Cost of living

kilopret

I'm just wondering if Irish governments ever tries to address the cost of living. Rent is one thing, but doctors have raised there prices again for example(70 quid for bloods+15minute gp vistit in Galway). I think a low cost economy would be a good idea,as it makes us more competitive for wages and the likes.It seems to be a large part of how Ireland positions itself when attracting jobs here.
But if the cost of living goes up then wages go up and that would seem to have a negative impact on the country.
Does this government plan to do anything about this?

Wanderer78

Short answer, no, as 'the market', and blah blah blah blah!

Hitman3000

kilopret wrote:

I'm just wondering if Irish governments ever tries to address the cost of living. Rent is one thing, but doctors have raised there prices again for example(70 quid for bloods+15minute gp vistit in Galway). I think a low cost economy would be a good idea,as it makes us more competitive for wages and the likes.It seems to be a large part of how Ireland positions itself when attracting jobs here. But if the cost of living goes up then wages go up and that would seem to have a negative impact on the country. Does this government plan to do anything about this?

Why would the government do anything as they are responsible for a significant portion of the costs we experience deal with. The government has already being advised that the housing crisis is costing inward investment and inability to fill certain jobs. Do you see any action?

bk

kilopret wrote: »

I think a low cost economy would be a good idea,as it makes us more competitive for wages and the likes.It seems to be a large part of how Ireland positions itself when attracting jobs here.
But if the cost of living goes up then wages go up and that would seem to have a negative impact on the country.

Ireland is no longer a low cost location and doesn't really push itself as such any more.

It has done really well attracting high wage IT, financial services, etc. jobs and this is likely to accelerate with Brexit.

And rightfully so, we are now a modern, successful, Western European country, with a very well educated, English speaking workforce. Their is no reason why we shouldn't be earning as much as people in Amsterdam, Copenhagen, etc.

The days of underselling ourselves as the poor of Europe are gone and about time.

kilopret

bk wrote: »

Ireland is no longer a low cost location and doesn't really push itself as such any more.

It has done really well attracting high wage IT, financial services, etc. jobs and this is likely to accelerate with Brexit.

And rightfully so, we are now a modern, successful, Western European country, with a very well educated, English speaking workforce. Their is no reason why we shouldn't be earning as much as people in Amsterdam, Copenhagen, etc.

The days of underselling ourselves as the poor of Europe are gone and about time.

This is my fear with this thinking.
Those jobs can only go to a certain percentage of people with a third level education in that area.
And if something happens,like companies pull out of Ireland for better value elsewhere, which we are seeing a lot of at the moment in IT. (Id imagine more will leave after 2020)
You cant just cross into another sector without 4 years and about 15-20k in university fees.
There seems to be little cross pollination between sectors anymore due everyone needing a third level degree, which adds to the costs again.

Having our living costs marked up dosent really do us any favors as it just means we have less money to do what we want with because everything is relatively more expensive. And on the flip side we endanger what made Ireland a place where you didnt have to move to another country at 18.

Is my reasoning flawed or is there something I'm missing?
Do you not think we could compete better with those countries if living costs were cheaper here?

hatrickpatrick

bk wrote: »

Ireland is no longer a low cost location and doesn't really push itself as such any more.

It has done really well attracting high wage IT, financial services, etc. jobs and this is likely to accelerate with Brexit.

And rightfully so, we are now a modern, successful, Western European country, with a very well educated, English speaking workforce. Their is no reason why we shouldn't be earning as much as people in Amsterdam, Copenhagen, etc.

The days of underselling ourselves as the poor of Europe are gone and about time.

It cancels out, though. People being paid higher wages doesn't help with quality of life if basic living expenses such as food, lodging, utilities etc are also subject to massive inflation. Higher wages don't equal higher quality of life, higher disposable income does, and the way things are going in Ireland that is rapidly becoming non existent, particularly if you're trying to live anywhere near Dublin as (a) the cost of lodging is higher, but more often overlooked (b), the cost of goods is generally also higher, everything from a pint or meal in a bar to a weekly grocery shop.

