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

Dead Cat Society

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    The Spider
    Registered Users Posts: 1,273 ✭✭✭The Spider


    You can't force people out of their homes, that they've had for decades, just because other people want to live there, older people have raised families in those houses, they still regard them as home, they have the right to pass that property on to their families.

    They have the right to those houses, they worked all their lives for them, nobody else has a 'right' to their property just because they feel they'd put it to better use.

    You have the right to earn more money that will allow you to buy these houses if they're for sale, but you have no right to a house just because you have a longer drive to work, seriously some of the nonsense, tax them out of their house etc.


  • Options
    #33
    stevedublin
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭stevedublin


    The Spider wrote: »
    ... tax them out of their house ...

    This is the way things will pan out, I suspect.


  • Options
    #34
    The Spider
    Registered Users Posts: 1,273 ✭✭✭The Spider


    stevedublin wrote: »
    This is the way things will pan out, I suspect.

    Doubt it to be honest, you're talking about the biggest voting demographic there is, the pensioners, any move in that direction will see the government taken down, and quite swiftly I'd imagine.


  • Options
    #35
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,359 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    The Spider wrote: »
    You can't force people out of their homes, that they've had for decades, just because other people want to live there, older people have raised families in those houses, they still regard them as home, they have the right to pass that property on to their families.

    They have the right to those houses, they worked all their lives for them, nobody else has a 'right' to their property just because they feel they'd put it to better use.

    You have the right to earn more money that will allow you to buy these houses if they're for sale, but you have no right to a house just because you have a longer drive to work, seriously some of the nonsense, tax them out of their house etc.

    Nobody has really suggested forcing anybody out of their house. There was a suggestion that LPT may be an incentive for people to downsize. That was it.

    If you have taken my suggestion of a better use of resources as somehow claiming a right to a house with a smaller commute then you got that wrong too.

    Given there are many people with low fixed income but a large useful asset others would get more use of it makes sense to come up with a combined strategy. Tax incentive to selling your home to a family and a tax break on using that money for a pension fund.

    The government have to spend a fortune building new infrastructure while other infrastructure is being under utilised as the families don't live near it.

    It would be possible to convert some of the old property into accommodation suitable for OAPS too so they may stay in the area.

    You could even throw in a time share option for a foreign property. This could all be a very good thing for all involved. It would also be voluntary.

    They kind of do it in a very small scale with some council owned property. I know one OAP who sold her old council property back to the council and they put her in a new council bungalow specifically for elderly people. She has a nest egg and a place to live until she dies.

    I think there is a retirement community a bit like it in Moate too. The problem being it is in Moate which isn't much help for a Dubliner who wants to stay close to their community


  • Options
    #36
    The Spider
    Registered Users Posts: 1,273 ✭✭✭The Spider


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    Nobody has really suggested forcing anybody out of their house. There was a suggestion that LPT may be an incentive for people to downsize. That was it.

    If you have taken my suggestion of a better use of resources as somehow claiming a right to a house with a smaller commute then you got that wrong too.

    Given there are many people with low fixed income but a large useful asset others would get more use of it makes sense to come up with a combined strategy. Tax incentive to selling your home to a family and a tax break on using that money for a pension fund.

    The government have to spend a fortune building new infrastructure while other infrastructure is being under utilised as the families don't live near it.

    It would be possible to convert some of the old property into accommodation suitable for OAPS too so they may stay in the area.

    You could even throw in a time share option for a foreign property. This could all be a very good thing for all involved. It would also be voluntary.

    They kind of do it in a very small scale with some council owned property. I know one OAP who sold her old council property back to the council and they put her in a new council bungalow specifically for elderly people. She has a nest egg and a place to live until she dies.

    I think there is a retirement community a bit like it in Moate too. The problem being it is in Moate which isn't much help for a Dubliner who wants to stay close to their community

    I don't have a particular problem with downsizing, as long as the people involved don't feel forced into it, I suppose that if they did want to downsize, they would have to downsize in the same area, so if they'd lived all their lives in Sandymount, they would have to have somewhere in Sandymount to downsize to.

