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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Housing Madness

1810121314

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    What city council are you talking about because we can easily look up their policy.

    Seeing as we are obliged to house refugees in this country it therefore is part of our housing needs.



  • Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    it's not pedantic to know what you are talking about. And speak the truth, not lies.

    if a family go through a system in order to get refugee status, then they are refugees. A story about a family faking their way to America 30 years ago is not relevant to refugee in Ireland.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Why would proof that fake refugees exist interfere with your claim there is not such thing? You think the UN doesn't suffer from the same problems now and have a much better system? You do understand these refugees back then were sent to Europe too how do you know none were given the status here?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,700 ✭✭✭Gusser09


    Well this is it.

    Another question we need to ask is do we want to end up like America in 20 years? Whereby we have trailer park type ghettos with shite houses etc in them.

    We should look into good quality approved fabricated homes now or else the above will happen. Its started already anyway. Shite quality log cabins in parents gardens etc.



  • Registered Users Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Juran


    I never said the lady who got the council hoise was an asylum seeker or refugee. I presume she now has irish citizenship so is entitled to apply for houses like me, you and everyone else in the country.

    There are 3 council houses in our private estate, home to single mothers for the past 10+ years. Their kids were early teens when they moved in. One lady works part time, the other 2 dont work. No one objects to them getting a council house.

    But there needs to be a system for social or council house for working families on lower incomes. This category goes out to work everyday, pays taxes, adds to society. The current housing system seems to encourage people not to work so they move up the housing list. I might be wrong.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    We can never go the route of the US because we have way higher building standards and planning control. Trailer parks in the US have been around since the 40s and still not here so no need to exaggerate.

    The log cabins used by some to live in are all illegal to live in here. They don't match the building codes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭BattleCorp1


    I'd be in favour of the councils going back to what they used to do and build council house estates.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21




  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭BattleCorp1




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21


    Even the ones with the new suv outside on the drive.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭BattleCorp1


    I know someone who couldn't get their new suv onto the bus so they just left it there. Said the social would get them a new one. True story.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,604 ✭✭✭Amadan Dubh



    This anecdotal experience posted above is just one example of the State directly and consciously propping up the market. The State also does this via the likes of HAP, funnelling money to housing bodies to elbow out individuals and usher them into an already tight rental market. RPZs put a floor on rents, hotels are being taken over and rented out by the State, no vacancy taxes are enforced, commercial landlords are not being forced to take a bath as of yet as the government hums and haws with its wfh legislation. Help the brickie is another way for the State to prop up the market. The list is huge but it is a fact that without the State our entire housing market crashes. Even looking at house building targets versus population growth estimates; the State will work to ensure that supply never meets demand. It is a con.

    If the State did not get so involved in our housing market, the whole thing would collapse. I think something like 60-80% from current levels could be on the cards if the State runs out of cash and can no longer prop up the market. I think where prices got to in 2012-14 is where they found their equilibrium.

    Small landlords are not the problem but of course they have been driven out by State actions to get them out in order to support larger players by reducing supply and funnelling workers into the institutionals' rental portfolios. Tenants and small landlords attacking each other is a great distraction for the State and the big players as I feel the fight should be individuals (ie small landlords and tenants/house buyers) versus the State/institutionals. I think if these opposing sides could come together they could force real change but they are being allowed to attack each other as this distracts them from the real enemy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Your post like the post you quote just isn't believable. Yours is just a mash up of theories without proof his being made up as it goes against the policies of the councils. His brother tells him something the builders said she said. Not really a reliable source of information and he has failed to say which council so it can be checked. She would have been entitled to emergency payments for appliances and would be told this. Do you really think she would ignore that and then spend her own money? It isn't true and easy to see why it isn't but makes for a good story along the lines of abandoning buggies and free cars



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,604 ✭✭✭Amadan Dubh


    My belief in the post quoted is in the story about the council bidding €300k for the property as the council policy has been to buy up homes directly in order to hit social housing targets.

    And everything I have listed is an actual State action which contributes to propping up the property market.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    So you don't believe the bit about her paying to refurbish the place? It is your picking and choosing of reality to make up your own narrative that creates your false impressions. HAP was made illegal to refuse as landlords weren't accepting it. That proves that it is not supporting the rental market rates along with the fact it is not enough for new rentals coming on the market proves the government are artificially keeping rents low on landlords by forcing RPZ rules.