Commercial rates and rents are a huge part of this problem IMO. It's widely believed that Dun Laoghaire's dead main street was killed by three factors - high rents, high rates, and on top of this the introduction of universal and high parking fees making coming to Dun Laoghaire for the day by car an absolute nightmare. Two out of those three factors are controllable by government, but do you think they'd even think about compromising the money they use for their vanity projects and fact finding missions to the tropics? Not on your nelly.

Absolute joke, tbh. Once again, this isn't about defunding necessary services, it's about Ireland's total unwillingness to cut down on administrative and governmental extravagance.

James Brown

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It cancels out, though. People being paid higher wages doesn't help with quality of life if basic living expenses such as food, lodging, utilities etc are also subject to massive inflation. Higher wages don't equal higher quality of life, higher disposable income does, and the way things are going in Ireland that is rapidly becoming non existent, particularly if you're trying to live anywhere near Dublin as (a) the cost of lodging is higher, but more often overlooked (b), the cost of goods is generally also higher, everything from a pint or meal in a bar to a weekly grocery shop.

Commercial rates and rents are a huge part of this problem IMO. It's widely believed that Dun Laoghaire's dead main street was killed by three factors - high rents, high rates, and on top of this the introduction of universal and high parking fees making coming to Dun Laoghaire for the day by car an absolute nightmare. Two out of those three factors are controllable by government, but do you think they'd even think about compromising the money they use for their vanity projects and fact finding missions to the tropics? Not on your nelly.

Absolute joke, tbh. Once again, this isn't about defunding necessary services, it's about Ireland's total unwillingness to cut down on administrative and governmental extravagance.

The dead high street issue is happening in a lot of areas/countries. There was the concern that because of globalisation every street in every city would become homogenised anyway. Then you've rents and rates only the bigger chains can afford. That's why you've Carroll's gift shops throughout Dublin city and the likes of Starbucks and McDonald's taking over around the world. I'm not sure how you could fairly combat that. There was talk of cultural zones or metering out the amount of one kind of retailer per area, but I'm not sure how workable that would be.
As for cost of living, we have a profit driven model we keenly adhere to. That's where we get our over reliance on the tax payer to pick up the back end. We really need to look at the business first (and last) model our governments follow. If we've a crash before the next boom, it'll be a harder sell to claim is was the average punter 'going mad' or partying, not that any big two non-party affiliate ever bought that.

bk

kilopret wrote: »

This is my fear with this thinking.
Those jobs can only go to a certain percentage of people with a third level education in that area.

Sure, but those well paying jobs bring money into the economy. People with those jobs go out to pubs and restaurants and coffee shops, which in turn employ people without education, etc.

kilopret wrote: »

And if something happens,like companies pull out of Ireland for better value elsewhere, which we are seeing a lot of at the moment in IT. (Id imagine more will leave after 2020)

What companies? I work in IT, it is absolutely on fire, companies are trying to employ people left, right and center and simply can't fill positions. The biggest issue the IT industry has at the moment is that they simply can't find enough people to fill their positions. That is what limits the industry from growing even bigger in Ireland.

kilopret wrote: »

You cant just cross into another sector without 4 years and about 15-20k in university fees.

20k in fees to invest in your future! In the bigger scheme of things that is nothing.

Plus if you are a mature student then their are plenty of grants that knock that down.

When I was at college, there was a mature student who had a family with three kids and worked at night as a bouncer while studying. He is now a director of a major IT company in the UK and is making 7 figures!

Ireland has amazing opportunities if you are willing to work hard. Pretty excellent universities that are in demand with employers around the world and cost a fraction of what an education in the US would cost you.

kilopret wrote: »

Having our living costs marked up dosent really do us any favors as it just means we have less money to do what we want with because everything is relatively more expensive.