    Don't underestimate the value of having people you know around you and having people you run into down the local etc. Something I'm becoming more aware of as I get older and especially after living in Dublin and moving from place to place and not really settling.

    The value it could be said is in the friends and neighbours more so than the house, although the other side is that a lot of people will look on the house as part of the kids inheritance.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    moxin wrote: »
    If the demand cannot afford the prices asked, its really down to the sellers if they really wanted to sell the asset or not.
    Yes. So it could turn into a German type property market where few people sell (so supply is constrained) and where sellers are content to wait for their buyer.

    That's all I'm saying: prices don't have to be high just because of easy credit. They can remain high because few people choose to sell and decide maybe to extend/improve what they have.


  • Options
    #38
    xper
    Registered Users Posts: 1,062 ✭✭✭xper


    Pawwed Rig wrote: »
    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    A proper incentive scheme should be designed with specialist property being built for ageing residents. That would include proper sound proofed property, disability toilets and showers in each property, allowance for pets, nurse on call etc...
    This is a great idea but I fear by the time the HSE and HIQA have implemented the regulations for such a venture it would end up being prohibitively expensive for anyone that actually wants to live there.
    Actually, while they may not be as commonplace as in the States, these kind of places already exists in Ireland. There's one in Shankill, Co. Dublin, for example: http://www.beechfieldnursinghomegroup.ie/apartments.html


  • Options
    #39
    gaius c
    Registered Users Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭gaius c


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    Isn't the point that a "dead cat bounce" is not standard or always applicable. The suggest is it doesn't even exist with property market and is a term borrowed from stock market discussions.
    Lack of supply is a normal market is causing a normal reaction of higher prices. The prices in Dublin could easily be said to have contracted too much as a result of the bust and are now springing back to an appropriate level.
    The assumption seems to be that the increases will continue. They could easily just stop.
    The bust stopped a lot of people buying so there is a massive pent up demand. Does that mean this is just a blip of a stabilisation of prices for true demand with a limit supply. The fact it is for houses could be a reaction to apartment price drops and lack of value retention. It probably has to do with people who are already in apartments too.

    Worth watching but it doesn't mean it is something to worry about either.

    http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/graphs-last-house-price-crash.php
    You can see both a bull trap and dead cat bounce in this graph of the 1990's UK property crash.

    Bull Trap : Jan 1990
    Dead Cat Bounce : Jan 1993


  • Options
    #40
    McDook
    Registered Users Posts: 113 ✭✭McDook


    gaius c wrote: »
    http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/graphs-last-house-price-crash.php
    You can see both a bull trap and dead cat bounce in this graph of the 1990's UK property crash.

    Bull Trap : Jan 1990
    Dead Cat Bounce : Jan 1993

    I see a pattern here.

    http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/indices-nationwide-national-inflation.php

    There arent just price falls over time. Money to be made.


  • Options
    #41
    gaius c
    Registered Users Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭gaius c


    McDook wrote: »
    I see a pattern here.

    http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/indices-nationwide-national-inflation.php

    There arent just price falls over time. Money to be made.

    Actually house prices tend to track, not exceed inflation over time. Sure they have to, otherwise the proportion of people able to afford property will decrease to zero over time.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    McDook
    Registered Users Posts: 113 ✭✭McDook


    gaius c wrote: »
    Actually house prices tend to track, not exceed inflation over time. Sure they have to, otherwise the proportion of people able to afford property will decrease to zero over time.

    Boom, bust, bigger boom, bigger bust, bigger boom .....
    Last few busts I remember how it was the end of the world too. And people were all saying at the time of the signs of recovery that it would not recover. That it was different this time and therefore would never recover.
    Yes the reasons were always different, but the cycle continued the same regardless.

    They said the opposite during boom times too.


