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

Seven years later [Zombie thread split]

  • 05-03-2012 3:36am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 879 ✭✭✭


    ...and there's the essential flaw in your plan.

    No offense to you dude, but that's a real 'head in the sand' attitude.

    The first flaw in your arguement is that the cost of property, in the long economic term, only goes in one direction - up.

    If you think the same apartment will cost you the exact same in five years time then you're out of your mind.

    I'll bet you anything that the apt that cost you 400,000 today will cost you 600,000 in 2010.

    The second flaw in your arguement is that you're assuming that interest rates will stay at their current historic low over the next five years. Oil prices hit an all time high today and the trend looks like it will continue, driving up inflation and interest rates in the long term.

    There's only been one good time to buy property and that time is now.
    mmmmm :rolleyes:


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 952 ✭✭✭shangri la


    Bascially I don't think any localised factors will come into play in influencing a drop in house prices.

    The main factor will be global/EU inflation over the next ten years.

    As oil is starting to skyrocket it looks like we maybe in for a bumpy ride re inflation and it could turn all into the 70's again.

    Economic patterns on the whole are generally cyclical and we are due for a massive global recession around about now.

    Certainly I wouldn't use *any* excuse to hold off buying property right now.

    On the whole, you never lose money with bricks and mortar in this country. After the currency crisis in the UK in the early 90's, property prices rebounded and then some.

    the good old days... 2005.

    I wonder how this person fared or was it a young one who didn't buy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,305 ✭✭✭Zamboni


    Awesome zombie thread.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,230 ✭✭✭Solair


    It illustrates quite nicely just how naive most people were about the absolute collapse that was only around the corner!


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,734 ✭✭✭Newaglish


    I read over some of the 2005/2006 threads in A&P sometimes as they give some really interesting insights into attitudes at the time. It's like a time capsule filled with ignorance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭smallerthanyou


    Wow. That is all.

    My favourite quote "Property prices will not go down .... full stop."


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,734 ✭✭✭Newaglish


    Wow. That is all.

    My favourite quote "Property prices will not go down .... full stop."

    What about this gem?
    I'll bet you anything that the apt that cost you 400,000 today will cost you 600,000 in 2010.


  • Registered Users Posts: 952 ✭✭✭shangri la


    whizzbang wrote: »
    And the Graph for the UK http://www.firsttimebuyerhelp.co.uk/images/youarehere.gif

    ignore the fact that prices dropped 50% after the other two peaks, That was only for erm, several years, property prices do not go down! ;)

    August '05.

    Well done.


  • Registered Users Posts: 952 ✭✭✭shangri la


    Culchie wrote: »
    oh nice website !

    I especially like the "Why rent is not dead money " article :rolleyes: Listen Whizzbang, I hope there are plenty who think like you, because in another 3 or 4 years, I'll have a house I bought to let in 1998 paid off. That isn't meant to be a smart comment, but the reality of the situation. Rent is dead money. If you can afford to buy a house, go ahead and do it. Why should you be paying off my mortgage, when you can be paying off your own? P.S Looks like a good time to invest in Japanese Land then
    the very next post.


  • Registered Users Posts: 952 ✭✭✭shangri la


    whizzbang wrote: »
    I'm happy for you that your house to let will be paid off (10 year mortgage?), I couldn't afford a house in 98 and I can't afford one now.

    I'm looking at it like this.

    I pay rent of $575 a Month Option A Buy Appartment now Pay ?1,796 a month mortgate (?400,000, 30 years, 3.5%) Let say ?1450 per month of that is interest for first 5 years After 5 years I have paid out ?107,760 Of which ?87,000 is interest and ?20,000 is paid off the principle I finish paying the mortgage and pay a total of ?646,624.35 Option B I wait 5 years, Pay ?575 a month on rent = ?6,900 a year Save ?350 a month (difference between mortgage and interest) After 5 years time I have paid out ?34,500 in rent I have saved ?20,000 I get a 25 year mortage on ?380,000 (400,000 - 20,000) Total repayments for which total to ?570,710.87 Add on the rent I spent in the 5 years waiting ?34,500 Add on the ?20,000 I saved Total outlay of ?625,210 ?20,000 less than if I bought now. The only reason this makes sense is that I believe that 5 years time house prices will be less than now. So I am effectivly paying ?34,500 to put off making the decision so I can see if I'm right. Seeing as rents are a lot less than paying the interest on a mortgage it is currently worthwhile to continue to pay rent to put off buying a house to see if prices decrease. If rents rise significantly I have to buy as the number no longer work out, if house prises rise significantly I have to buy as number dont' work out. If house prices drop (which I think they will), or stay level I'm in the money Ireland is not immune to Negative Equity! for some reason people think we are! J
    post of the thread!