    Have you proof landlords want HAP, aren't leaving the market and that RPZ doesn't keeps rent low on landlords? See there is a big difference on having an actual theory based on facts and just making up what you believe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21


    Stay out of hap anyway. Airbnb it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    Good to see that people are being advised to look up the information. When I post about vacant homes, people seem to make up stuff in their heads about them all being wrecks in the back of beyond. Whereas the real detailed information is available, where 13 categories (plus Other) of Vacant are listed, of which only a very small number are Boarded Up Habitable. The Census does not record inhabitable wrecks. And the information shows that they exist in urban and rural.



  • Registered Users Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Juran



    Prime example of what A. Dubh posted. I know this area, the house was worth approx 300k when it went on the market in late 2019. It was built in around 1998 - 2000 era, so not old, and up to modern building code. Probably needed decent cosmetic upgrade inside. In total the local council spent 600k on it, that includes retro fitting it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,570 ✭✭✭vriesmays


    Do you think they'll leave their families stay abroad and live here alone.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    We take a tiny amount of refugees compared with country's like Germany . I don't understand how it costs 600k to retrofit one house , when a new tenant moves in the council installs new kitchen press, s makes basic repairs, paints the walls. The council needs to build more 1 bed units for single people



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    A decent cosmetic upgrade?

    They must have tiled the bathroom with tiles of solid gold to spend 300k on it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭✭BattleCorp1


    It's my understanding that it was €600k in total, that's purchase price and renovation costs.

    On your point regarding more 1 bed units for single people, I'd never recommend this. Minimum 2 bed units as people could get sick down the line and need a carer to stay or maybe have children etc.



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Gosh darn it! The people who accidentally profit from the housing crisis year upon year just keep making mistakes that boosts their accidental profit year upon year. The luck of it!

    A constant influx of immigrants due to accidentally formulated policy.

    A constant international reit market due to accidentally formulated tax and fdi policy.

    A constant undersupply of housing due to accidentally formulated building policy.

    So many accidents! It's just so very unlucky!


    Maybe if for another decade we rely on the same people's promises to undo their highly profitable mistakes something might change. Surely they deserve the benefit of the doubt by now.


    Perhaps if similar accidents were to happen to these peoples own homes, workplaces and investment properties then the accidents would cancel each other out? Perhaps then you'd see a turnaround in things that would make your head spin.


    It'd be awfully unlucky, but considering their every stated promise has had the opposite effect for nearly a decade, surely they would understand these fiery accidents, of all people.



  • Registered Users Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Juran


    Wonder why the social apartment model doesnt seem to be used in Ireland, or why does it not work here. I agree with the comment that we need 2 bed apartments to house the masses.

    I,m not talking about 20 story high rises the UK built in the 60's and 70's. If you visit the outskirts of european cities, like Germany, Holland, Spain, you see lots of social apartments, which are not gettos and they look well looked after. I know plenty of europeans who grew up in a 2-bed apartment provided by their state, and their family was grateful to have it, they respected the property and their neighbors.

    Its a quick and cost efficient way to house those who need it. Why does Irish state prefer to provide 3 to 4 bed houses with a back garden .. at 4 times the cost. Our friends in Europe could only dream of such a state provided house.



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    We don't have a supply problem. We have a demand problem.


    We have a carefully curated, artificially made demand problem.


    We have had REIT "policies" for near a decade that incentivises demand. Tax free situations for them...why? government rent-back schemes...why? To increase demand and profits for the boys.


    We have had immigration "policies" for near a decade that incentivises demand. A publicly stated plan to "grow" the population by 1 million...why? To increase demand and profits for the boys.


    The simple fact of the matter is this: the only reason more immigration and more bulk buying by REITs isn't happening to an even greater extent is BECAUSE the existing demand is so over the top.


    If home prices dropped by half tomorrow, there'd be a run on the country and we'd be back to square one within a year.


    If they quadrupled housing production, there would be an equal uptick in immigration and REITs to negate it all.


    This is no accident.


    That's the fact of the matter, and it isn't to do with eu migration policies because the majority of immigrants into the country are non eu, and it isn't to do with building more homes because they'll be bought out lock step, and it isn't to do with building differently, and it isn't to do with regulation, and it isn't to do with "employment gaps", and it isn't to do with anything they have been telling you year after year after year after year after year after year after year after year after year.


    A bunch of cute hoors and their bedfellows have been riding the hole off this country, telling you "this time next year...!" and it's well past time to cut out the BS and get to the heart of it. At this point, if they tell you something, it's guaranteed to be untrue. Lying sacks of shaisse.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Simple question can you prove any of this? Incompetence explains it a lot easier than the government is really good at organising things secretly for their personal benefit. It seems quite silly to say we have a demand problem with no supply issues. I actually think we have enough supply due to occupancy rates we could redistribute housing but the government could never do it due to the public demands. You seem to think the government are the only people controlling housing and no public opinion is involved.



