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

Would you consider voting a Majority Fianna fail for the next government?

Options
1192021222325»

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    Not necessarily. Others will buy the same house and now make substantial improvements to it.
    What?? Several people buy the same house in put in new bathrooms or something? :confused:

    I think the leap of logic you were going for is that everyone else in the market is still willing and able to pay what they were willing and able to pay the day before, and the property will be bid back up to its original market clearing price of 550k. Can you explain a mechanism that will prevent this?
    Just to get this straight. You think that a house that costs €500,000 today, will cost €550,000 tomorrow evening, if stamp duty is abolished tonight?
    Yes, it will. It's basic economics. You can protest all you like, but you haven't made any argument to show otherwise.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    Yes, it will. It's basic economics. You can protest all you like, but you haven't made any argument to show otherwise.

    I have explained to you already that Ireland is a case in point. Cutting stamp duty lowered the cost of home ownership, and therefore stoked demand.

    why do you think cuts in stamp duty caused an increase in demand in Ireland?

    Answer my question - are you saying Fianna Fáil are not to blame for their stamp duty interventions?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    I have explained to you already that Ireland is a case in point. Cutting stamp duty lowered the cost of home ownership, and therefore stoked demand.
    Um...no, you started waffling about some point I never raised.

    I have asked you repeatedly to explain why the market clearing price of a property (which is highly inelastic in supply in the short term) will slump in response to a stamp duty cut. You have offered nothing, but have tried to deflect several times.
    why do you think cuts in stamp duty caused an increase in demand in Ireland?

    Answer my question - are you saying Fianna Fáil are not to blame for their stamp duty interventions?
    Yes, deflections exactly like that.


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 8,573 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wilberto


    Not necessarily. Others will buy the same house and now make substantial improvements to it.

    Just to get this straight. You think that a house that costs €500,000 today, will cost €550,000 tomorrow evening, if stamp duty is abolished tonight?

    So why has this never happened, anywhere?


    I can see exactly what you're saying in fairness, and it makes sense. If a person has €550k to buy a property worth €500k plus €50k stamp duty suddenly finds out that stamp duty is going to be abolished (:rolleyes: !) then they now have €550k to spend on a property, meaning that they can either look for properties worth €550k or still buy the property for €500k and make improvements to it from the remining €50k.

    But, you also mentioned cuts in stamp duty leading to increased demand. This will, on its own, lead to higher prices.


    However, and I think this is the argument that Anynama was making, if a person is willing to spend €550k on a property, then they're willing to spend €550k on a property, regardless of where the other €50k is going to go.


    It ultimately depends on whether the market factors in the cost of stamp duty into the price of the property. (((Aswell as about a million other factors of course:P)))


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Anynama141


    Wilberto wrote: »
    I can see exactly what you're saying in fairness, and it makes sense. If a person has €550k to buy a property worth €500k plus €50k stamp duty suddenly finds out that stamp duty is going to be abolished (:rolleyes: !) then they now have €550k to spend on a property, meaning that they can either look for properties worth €550k or still buy the property for €500k and make improvements to it from the remining €50k.
    But the problem with this line of thinking is that everybody else in the market also still has all the same money they had before, and the number of houses for sale has not decreased - so why would everybody not still have to pay 550k for the house that they were willing to pay 550k for the day before? Why has the market clearing price shifted?

    Or look at it from the perspective of a seller - you were marketing your house for 500k, you knew that the real market price was actually 550k (500 + 50). If the government scraps the tax, you can expect to get all of that 550k, not just 500k of it.
    Wilberto wrote: »
    However, and I think this is the argument that Anynama was making, if a person is willing to spend €550k on a property, then they're willing to spend €550k on a property, regardless of where the other €50k is going to go.
    Yup, that's it in essence. You are still competing to buy the same range of properties with the same range of competing buyers who all have the same budgets. The idea that the price they have to pay to purchase a property would suddenly drop in that context is ridiculous.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    I dream that one day we'll live in a democratic Ireland where we can vote out politicians we don't like, and thus hold them accountable.



    Nah... I'm just kidding... that's what we currently have.

    Yeah, but what about the time in between the start of their 5 year tenure right up to the last day of the 5 years, will we see any accountability, no--if the politicians want to give themselves an wage increase every year, have we any say, no--do we have any say as regards of any potential waste of taxpayers money, No etc etc. I think you get the idea, do ya?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    Anynama141 wrote: »
    You pay motor tax after you pay your car*. And the bigger your engine, the more you pay. What's the difference?

    *Unless you are a Freeman.

    Or unless my house is unmovable, stationary, static.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,274 ✭✭✭darkhorse


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    A few things.

    You might think someone repeatedly lying about being too stupid to answer your questions wouldn't frustrate you, but I'd guess it'd annoy you at least a little.

    You might also be reading "angry" into my sarcasm. That happens.

    Finally regarding different definitions of accountable, the poster in question seems to agree with my definition, except that he thinks the only sorts of elections that hold people accountable are ones driven by a referenda. Begging the question: if no one called a referenda to oust a pol, would darkhorse want an end to all other elections?

    In other words, elections are only a way to hold someone accountable if they're driven by referenda, maybe, but maybe not...

    It's a load of crap.

    And one of his dozens of silly posts (which he'll probably claim he's too stupid to understand himself, if he even remembers he wrote it) which don't bear any scrutiny.

    It's also a passive aggressive insult: ie only people that want referenda driven special elections care or demand accountability.

    As if.

    When it comes down to it, you don't half talk a lot of sh1te yourself.


Advertisement