  • Registered Users Posts: 413 ✭✭noxqs


    I love reading this forum back to 2005/2006. This is stuff future and current historians should be salivating over.

    Many of the cheerleaders who were frequent posters back then for years, havent said a peep since 2008. I remember a quote:
    "either way a property bought as an investment for the purpose of living in serves that purpose regardless of booms/crashes etc. Its not like stocks and shares."

    This kind of insane "investment" advice from self proclaimed gurus probably influenced a lot of people to do some bad choices. These people boasted about their multiple investment properties, I wonder how that went for them.

    Anyways - enough schadenfreude - but it should be sobering food for thought should you ever find yourself in a market where this is repeating.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 952 ✭✭✭shangri la


    noxqs wrote: »
    but it should be sobering food for thought should you ever find yourself in a market where this is repeating.
    david mcwilliams reckons this is the current situation in australia.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,799 ✭✭✭StillWaters


    Canada looks bubble like also.


  • Registered Users Posts: 436 ✭✭Spiritofthekop


    ...and there's the essential flaw in your plan.

    No offense to you dude, but that's a real 'head in the sand' attitude.

    The first flaw in your arguement is that the cost of property, in the long economic term, only goes in one direction - up.

    If you think the same apartment will cost you the exact same in five years time then you're out of your mind.

    I'll bet you anything that the apt that cost you 400,000 today will cost you 600,000 in 2010.

    The second flaw in your arguement is that you're assuming that interest rates will stay at their current historic low over the next five years. Oil prices hit an all time high today and the trend looks like it will continue, driving up inflation and interest rates in the long term.

    There's only been one good time to buy property and that time is now.

    Can we get Dublinwriter back in the thread please....I've a few questions for him!! :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 319 ✭✭Ritchi


    Good reading in this thread. It seems that the few who bucked the trend turned out to be right.

    Everyone now is saying it's a bad time to buy...


  • Registered Users Posts: 952 ✭✭✭shangri la


    I actually sent them a message this morning about the thread, they logged in a couple of days ago so it might be an interesting view to get.


  • Registered Users Posts: 952 ✭✭✭shangri la


    Ritchi wrote: »
    Good reading in this thread. It seems that the few who bucked the trend turned out to be right.

    Everyone now is saying it's a bad time to buy...

    There was economic reasons in 05 to see the slump happening.

    There are economic reasons now to say prices will continue to drop.

    The difference is people are now thinking for themselves.

    The cycle will repeat itself in 20 years. Such is life. The average person is now lumping into gold which will be the next crash in about 2/3 years.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭GetWithIt


    Ritchi wrote: »
    Everyone now is saying it's a bad time to buy...
    Well a stopped clock is right twice a day.


  • Registered Users Posts: 22,929 ✭✭✭✭ShadowHearth


    Epic zombie thread indeed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,230 ✭✭✭Solair


    I would be very concerned about Australia. While there's a good strong export-led real economy being driven by mining, there's a huge bubble based on massive mortgages building up in Melbourne and Sydney in particular.

    Vancouver's off the scale in terms of house prices at the moment too! Canada also has a track record in this. It's had a major bubble and bust in the recent past.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,366 ✭✭✭whizzbang


    Woo blast from the past! I never did buy and am still renting!

    It is an interesting thread to go back over alright! :)

    In reality 3 of my 4 points did not come into it in the end of it all! It looks like it really all just boils down to how much money banks are willing/able to lend!