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    It is a simple matter of reasonable deduction.


    Motive: money. And so, so much of it. All that money goes into someone's pocket, all that rent money, all that commercial money, all that development money. The most understandable motivation of all time. Not to mention that there is a serious, serious conflict of interest with politicians being personally invested as landlords, and that's what is declared! How many have friends and family "indirectly" involved in property? I bet we'd all be shocked.


    Means: it's a government, with the powers of a government, tied indelibly to national and international entities that also love money, from REITs to NGO's. The government can both control the building environment and the regulation environment and immigration environment. What kind of a plank allows more and more people, year after year, into a worsening housing crisis, year after year? Allows the development of unaffordable housing year after year, from exhorbitant "international student accommodation" to luxury builds? Come on. They pull the strings on artificial scarcity of housing AND artificial demand.


    Opportunity: "the government" is practically every party involved, opposition or not. There is no opposition, all of them have their fingers in it, and there's plenty of money to go round. They've gotten away with it for 3 years on the trot with zero resistance, so why not 4, and then 5, and so on? Opportunity.


    Track record: years upon years upon years. A joke.


    That's my proof: deduction.


    Anyone who can dismiss all the above as sheer incompetence needs to check reality. An extremely profitable enterprise, readily controlled, with no negative consequence, for nearly a decade on the go...is fecking well NOT incompetence. On the contrary, it's exemplary in the demonstration of efficiently meeting goals.


    Akin to the police sitting in the cop shop, not lifting a finger, waiting for a murderer to hand themselves in before they even consider that the dead body with an axe buried in its head is "suspicious", it's just ridiculous.


    The motive, means, opportunity and track record are all there. The only incompetence is the general public believing this is a mistake.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    So made up by you. Once we are clear you have no proof. You haven't cleared a motive. How are they personally making money?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Yes, it's all made up by me. There's no rhyme or reason to my logic at all. Sure.


    As said, the only incompetence on display throughout this entire fiasco is the incredible ignorance of the public at large.


    I'd see more critical analysis from a pineapple.


    "They're just thick!" Yeah, yeah, yeah. Very bloody believable. Off you go so, waiting for them to be un-thick while the money keeps flowing into pockets.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    I think you are making up this bit from your previous post.

    "That's the fact of the matter, and it isn't to do with eu migration policies because the majority of immigrants into the country are non eu"

    The last Census was in 2016 when the UK was in the EU. Poland was tops, UK was second, and the only non eu in the top 10 was Brazil at 6. We should have had a Census in 2021, but it was put back to this year. Where are you getting your figures from?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    I have asked you one simple question and you didn't answer it. It is not like you have any solid theory here but if you can't deal with even an explanation for your "motive" I think it is you that lack critical analysis



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    You are confident enough to quote statistics from a census, yet are apparently oblivious to the yearly reports on migration from the Central STATISTICS Office, where all the numbers are there, where simple subtraction, addition, multiplication and division tell you everything you need to know.


    Why would you do that? How could you be ignorant to such a thing? They are rhetorical questions, I don't care for your answers, and there's snowball chances in hell I'm going to get into arguing cherry-picked, probably purposefully miscalculated numbers from you. Obfuscation is the word here.


    What I said is true, and regardless, my presentation of this housing crisis as an entirely manufactured "phenomenon" remains most comfortably/uncomfortably coherent and explains the unexplainable. The pieces fit perfectly and that's that.


    Again...


    It is a simple matter of reasonable deduction.


    Motive: money. And so, so much of it. All that money goes into someone's pocket, all that rent money, all that commercial money, all that development money. The most understandable motivation of all time. Not to mention that there is a serious, serious conflict of interest with politicians being personally invested as landlords, and that's what is declared! How many have friends and family "indirectly" involved in property? I bet we'd all be shocked.


    Means: it's a government, with the powers of a government, tied indelibly to national and international entities that also love money, from REITs to NGO's. The government can both control the building environment and the regulation environment and immigration environment. What kind of a plank allows more and more people, year after year, into a worsening housing crisis, year after year? Allows the development of unaffordable housing year after year, from exhorbitant "international student accommodation" to luxury builds? Come on. They pull the strings on artificial scarcity of housing AND artificial demand.


    Opportunity: "the government" is practically every party involved, opposition or not. There is no opposition, all of them have their fingers in it, and there's plenty of money to go round. They've gotten away with it for 3 years on the trot with zero resistance, so why not 4, and then 5, and so on? Opportunity.


    Track record: years upon years upon years. A joke.


    That's my proof: deduction.


