FF/FG/Green Government - Part 3 - Threadbanned User List in OP

Don't disagree, but more and more the electorate are realising that multiple briefs seem to be at odds with each other. None of which are doing anything to benefit 80 percent of the country.

I think more and more are seeing through the pantomime farce- because I’m actually one of them. I’m from a staunch FG family. Would have defended them right up to the last election despite the utter disaster Varadkar oversaw.

Unless you’re a welfare lifer or economic migrant then there’s absolutely nothing to be grateful for or thank this shower of bumbling idiots for. They’re really the only cohorts they’re interested in. Those and their cronies who they keep “in the know”.

i think it was a mutual and cynical carve up of big jobs for themselves- which was even more sickening to be honest. FF were slightly bigger than FG so at least had some argument for being in government- Varadkar being the useless tosser that he is slid back into government rather than going back to opposition which was what the electorate said. We ended up with the Greens meaning a whole pile of pain for the least well off and already struggling middle classes. Unforgivable and I’m furious as so many others.

I would be the same. Contemplating not voting next time

I really like our local SD. But they are a dose of a party...

Agree FG are in serious trouble, I have no idea what they would think their "base" even is these days

I really hope he doesn’t. He’s simply not fit for the role

So property owners you like are not vulture funds but those you don't like are vulture funds. Am I getting this right, as your stance is very confusing.

The govt didn't break housing. Demographics changed, and FG didn't do anything about it. Now there's a new government that is.

70 years ago, most people left school between ages 13-18. Half were men, and most got a job with their hands - skilled or unskilled.

There wasn't much for building, and houses were cheap to build. The western world, thanks to the invention of the car, was moving the population from tenements to suburbs.

Fast forward to today:

• most people don't work in construction
• for the few builders that exist, there's more competition for their attention with high-density commercial and office space
• housing, thanks to good regulation, is much more expensive to build

My parents bought their house in 1984 and the toilet was literally in the garden. It didn't have central heating or proper windows. Now, we have good regulations so your house doesn't spontaneously combust. But it makes a house much more expensive to build.

That's why there's a housing crisis in almost every European capital. Not Eamonn Ryan.

It's not REITs, vulture funds, "FFG" silliness. It's a huge demographic change in the labour market, made worse by govt inaction post-global-financial-crisis. But it was coming either way since universal access to 3rd level became the normal.

And now every country is trying to play catchup, and all at the same time. I was talking to a modular building company in Latvia and they said it's impossible - not difficult, impossible - to get their hands on supply.

Covid did a lot of damage. For example, Ireland didn't issue any felling licenses in 2020, so we're a year behind on timber.

There was an initiative about to launch this year where we pay people with land to grow trees for timber that the state can use for housebuilding - but after Russia invaded Ukraine, that got pulled back in case we need to use that land for crops for food security.

Housing For All is designed *by the housing charities*. I don't think many here understand this. In 2020, DOB got everyone around the table to figure how to actually sort housing, and then fund it as much as possible. They've removed all the overlap that was happening between housing charities like PMcVerry, Cluid, Threshold, etc. And now each charity gets to do what they're best at.

This is paired with insane new levels of funding for social and affordable housing, plus planning for the amenities that have to surround them, plus new schools, plus new nursing homes, everything. Where I live is getting 2 new primary schools and 2 new nursing homes (which SF voted against building, cheers lads).

When you build 30-60k new homes a year, there's a buttload of spatial planning that has to be wrapped around them too.

I think if regular people knew the actual detail of Housing for All it would blow their minds. But too many have already decided who the devil is, and new information just refracts off them like light off a mirror.

🤣🤣🤣

10/10.

😂

Imagine taking credit for what this government has done..😅

On FF versus FG electoral prospects: I think FG are only behind now because we’re “in front.”

I think once FG are back in front FF will be eaten in the duopoly. Varadkar won’t be nearly as kind to us as MM has been to FG.

Why should anyone vote for us, when we’ll clearly just put FG back in power, again and again?