    As for now I think we have probably seen about 75% of the drop we are going to see with about 50% (very roughly) taken off the top prices. If you find a place you like and can fund it with a 20 year mortgage on a single salary then I think it may be time for you to buy a place. Making "Cheeky offers" may help with this.

    In reality until the banks are in a position to start lending again I don't see prices stopping falling any time soon. But the rate of fall will probably slow down.

    In summary. There seems to be no downside to waiting a bit longer, but if you find a place you can afford (20 year mortgage on 1 salary) and you want now you won't be doing too bad either.

    J


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,246 ✭✭✭daltonmd


    whizzbang wrote: »
    Woo blast from the past! I never did buy and am still renting!

    It is an interesting thread to go back over alright! :)

    In reality 3 of my 4 points did not come into it in the end of it all! It looks like it really all just boils down to how much money banks are willing/able to lend!

    As for now I think we have probably seen about 75% of the drop we are going to see with about 50% (very roughly) taken off the top prices. If you find a place you like and can fund it with a 20 year mortgage on a single salary then I think it may be time for you to buy a place. Making "Cheeky offers" may help with this.

    In reality until the banks are in a position to start lending again I don't see prices stopping falling any time soon. But the rate of fall will probably slow down.

    In summary. There seems to be no downside to waiting a bit longer, but if you find a place you can afford (20 year mortgage on 1 salary) and you want now you won't be doing too bad either.

    J


    Wow you played a blinder WB, (tips hat), although I think by your posts that even you couldn't envision us being where we are now!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,366 ✭✭✭whizzbang


    daltonmd wrote: »
    Wow you played a blinder WB, (tips hat), although I think by your posts that even you couldn't envision us being where we are now!!

    100% agree! If someone told me then the state we would be in now I would have thought them a complete nut job! Turns out I was too optimistic ;)

    If nothing else I hope these threads caused at least one or two people to question the popular beliefs and make their own decisions!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,246 ✭✭✭daltonmd


    whizzbang wrote: »
    100% agree! If someone told me then the state we would be in now I would have thought them a complete nut job! Turns out I was too optimistic ;)

    If nothing else I hope these threads caused at least one or two people to question the popular beliefs and make their own decisions!


    I found the thread interesting for a lot of reasons, my main one though relates to the government in power - the posts on this thread were, I believe, following the government/VI's line and spin.

    The biggest scariest thing in this thread is that none of those who disagreed with you attempted to work out a "what if" property prices fall or "what if" interest rates rise - or even "what if" I lose my job.

    The thought of any of these three scenarios just didn't come into it at all. We can blame the government for so much (and I do) but when it's your neck on the line the only person you can depend on is you and that being the case do your sums, factor in mortgage interest rises/illness/job loss. If you can't buy a property comfortably then don't.

    I regularly have EA's/mortgage brokers contact me about properties/mortgages - I ask them for a guarantee that if I can't pay that "little" mortgage for the property that is "great value" in 2 years from now, that they will take it over and pay it?

    Needless to say I'm still waiting!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Solair wrote: »
    I would be very concerned about Australia. While there's a good strong export-led real economy being driven by mining, there's a huge bubble based on massive mortgages building up in Melbourne and Sydney in particular.

    The mining really caused a major boom in Western Australia.
    Perth had mushroomed.
    Solair wrote: »
    Vancouver's off the scale in terms of house prices at the moment too! Canada also has a track record in this. It's had a major bubble and bust in the recent past.

    The very noticable thing about Canada was their banks.
    The good old Scottish Presbyterian mindset saved them from the worse excesses of their neighbour's subprime and I think the massive property spending.
    Saying that Canada's prices did go up with some places like Vancouver/Whistler skyrocketing thanks in part to things like the Olympics.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    I found the thread interesting for a lot of reasons, my main one though relates to the government in power - the posts on this thread were, I believe, following the government/VI's line and spin.

    The biggest scariest thing in this thread is that none of those who disagreed with you attempted to work out a "what if" property prices fall or "what if" interest rates rise - or even "what if" I lose my job.

    The thought of any of these three scenarios just didn't come into it at all. We can blame the government for so much (and I do) but when it's your neck on the line the only person you can depend on is you and that being the case do your sums, factor in mortgage interest rises/illness/job loss. If you can't buy a property comfortably then don't.