Living costs going up is only an issue if wages aren't also increasing to match it. And from the various salary surveys I've seen they are.

Norway has the highest living costs in the world? Is that a problem? Of course not, because they also have the highest wages to match it.

And this comes with a significant advantage, it means your Euro goes much further when travelling. I'll never forget when I went to the Temple Bar with some Norwegian friends, they were amazed at how cheap it was and bought me whiskies all night :eek:

kilopret wrote: »

And on the flip side we endanger what made Ireland a place where you didnt have to move to another country at 18.

And that is the point, smart, well educated people no longer have to leave the country, because the jobs are right here and they pay relatively well.

kilopret wrote: »

Is my reasoning flawed or is there something I'm missing?
Do you not think we could compete better with those countries if living costs were cheaper here?

What you are missing out on is we are once again approaching low unemployment rates, so what would be the point in trying to be a low cost country, when most people are already happily employed and earning comparatively decent wages?

And the thing is, there really is no alternative.

We still have agriculture, but automation means nowhere near as many people are employed in it as in the past.

We were never an industrial power due to missing the whole industrial revolution and tell me do you really want to earn €1 a day working for 12 hours in a factory? Because that is what you need to do to compete with China, etc. in manufacturing.

That isn't to say that there aren't issues we need to deal with. We certainly do, we need to tackle the housing crisis and the rising costs of it. We need to be building large numbers of high quality apartments near high quality public transport like Metro North and DART underground, which also need to be built, so that we can keep housing costs down and continue to attract in the companies employing all these nice high paying jobs.

But lets not try and wish back the idiocracy of the 50's to 70's.

We really need to get over our inferiority complex and realise that we have all the tools to be a rich and successful small northern European country.

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It cancels out, though. People being paid higher wages doesn't help with quality of life if basic living expenses such as food, lodging, utilities etc are also subject to massive inflation. Higher wages don't equal higher quality of life, higher disposable income does, and the way things are going in Ireland that is rapidly becoming non existent, particularly if you're trying to live anywhere near Dublin as (a) the cost of lodging is higher, but more often overlooked (b), the cost of goods is generally also higher, everything from a pint or meal in a bar to a weekly grocery shop.

Commercial rates and rents are a huge part of this problem IMO. It's widely believed that Dun Laoghaire's dead main street was killed by three factors - high rents, high rates, and on top of this the introduction of universal and high parking fees making coming to Dun Laoghaire for the day by car an absolute nightmare. Two out of those three factors are controllable by government, but do you think they'd even think about compromising the money they use for their vanity projects and fact finding missions to the tropics? Not on your nelly.

Absolute joke, tbh. Once again, this isn't about defunding necessary services, it's about Ireland's total unwillingness to cut down on administrative and governmental extravagance.

Dun Laoghaire's main street was killed by the N11, the Luas, the DART and the M50.

Dun Laoghaire is inaccessible by car, it is not just the parking restrictions, it is the narrow streets, the one-way system etc. As a result the hinterland for Dun Laoghaire has shrinked enormously. You live in Cabinteely? Jump on the N11 to Stillorgan or the M50 to Dundrum, even Dunnes in Cornelscourt and Carrickmines Retail are much easier to get to.

bk

Dun Laoghaire's reason for being was one of Ireland's main tourist destinations. This was destroyed by Ryanair and package holidays to Spain. It then got hit by a second shock with the building of Dundrum. Who wants to shop in Dun Laoghaires cramped, small, dark, crappy shopping street when you can drive to and park of free at the massive Dundrum instead.

Having said that they have done an amazing job in revitalising the area down by the sea front, with covering over the train line, building of the Library, etc. It has now become a major weekend day trip destination, absolutely jam packed at the weekends, with the pubs, cafes, restaurants along the sea front booming. Really quiet impressive given the challenges it faced and pretty much a case study on how to revitalise an area through pedestrianisation.