    Anyone who can dismiss all the above as sheer incompetence needs to check reality. An extremely profitable enterprise, readily controlled, with no negative consequence, for nearly a decade on the go...is fecking well NOT incompetence. On the contrary, it's exemplary in the demonstration of efficiently meeting goals.


    Akin to the police sitting in the cop shop, not lifting a finger, waiting for a murderer to hand themselves in before they even consider that the dead body with an axe buried in its head is "suspicious", it's just ridiculous.


    The motive, means, opportunity and track record are all there. The only incompetence is the general public believing this is a mistake



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Unbelievable!


    What is it, exactly, that would satisfy your innate ignorance on accepting perfectly sound, explained, logical surmise? Hm?


    Is it a signed confession you're waiting upon?


    What will satisfy your denial?


    And, counter to that, how can you laughably attempt to attack my position while your side of the argument amounts to four words of hermetically sealed explanation, "they are just thick"?


    Like the poster above, consider that all rhetorical as I'm not expecting some fascinating theory to emerge from "they are just thick".



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    Mine wasn't a rhetorical question, and you did not treat it as such given that your answer referred to a source of information viz the CSO. But their figures do not bear out your contention that the majority of immigrants are from outside the EU.

    I don't accept the method you use to get proof of something, i.e. your own deduction. The real figures are available if you want to see them.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    How about you explain who exactly is pocketing the money and how. You say it is all obvious but can you explain how? I would love to know who exactly is in government enriching themselves and how they are using the government policies to do this. You are saying this is the motive and it is a good one just want to know how they are.

    I mean you could be silly and say higher rents and they are all landlords. When you and I both know legislation for small landlords have been punitive so that makes no sense and then the fact not many actually own that much rental properties. Even if they don't own it is hard to see that they would be doing so for relatively small amounts of money.

    Of course there is always the claim of bribery. Hard to prove but if you just believe in it then it has to be true as it is hard for proof thus they are hiding it well.

    So tell us who exactly is making the money and how?



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    You quoted census numbers, while ignoring migration numbers, on the question of migration numbers.


    Why do you think you deserve a response for such such illegitimacy? You don't.


    People are more than free to look at the cso numbers themselves, I encourage it. You obviously don't give a rats arse because you could have done so yourself. You didnt, and that explains your motivation. Education is a good thing in a country so obviously lacking in critical thought.


    Of course the real question is which pavlovian stimulus triggered your rush to get in with terrible information. Are you somehow or other personally invested in the property question, or is it the immigration question?


    Needless to say (or is it?), people rushing in to defend an obviously corrupt government begs the question "but why?!"


    No explanations, no reasoning, no logical sequence, just BS obfuscation to cover up the most blazingly blatant robbery thrust upon the country in a decade, with no sign of comeuppance coming.


    So, again, I don't care for your crooked motivations, triggers, or terrible attempts to end up saying nothing at all.


    So, once again, in the face of zero argument...


    It is a simple matter of reasonable deduction.


    Motive: money. And so, so much of it. All that money goes into someone's pocket, all that rent money, all that commercial money, all that development money. The most understandable motivation of all time. Not to mention that there is a serious, serious conflict of interest with politicians being personally invested as landlords, and that's what is declared! How many have friends and family "indirectly" involved in property? I bet we'd all be shocked.


    Means: it's a government, with the powers of a government, tied indelibly to national and international entities that also love money, from REITs to NGO's. The government can both control the building environment and the regulation environment and immigration environment. What kind of a plank allows more and more people, year after year, into a worsening housing crisis, year after year? Allows the development of unaffordable housing year after year, from exhorbitant "international student accommodation" to luxury builds? Come on. They pull the strings on artificial scarcity of housing AND artificial demand.


    Opportunity: "the government" is practically every party involved, opposition or not. There is no opposition, all of them have their fingers in it, and there's plenty of money to go round. They've gotten away with it for 3 years on the trot with zero resistance, so why not 4, and then 5, and so on? Opportunity.


    Track record: years upon years upon years. A joke.


    That's my proof: deduction.


    Anyone who can dismiss all the above as sheer incompetence needs to check reality. An extremely profitable enterprise, readily controlled, with no negative consequence, for nearly a decade on the go...is fecking well NOT incompetence. On the contrary, it's exemplary in the demonstration of efficiently meeting goals.


    Akin to the police sitting in the cop shop, not lifting a finger, waiting for a murderer to hand themselves in before they even consider that the dead body with an axe buried in its head is "suspicious", it's just ridiculous.


    The motive, means, opportunity and track record are all there. The only incompetence is the general public believing this is a mistake



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    No obfuscation on my part, I gave you clear information.