    Listen people chose to ignore the warnings because it suited them.
    It wasn't that they were just naieve.
    Property was the path to riches for some so they invested like billyo and even if they were just buying as a home, it was just their first step on the ladder and that apartment or 3 bed in Gorey or Naas was going to be flipped for something bigger a few years down the road.
    Check how many Dubs bought in satelite towns, all with the grand aim of moving back to their roots in the capital a few years down the road.

    A lot of people got greedy and very stupid.
    For some it was a case of seeing their neighbours buying stuff and they decided that they had to keep up with the jones.
    Never right off this factor.

    Back in 2006 I had a discussion with a developer friend.
    He claimed I was another McWilliams and that the price of property was right since the population was growing due to immigration.
    Of course he was making wads of cash selling houses in some small country towns that were going to benefit from decentralisation.
    I was just trying to ruin his grand dream.

    Although maybe he took some of my concerns on board, because he did divest himself of some sites at the peak and managed to survive.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,246 ✭✭✭daltonmd


    jmayo wrote: »
    Listen people chose to ignore the warnings because it suited them.
    It wasn't that they were just naieve.
    Property was the path to riches for some so they invested like billyo and even if they were just buying as a home, it was just their first step on the ladder and that apartment or 3 bed in Gorey or Naas was going to be flipped for something bigger a few years down the road.
    Check how many Dubs bought in satelite towns, all with the grand aim of moving back to their roots in the capital a few years down the road.

    A lot of people got greedy and very stupid.
    For some it was a case of seeing their neighbours buying stuff and they decided that they had to keep up with the jones.
    Never right off this factor.

    Back in 2006 I had a discussion with a developer friend.
    He claimed I was another McWilliams and that the price of property was right since the population was growing due to immigration.
    Of course he was making wads of cash selling houses in some small country towns that were going to benefit from decentralisation.
    I was just trying to ruin his grand dream.

    Although maybe he took some of my concerns on board, because he did divest himself of some sites at the peak and managed to survive.

    I really don't think that a lot of people were initially being greedy jmayo - when house prices were spiraling out of control in the major cities a lot of people, driven of course by rising rents, were fed the "buying is cheaper" line, many, many people bought in the commuter belt - it was a frenzy. People had no choice but to buy in the commuter belt - they couldn't afford the areas, working class areas I might add, like Drimnagh, Crumlin, Ballyfermot, Inchicore where they were brought up.

    I remember one ad in particular, from a main bank, where two 20 somethings were in the back of a taxi and both of them had no place to go and then the offer of cheap credit - people were brainwashed into believing property would only go up, rent was dead money, you'll always have a job and your wages will only ever go up.

    People didn't want to hear the warnings? When the Government, the financial regulator and all those people in a position of power told them otherwise - even the opposition did nothing, indeed they fought for higher old age pensions, higher rates of social welfare.

    We have our priorities wrong in this country - we lay down and allow bondholders to be repaid, yet the very people who we need to rebuild this economy are to the pin of their collars repaying the same banks unsustainable mortgages, that they will never be able to repay - a double bail out.

    Sooner or later these people will get to a crossroads and they will default because they will realise that this is the rest of their lives.

    This is a harsh punishment for one financial mistake (in a lot of cases).


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    daltonmd wrote: »
    I really don't think that a lot of people were initially being greedy jmayo - when house prices were spiraling out of control in the major cities a lot of people, driven of course by rising rents, were fed the "buying is cheaper" line, many, many people bought in the commuter belt - it was a frenzy. People had no choice but to buy in the commuter belt - they couldn't afford the areas, working class areas I might add, like Drimnagh, Crumlin, Ballyfermot, Inchicore where they were brought up.

    A fair few people were of the mindset that if they couldn't buy in Dublin then head out to the sticks and buy.
    Why did they feel they had to buy, no matter where ?

