered moving into town and got the house valued. We again got the house valued 2 years ago and it was still coming in at the same amount!



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,778 ✭✭✭Sunny Disposition


    At the risk of veering off topic a bit, it is a nonsense when people try to claim immigration isn't a major factor in the housing crisis, of course it is.

    Also, and though it shouldn't need to be said, no blame at all can be attached to immigrants for it. None at all. It's a failure of policy.


    A country with liberal immigration policies was bound to attract a lot of people whenever it has a strong economy, but there was never any plan to deal with that. Even now none of our politicians will talk about how to deal with immigration. In many parts of the country there are overcrowded schools, shortages of housing and overcrowded hospitals, all in part related to a major change in demographics over the last 25 years, but even now there is little interest in dealing with them. Successive Governments have always thought a strong economy would be enough to satisfy the country, but this time it might not be.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'd like you to stop making comments about what I feel or supposedly think... and instead, deal with what I've written.

    I see no value in adding more to the discussion,. when you have failed to address my previous points.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Hold on a second. What persecution complex? I described the market where my property is, in response to your own rather emotional remarks about renting. It's true that I do get annoyed at the attitude that all landlords are raking in the money, and squeezing the renters, since I know from personal experience and from others that it's just not true.

    I could have worded my posts earlier pointing out the manner of your posting about renting in Ireland, and been dismissive of your opinions, but I didn't. Show some similar maturity.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    Like what? Immigration? Gave an opinion. Housing? Same. SF and IRA, also.

    You keep referring to my manner of responding so I was commenting in kind.

    I could have worded my posts earlier pointing out the manner of your posting about renting in Ireland, and been dismissive of your opinions, but I didn't. Show some similar maturity.

    You should read over your comment to me.

    Does the fact that we are discussing the state, be it good or bad, of things and the conversation goes to SF and the IRA not tell you anything?

    You suggest spoiling votes which is great for a government who would rather you do that than vote elsewhere.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    When discussing housing it often goes onto SF since they claim to have all the answers.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    But they don't make that claim. No party has claimed that. That's FF/FG spin.



  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I had no idea you were a landlord and to be honest don't really give two **** if you are or not, particularly since you dodged a fairly simple question that most landlords seem to dodge.

    I wasn't having a go at landlords anywhere in my post but you brought it up and complained about what about people having a go at landlords. After completely misreading my post and claiming I said something I didn't.

    Emotional? Heh, good one. I pointed out that one thing doubles in price while everything else stays pretty much the same then just maybe there's something going on there. I went through a bunch of your points and you've addressed zero of mine. You've addressed points that you've imagined I've made alright, but that's not quite the same thing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    Their housing spokesperson, Eoin O Broin, wrote a book literally titled "Home: Why Public Housing is the Answer".

    Having lived in social housing, I wouldn't regard it as the answer to anything given the antisocial behavior.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 29,490 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ...did you ever notice that the public books were actually in pretty good shape leading up to the crash!




Advertisement