The Currency is probably one of the best and most understandable financial news sites/services around. The whole idea of relying upon the market to solve problems was, I think, one of those PD ideas. The market always acts in its own interest rather than altruism but the politicians seemed to thick to realiise that. Being cynical about it, it is was that decision that really kicked off the property bubble in that it massively affected the supply chain. As for Noonan, that's no surprise.

Regards...jmcc

We give developers money when, as in most cases since last September, 25% of what they’re building will be state-run (with help from charities) social housing - THAT’S what they get money for!

It’s not a gift. It’s the way to absolutely maximise the building of new social and affordable housing, so we can get people off the streets (and out of hotel rooms) and into good homes as quickly as possible.

You know who’s part of this plan, and whose sign off is needed on the suitability of almost every project? Almost every housing charity, via various new state bodies.

Cluid understand the particular constitution requirements and amenities around social housing. For example, keep social housing on the ground floor, so an elderly person can have their meals on wheels passed through an open window. Or a disabled person won’t have to use the lift in a fire. These are the people who are designing all our social housing now.

If it’s for people who are living on the street, Ireland has the 2nd highest retention rate of moving from the street into a forever home in the world - 84% retention after one year, only beaten by NYC with 88%.

DOB is doing an infinitely better job than the last 4 housing ministers combined. That’s why it’s been backed enthusiastically by all the major housing charities, because they helped to write this plan.

But why let reality ruin one’s indulgent fantasies about the great evils of their imagination.

The housing charities on which you cannot get FOI information?

Given the funding they are given and the seeming lack of oversight it would be a surprise if they didn't support him.

More and more resources diverted into houses those scrimping saving and getting killed with rent will never get the chance to buy

I'm no expert but looking at this as a Novice.

I'm bewildered and perplexed by this housing association model, there's a serious lack of transparency going on with housing associations. Governance issues, financial accountability are clearly a problem.

I've often wondered who's actually benefiting from housing associations, more particularly financially. I understand they borrow money like any other developers or in the case of purchasing properties arrange commercial mortgages. Are these housing charities being under written by government, also what direct level of funding are they actually getting apart for rent subsidies through HAP for example. Who owns the Assets in essence who's actually benefiting financially.

It seems a very odd set up.

Separately we have the patron Saint of distressed mortgage holders, David Hall. His organisation essentially promises to help, purchase the borrowers properties (presumably at a discount or the remaining mortgage outstanding) then kindly offers to rent it back to them. Whilst some might think this is all perfectly wonderful, I'm not sure how I'd feel living in a property, I've perhaps already paid for over a quarter or half it's value already, only to find myself renting it with no equity value for possibly the rest of my life, whilst Halls organisation builds up a portfolio , likely funded by the state through rent subsidies. There's of course the risk of repossession and I appreciate that, some think Hall's and Housing charities solutions are better, I personally disagree.

Something else that's rarely discussed, is mortgage switching , anyone already in Distress has not a chance in hell of switching. I'm personally aware of people who's mortgages were sold to a vulture fund, relatively small arrears, servicing mortgages but struggling to clear arrears, They are currently on 3/4% interest rates and can not switch and vulture funds don't do rate reductions. I accept this is the mortgage holders fault but there's zero consideration to allow them reduce interest rates as high as 3/4 %. If as predicted rates are going to increase , Mortgage Arrears numbers will I believe increase substantially , not helped by cost of living crisis.

I don't pretend to be an expert on the matter but to my mind ,Housing charities are in essence building up substantial properties portfolios with very little risk through substantial state supports, whilst Tenants remain tenants and distressed former home owners also become Tenants. Just seems utterly bewildering.

I posted this recent article which raises some serious questions no one wants to answer. Apparently the questions not in the public interest, I beg to differ.

As for DOB , I've zero confidence in him , he's literally all over the place. And now yet again overseeing direct financial incentives to Developers that Home buyers will not benefit from other than supply that will remain out of reach, it's madness.