    Then they reckoned they could in a few years move back to the capital.
    Hell they did not even register their cars in the counties they were living in, but registered them in Dublin.
    I know a few people that actually managed to make it back to Dublin, but their mortgages must be a millstone around their necks for years to come.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    I remember one ad in particular, from a main bank, where two 20 somethings were in the back of a taxi and both of them had no place to go and then the offer of cheap credit - people were brainwashed into believing property would only go up, rent was dead money, you'll always have a job and your wages will only ever go up.
    I think I remembered that ad as well.
    Then again i didn't run out and buy because I knew property was a bad investment, whether I wanted to rent it or live in it.

    A lot of people believed some of the awful sh**e that was being pedalled.
    They felt they had to get on the ladder, but everything would be alright and their shoebox would be worth 100,000 more and then they could trade up.
    Either they were somewhat greedy and only saw the gains their friends had made or they were idiots ?

    You see your argument would hold more sway if a lot of the ones who are in trouble had not taken out 100% or near enough to 100% mortgages, thus meaning they affectively had no savings to put towards a house purchase.
    Also how many of these purchasers moved into houses with little or no furniture or God forbid second hand furniture ?
    How many of them also appeared to be driving new cars ?
    daltonmd wrote: »
    People didn't want to hear the warnings?
    So was that stupidity or was it because they wanted their slice of the pie now and they would not contenance anything that blew that bubble ?
    daltonmd wrote: »
    We have our priorities wrong in this country - we lay down and allow bondholders to be repaid, yet the very people who we need to rebuild this economy are to the pin of their collars repaying the same banks unsustainable mortgages, that they will never be able to repay - a double bail out.

    So do you suggest a bailout for mortgage holders ?
    If you do then this discussion is over.
    I am not going to support the bail out, sorry firing my current and future taxes, at any more people who made bad economic dicisions.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    Sooner or later these people will get to a crossroads and they will default because they will realise that this is the rest of their lives.

    So the price of property finds a correct market level and banks have more right offs ?
    Should people get to keep something they have not paid for ?
    Should I pay for someone elses home as well as one for my family ?
    daltonmd wrote: »
    This is a harsh punishment for one financial mistake (in a lot of cases).

    Sorry to be harsh but sh** happens.
    When we lived in caves some people were reckless, stupid and sometimes maybe a bit unlucky and got eaten by wild animals.
    Without some of us being maybe a bit smarter, more conservative and a bit luckier we might not exist as a human race today.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,246 ✭✭✭daltonmd


    jmayo wrote: »
    A fair few people were of the mindset that if they couldn't buy in Dublin then head out to the sticks and buy.
    Why did they feel they had to buy, no matter where ?

    Because from every direction, that is what people were hearing.
    jmayo wrote: »
    Then they reckoned they could in a few years move back to the capital.
    Hell they did not even register their cars in the counties they were living in, but registered them in Dublin.
    I know a few people that actually managed to make it back to Dublin, but their mortgages must be a millstone around their necks for years to come.

    Yes - that was the aim for many. It's no different to investors/developers/bankers/government ministers who were doing the same thing. People did make a lot of money out of property and that fed the frenzy.
    jmayo wrote: »
    I think I remembered that ad as well.
    Then again i didn't run out and buy because I knew property was a bad investment, whether I wanted to rent it or live in it.

    Neither did I - but plenty did. Mainly in their 20's and if you look at this demographic of society, they were brought up in remarkably affluent times, they never saw a recession, never drew the dole, probably didn't even know anyone on the dole.
    jmayo wrote: »
    A lot of people believed some of the awful sh**e that was being pedalled.
    They felt they had to get on the ladder, but everything would be alright and their shoebox would be worth 100,000 more and then they could trade up.
    Either they were somewhat greedy and only saw the gains their friends had made or they were idiots ?

    It was being pedalled by the people who were supposed to be in charge, all people could see for years in a row was property going up in price and further from their reach.
    jmayo wrote: »
    You see your argument would hold more sway if a lot of the ones who are in trouble had not taken out 100% or near enough to 100% mortgages, thus meaning they affectively had no savings to put towards a house purchase.
    Also how many of these purchasers moved into houses with little or no furniture or God forbid second hand furniture ?
    How many of them also appeared to be driving new cars ?

