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

Maybe investing those surpluses in infrastructure and services might actually lead to the betterment of the country regardless of Donald Trump.

"The UK is a product of years of what FFG are currently doing"

There is currently talk of building housing on the green-belt around London. The same politicians and civil servants who suggest and pursue this will also claim that they are serious about protecting the environment. Well, what is "greener" than leaving land to nature, I would ask.

The UK is what Ireland is speed-running towards, and if anyone thinks that voting for SF, Irish Labour or any other collection of globalist hacks and/or communists will prevent or reverse what has been done, they have a surprise on the way.

The UK implemented the bedroom tax which incentivised more efficient use of existing stock.

FFG copied and pasted the demand side policies, but didn't go near supply side policies

I was helping a friend fix up and paint his rented house that he was selling. We had taken down the curtains and every single day of the 3 days i was in there helping him people were knocking on the door first and then the windows when they saw us working inside, asking for the landlords number and practically begging us to rent the house to them.

The first day he was caught off guard and he would say yes when asked if he owned the house. The second day he answered by telling them he was only working there. Half way through the third day we put the curtains back up and closed them. It helped a bit but word had got around and people were still coming. Even some who were already there the days before. There must have been 30 people in all who knocked on the window. Most of them wouldnt go away until he came to the window or door either. Some of the stories i heard them giving him would break your heart.

One of the evenings when he brought me for a few pints we got into a conversations about it. He was selling because the rent was so low and he couldnt put it up, tax was too high and generally when he had a very bad tenant he couldnt get rid of them or even get the rent off them. Even when he decided to sell it was a pain to get it empty. And he didnt want those issues again, so he decided it was time to just sell up.

He did say that he would never even think of selling if he could get market rent, to pay for anything he had to put into the house that all cost more nowadays. And if he could always charge market rent and if he had to pay less tax. But also that there would be profit in it for him with less potential disastrous downside. He said it would be a fantastic investment if only he had control over his property. He would quite happily rent it for less money than market to someone who proved to be a good tenant and why would he even need to ask them to move out if they were good tenants and he was making enough to have a profit and keep up the maintenance without having handcuffs on him. It opened my eyes tbh.

Nobody would ever sell an investment property from under a good tenant paying market rent. Why would they? No need. The relationship is good, everyone is happy, no need to sell. Its when they cant rent for what the place is worth, when they cant remove people that arent working out and when they are tied up on their own property if they ever do decide to sell it that is getting to them.

If you had less landlords selling up and happy landlords and tenants matched up then all is good. There would be plenty of rentals. New investors would come in instead of out of the market. No need then for charities and the state to be competing against ftbs for the new build houses that come on the market, so they would be cheaper. Everyone happy renting so not all chasing the few places available which are on the market at huge prices to cover the lack of wiggle room in the rent when they have to move out of the one getting sold because the rent is far too low to make a return on. Good tenants could be rewarded without a landlord suffering when they move out by being locked on the lower rent.

Anyway, just my rambling thoughts on a Friday morning before work. I could be completely wrong, but i now see both sides of the problem.

We can do little about what Trump does to encourage MNC back to the US.

What we can do is make it difficult for MNC to leave by delivering affordable housing for their staff, energy, water and transport infrastructure

An LNG facility funded by private sector in Shannon is continually being blocked by this government. A unit of gas that sells in the US for 2 dollars sells in the EU for 8 dollars. I'd imagine it's more in the UK and Irl.

We are where we are but gaining a competitive advantage is delivering basic housing at affordable rates to people earning more than they ever have in the past.

To a logically thinking person, this is an opportunity not a problem. The issue is the system that prevents us seizing the opportunity

To a point yes, but look at stock levels, they are at record lows.

Coupled with interest rates decling in the ECB, in the short to medium term, we wont see much change I think.

The only thing that would change this is an ecnomic shock like in 2008, but that would have to start in the US first I think.

Fair point but the issue is that the state is shopping in the "premium" market to house those that can't afford rather than creating lower cost alternatives. As above they seem to be objecting and blocking those that do

We also have more people employed in the state than ever before, coupled with the highest value of household wealth ever recorded in ireland.

Isn't it the case that over 40% of home purchases are cash buyers.

As long as supply remains behind demand and barring a huge economic employment shock, prices dont look to be coming down anytime soon.

Lets not forget that the govt paying market rent for tenants whom cannot afford private rents themselves only buoys the situation.

The interest payments on US debt surpassed 1 trillion recently. There going to have to be inventive to maintain that as there does not seem to be any wish from both parties ease up on spending

We are where we are

Over 40: work from home

Under 40: sleeping pods at work

You could not make it up,

I don't think that the state is buying houses for the shared equity scheme. Rather, it's giving people money in exchange for part ownership of the house. The person who lives n the house will be the owner to all intents and purposes. The state is, however, out rightly buying houses and apartments for use for social housing.

Yep, thats it. But obviously when they buy for social housing the state still own the asset.

I think thats a lo g term strategy now, given that the state build very few new social homes themselves any longer.

The approach i dont agree with is when the councils rent apartments from a developer for social housing. Tax payer foots the bill to rent and at the end of the tenancy, the whole scheme goes back to the developer.

If the council is going to dip into the private market, at least purchase the homes.