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Yeah I'll get the bank statements sent over to you today, the phone recordings and if I have time I'll have the culprits come over and personally explain to you.


    While I'm at it, I'll get a proof of gravity from God for you, seeing as no doubt logical inference of an apple falling from a tree would be "unbelievable" for you too.


    You just sit tight there and wait for reality to hit. Keep batting for the "they are just thick" crowd in the meantime. Suffering jaysus, I've heard better explanations from 6 year olds.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,453 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    You do get there is a theory of gravity based on observable facts? To me no god exists so the fact you would use a fictional being for proof indicates more about you.

    Have you any observable facts for us to believe you? You should be able to name one person if they are all at it and there is so much money involved. If you believe it is true either way without any proof just say it so we know.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Yes, obfuscation, yes.


    You gave census figures in place of migration numbers. A true honest John.



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Observable fact: a promise to reduce housing costs for so many years, versus the concomitant increase of housing costs over those same years, a concomitant increase in immigrants, a concomitant increase in unaffordable, unfit-for purpose housing provision, etcetera etcetera etcetera.


    A promising start to construct the logic of sheer corruption.


    Now I'm finished with you and your "they are just thick" """"""""theory""""""" and desire for proof of the most self-evident things in life. You have nothing, not a jot of an argument.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,994 ✭✭✭c.p.w.g.w


    My SIL, living in Tipperary put her house up on the market Monday, she has 3 viewings Wednesday, 1 Thursday & 2 Friday...and her agent said they are waiting for a few more to arrange dates and times...her house is a kip as well and it's listed for a realively high price...we are currently waiting on the council to get back to us about our place, they have till Friday and if they can't confirm its going up a daft



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Don't worry, the government and their pals have this desperation in hand.


    Quick and lazy perusal...(while also looking at the wording within the new national housing plan, woof, what a load of, ahem, very, very carefully re-worded double-speak)...


    Irish times:

    "The good news is that supply is set to increase in 2022; the bad news is that it is not enough to meet demand. Housing completions will hit about 21,000 in 2021, with analysts predicting a figure of 26,000 to 27,000 in 2022"


    However...

    Various population goals indicate roughly 25k to 30k "net inwards migration" this year too.


    So while they're bound to underperform on construction, and overperform on their migration goals, in a time where accommodation being built is getting smaller and smaller in size (apartments overtaking houses)...


    while not counting the REIT deals and government guaranteed rent-backs...


    It's all just another MISTAKE, just another ACCIDENT, just another MIS-STEP. Don't fret, as our del boys tell us, "this time next year, we'll solve your housing problem, this time next year, swear to God, no taksie-backsies, pinky-swear!"



    And let's not forget the windfall of the Ukraine crisis and millions displaced across europe, if you listen carefully enough you can practically hear the coin-counting, another juicy excuse to keep the gravy train rolling. Cynical, but cynicism well-deserved by our governance and buddies.

    Post edited by sutrapall on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    Where did you observe that "fact"? The peak sale price was reached in 2007, and following a steep decline, we are only now getting back to that level. Hence the amount of negative equity that you must have observed for many years. A similar pattern is observable in the rental sector of housing costs.

    https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/prices/residentialpropertypriceindex/



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Oh, so after playing honest John by trying to misrepresent census figures in place of migration numbers, here you are to not-obfuscate by saying that house prices have been increasing for nigh on a decade out of control (but in reality, very much in control) in a different way to me, dressed up in **** to look like a point.


    And what is your point, exactly? That you can re-word what I said? It's that pavlovian thing again, the frustrated subliminally implanted impetus to speak out against the truth without actually having anything to say. Speaking without point is akin to grunting.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,427 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    I wish I could get some reward for my "Pavlovian" behaviour. Instead of your insults and invective.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,362 ✭✭✭landofthetree


    Residential construction activity exceeded pre-pandemic levels last year, topping more than 30,000 units, according to a report from Deloitte.


    We are building too many houses. We will be back to ghost estates within 2 years.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21


    The housing budget will be cut to fund Ukraine rebuild.



  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭sutrapall


    Let us be honest here. You playing obvious, obvious games is the insult. Me rightfully pointing it out is not the insult.


    As to your comment of rewards, it's funny, I was thinking along those lines generally. Why do people feel the need to maintain and defend a status quo that ultimately, if not directly, diminishes their lives?


    If there was a voucher system, virtue bucks, maybe, that could be claimed and then used toward outrageous rent, outrageous mortgages, of themselves or friends, family, what have you...that would make sense. But virtue vouchers don't exist, so...something very strange afoot, methinks, when a people is compelled to make their lot worse!



  • Advertisement
Advertisement