    By virtue of the fact that 1000's are in serious trouble, more are in NE , my argument proves itself. While there will always be stupid people and greedy people, you can't say that all those who bought during the boom were.
    Many were/are decent hardworking people/families who simply wanted a home.

    jmayo wrote: »
    So was that stupidity or was it because they wanted their slice of the pie now and they would not contenance anything that blew that bubble ?

    You know this them and you argument infers that you and others who think like you DID NOT benefit from the boom, you did. You paid very little tax, had great tax breaks, pay rises. All of this was from wealth created by the property bubble and the "fools" who bought.


    jmayo wrote: »
    So do you suggest a bailout for mortgage holders ?
    If you do then this discussion is over.
    I am not going to support the bail out, sorry firing my current and future taxes, at any more people who made bad economic dicisions.

    So if I have a different point of view you refuse to discuss? Defeats the purpose of a discussion forum now doesn't it? :)

    There will have to be a debt write-down (not a bailout for mortgage holders) on those who will never be able to pay, there will have to be a write-down for those in serious trouble. We have a section of the workforce trapped all around the country. They cannot sell, cannot find work to pay the mortgage, cannot move for work.

    It astonishes me that people are so dead against this - even though we bailed out bondholders who had no right to such a deal - yet despite the banks already having being bailed out, with money provided to cover mortgage losses, they are STILL getting money off hard pressed people - it is a second bailout, this is money that won't go back to our economy.
    Also, keeping these people on the SW is dragging the economy further - not to mention the dead property market - it will happen.
    By design or accident there will be a write - down of debt.

    jmayo wrote: »
    So the price of property finds a correct market level and banks have more right offs ?
    Should people get to keep something they have not paid for ?
    Should I pay for someone elses home as well as one for my family ?

    It won't find the correct market level because a lot of property on the market is still at elevated prices - because of NE.
    No - people should not get to keep what they have not paid for. If someone is living in a 5 bed in Cabinteely then they should not keep that house - if they can't afford it with some kind of write - down then they lose it.
    This is not about rewarding bad behaviour - it is about freeing up the labour market, freeing up cash that is going to banks and allowing people to start again with a more manageable debt.

    This isn't anything new - it's been done on an hourly basis in the States. We have to look at the bigger picture.

    jmayo wrote: »
    Sorry to be harsh but sh** happens.
    When we lived in caves some people were reckless, stupid and sometimes maybe a bit unlucky and got eaten by wild animals.
    Without some of us being maybe a bit smarter, more conservative and a bit luckier we might not exist as a human race today.

    Christ jmayo - people made a mistake - if they murdered someone their sentence would be lighter. In not giving a write-down it's those left working who are suffering.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,068 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    daltonmd wrote: »
    Because from every direction, that is what people were hearing.

    There is such a thing as personal responsibility.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    Neither did I - but plenty did. Mainly in their 20's and if you look at this demographic of society, they were brought up in remarkably affluent times, they never saw a recession, never drew the dole, probably didn't even know anyone on the dole.

    Yes these would be the same ones who "wanted it all and now".
    Except now a lot of these same people want someone else to pay for their spending.
    Well feck them, the BMW they rode in and the donkey they will ride out on.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    It was being pedalled by the people who were supposed to be in charge, all people could see for years in a row was property going up in price and further from their reach.

    And I will say this as I said in another thread, there were enough people out there saying it will crash.
    Of course they were lambasted and labelled as cranks.
    There was enough history to show that it was an unsustainable bubble and they always result in a crash.
    Hell how many Irish people had seen relatives get burnt in the property bubble of the UK in the late 80s ?

    Of course the naysayers were countered with the BS about how "Ireland was different" and as the poster on this original thread trotted out "property prices always go up ... and have never gone down in Ireland".
    daltonmd wrote: »
    By virtue of the fact that 1000's are in serious trouble, more are in NE , my argument proves itself. While there will always be stupid people and greedy people, you can't say that all those who bought during the boom were.
    Many were/are decent hardworking people/families who simply wanted a home.

    I am not saying everyone was greedy or stupid, but a hell of an amount were.
    FFS you had 21 year olds buying property and a lot of the time as investments because they still wanted to live with mammy.