  • Options
    #43
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users Posts: 19,613 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    McDook wrote: »
    Boom, bust, bigger boom, bigger bust, bigger boom .....
    Last few busts I remember how it was the end of the world too. And people were all saying at the time of the signs of recovery that it would not recover. That it was different this time and therefore would never recover.
    Yes the reasons were always different, but the cycle continued the same regardless.

    They said the opposite during boom times too.

    In fairness you can't just compare what people said wrongly back then to prove a point about a recovery in the here and now.
    The thing that is very different about this bust compared to the busts of the past is that never before has the nation owed so much. Depending on which commentator you listen to we collectively owe €220bn-240bn. Think about that- a nation of 4.5 million people owe a debt of €220 billion euro. As a nation the debt is a massive millstone around our necks and it is totally unsustainable.


  • Options
    #44
    McDook
    Registered Users Posts: 113 ✭✭McDook


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    In fairness you can't just compare what people said wrongly back then to prove a point about a recovery in the here and now.
    The thing that is very different about this bust compared to the busts of the past is that never before has the nation owed so much. Depending on which commentator you listen to we collectively owe €220bn-240bn. Think about that- a nation of 4.5 million people owe a debt of €220 billion euro. As a nation the debt is a massive millstone around our necks and it is totally unsustainable.

    We'll see. Im willing to bet that property prices are going to rise, even higher than they were before. Then they will crash again, even worse than the last one.
    People always think its going to be different this time. Good or bad.


  • Options
    #45
    OMD
    Registered Users Posts: 2,458 ✭✭✭OMD


    gaius c wrote: »
    Actually house prices tend to track, not exceed inflation over time. Sure they have to, otherwise the proportion of people able to afford property will decrease to zero over time.

    Average house price may track inflation but that does not mean the price of the average house will track inflation.
    For example the population of Dublin increased about 20% in the 15 years between 1996 and 2011. While average price may be expected to remain the same as people move further and further away from the city centre. However houses nearer the centre will increase in price as demand increases for these areas. So in 1996, the average property price was based on a smaller number of houses which were nearer the city centre. Over the years since huge numbers of properties were added but in far out places such as Lucan etc.
    People on this site (not necessarily you) constantly misunderstand this. There are countless comments from people who cannot understand how the house their granny bought in Ranelagh or wherever 60 years ago has gone up way more than inflation and then point this out as some kind of proof that property is overvalued.


  • Options
    #46
    gaius c
    Registered Users Posts: 3,528 ✭✭✭gaius c


    McDook wrote: »
    Boom, bust, bigger boom, bigger bust, bigger boom .....
    Last few busts I remember how it was the end of the world too. And people were all saying at the time of the signs of recovery that it would not recover. That it was different this time and therefore would never recover.
    Yes the reasons were always different, but the cycle continued the same regardless.

    They said the opposite during boom times too.

    What's that got to do with my point?
    You're extrapolating micro-scale fluctuations over a macro-scale period instead of being honest and admitting that you're talking about flipping & speculation.
    Serious investors look at yields, not capital gains.


  • Options
    #47
    McDook
    Registered Users Posts: 113 ✭✭McDook


    gaius c wrote: »
    What's that got to do with my point?
    You're extrapolating micro-scale fluctuations over a macro-scale period instead of being honest and admitting that you're talking about flipping & speculation.
    Serious investors look at yields, not capital gains.


    Great yields to be had these days investing in property. I wouldnt look at capital gains at all if I were you, but think of them as a nice to have.
    But property investment is not for me. I prefer the markets myself.

    Point being people always think its going to be different. ALWAYS.
    The last boom was no exception and the last bust was no exception.
    It will just keep going and there will always be people who think it is going to be different this time.

    So, Like I said we'll see what happens next. Just look at the thread going on for nearly a year a bout a glut of repossessions bringing down house prices. How long does it have to go on before they finally call it and admit it hasnt happend. Forever it seems.


Advertisement