    You had eejits buying anywhere just to get on the ladder, and they never appeared to notice what type of unwanted property in some unwanted location they were buying.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    You know this them and you argument infers that you and others who think like you DID NOT benefit from the boom, you did. You paid very little tax, had great tax breaks, pay rises. All of this was from wealth created by the property bubble and the "fools" who bought.

    Now you are beginning to sound like a ffer.
    Yeah we are all to blame and we all benefitted. :rolleyes:

    My salary jumped a lot up until 2001, when I became a casualty of the dot com bubble burst.
    Then I had to start again.
    During the construciton bubble, I did not have great pay rises as I did not work in the public sector or in construction.
    As for all the benefits I saw a fair few disadvantages like more traffic snarl ups trying to get to work and a general increase in the cost of living.
    Oh and having to listen to all the muppets lecturing me how I was an idioit because I didn't own a few investment pads and how women would see me as a loser since I was driving an old car. :rolleyes:
    daltonmd wrote: »
    So if I have a different point of view you refuse to discuss? Defeats the purpose of a discussion forum now doesn't it? :)

    No I find discussing how my taxes are going to be wasted rather infuriating.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    There will have to be a debt write-down (not a bailout for mortgage holders) on those who will never be able to pay, there will have to be a write-down for those in serious trouble. We have a section of the workforce trapped all around the country. They cannot sell, cannot find work to pay the mortgage, cannot move for work.

    So what exactly do you mean by a debt write-down ?
    So these ones that cannot sell, cannot repay the mortgage, cannot move, will they get to keep their properties and enjoy a debt write down ?
    daltonmd wrote: »
    It astonishes me that people are so dead against this - even though we bailed out bondholders who had no right to such a deal - yet despite the banks already having being bailed out, with money provided to cover mortgage losses, they are STILL getting money off hard pressed people - it is a second bailout, this is money that won't go back to our economy.

    If you bother reading my posts you will find I was one of the most ardent opposers of NAMA, bank bailouts for the likes of Anglo/INBS and would most certainly have asset stripped every one of the developers and their sprogs.

    The banks are STILL getting money off hard pressed people, because those people STILL OWE money.
    Fecks sake you would swear that the banks are acting like a Mafia loanshark and that the people are been chased for no reason.
    The people signed up for loans and mortgages and the banks are trying to get repayment.

    The money allocated for mortgage debts should not be used if people can continue to pay for their mortgages in some fashion.
    BTW that money allocated to banks for mortgage losses is funded by the taxpayers and if some of it can be recouped without being used then it is all the better for the taxpayers.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    Also, keeping these people on the SW is dragging the economy further - not to mention the dead property market - it will happen.
    By design or accident there will be a write - down of debt.

    It won't find the correct market level because a lot of property on the market is still at elevated prices - because of NE.
    No - people should not get to keep what they have not paid for. If someone is living in a 5 bed in Cabinteely then they should not keep that house - if they can't afford it with some kind of write - down then they lose it.

    If by the debt writedown you mean they enter a form of bankruptcy then fine, but there should be no debt write down where they can walk away, dumping their debts on the rest of us and immediately be allowed start again.
    That is a slap in the face to those who didn't go overboard and those who are doing their best to meet their debts.
    There has to be some form of economic punishment for dumping your debts.
    And being forced to give up your property should only be part of it.
    daltonmd wrote: »
    Christ jmayo - people made a mistake - if they murdered someone their sentence would be lighter. In not giving a write-down it's those left working who are suffering.

    Jaysus don't get me started on the criminal system. :mad:
    I would have life meaning life and none of this out in less than 10 with remission for good behaviour sh**e. :mad:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    daltonmd wrote: »
    Christ jmayo - people made a mistake - if they murdered someone their sentence would be lighter. In not giving a write-down it's those left working who are suffering.
    Does everyone get one free taxpayer funded bailout or is this just for people who overpaid for property? What about the people who have seen their pensions decimated over the past few years? Or what about the people who decided to rent and not "do anything to get on the housing ladder", will they get a free house out of this?

    BTW, for more on Dublin Writer see this thread
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=74210844


Advertisement