RDM_83 again

One thing they could tackle but they won't is insurance and the legal sector (the two are in some ways intertwined).

The government could fairly easily change various laws/guidelines/books of qorum(?) to bring Irish insurance costs more in-line with European averages.
This isn't just something affecting personal motorists or home-owners, there has been substantial increases in costs for businesses too.

The rental/housing crisis is something that will be difficult to tackle and may have a longer lead in time, insurance costs could probably be fixed with much less effort- it may damage certain legal professionals bank accounts though so nothing will likely be done

kilopret

Thanks for the well thought out reply BK , you gave me something to think about.
However,I think the overall problem with this line of thinking stems from the fact that this is what things are, this is how they will always be.

bk wrote: »

Sure, but those well paying jobs bring money into the economy. People with those jobs go out to pubs and restaurants and coffee shops, which in turn employ people without education, etc.

What companies? I work in IT, it is absolutely on fire, companies, are trying to employ people left, right and center and simply can't fill positions. The biggest issue the IT industry has at the moment is that they simply can't find enough people to fill their positions. That is what limits the industry from growing even bigger in Ireland.

So we both seem to work in the same industry. You can hire 4 senior developers in India for the cost of 1 in Ireland at the moment. I think the average was about 800 euro a month per engineer. I have noticed more IT jobs going to Asia or to other lower cost countries lately. I cant name companies but, just talking to people who work in various different companies around Ireland, its definitely something I'm hearing more about.

Its a similar situation to what I witnessed happening a few years ago to HR and other operational related roles that left Ireland a few years ago. And its something I'm guessing happened in the mid to late 90s with manufacturing. I think the difference then was we were lucky to be in a position to move into better roles in multinationals.Of course, this is anecdotal and my own experience so I do hope I'm wrong about this!

bk wrote: »

20k in fees to invest in your future! In the bigger scheme of things that is nothing.

I would have agreed with you before I got married, got a mortgage and had kids

But the thought of doing all that with a 4 year degree as well while working a full time job,making less money then I'm used too while having the stress of exams around the corner is terrifying.

bk wrote: »

Plus if you are a mature student then their are plenty of grants that knock that down.
When I was at college, there was a mature student who had a family with three kids and worked at night as a bouncer while studying. He is now a director of a major IT company in the UK and is making 7 figures!

Studying all day working all night with 3 kids is an incredibly difficult situation, I really hope I dont have to do that.
I'm glad he's doing well, but it I would rather more cross pollination of skills to other industries. I find grads, coming from universities spend too much time,like way too much time, on academic side of IT. Sure, they can recite the OSI model and tell me what the 4 characteristics of an object orientated programming language are but cant give me some psedocode on reversing a string.

bk wrote: »

Ireland has amazing opportunities if you are willing to work hard. Pretty excellent universities that are in demand with employers around the world and cost a fraction of what an education in the US would cost you.
Living costs going up is only an issue if wages aren't also increasing to match it. And from the various salary surveys I've seen they are.

I think that's a problem. Given that these jobs come from companies that are in Ireland because its cheaper would leave if they had to pay people more.
And I still think its better to have the wages high and the cost of living low, that way you have more disposable income when things are good. And not a horrible contraction when it hits the fan. For example 2008 and the building sector.

bk wrote: »

Norway has the highest living costs in the world? Is that a problem? Of course not, because they also have the highest wages to match it.

And this comes with a significant advantage, it means your Euro goes much further when travelling. I'll never forget when I went to the Temple Bar with some Norwegian friends, they were amazed at how cheap it was and bought me whiskies all night :eek:

I dont know much about how Norway does this, if you know please let me know.
But in saying that, is Norway as reliant on FDI as Ireland is and are they competing with countries that we have to compete with, I'm not sure they do.

bk wrote: »

And that is the point, smart, well educated people no longer have to leave the country, because the jobs are right here and they pay relatively well.

I hope this continues and I'm been unreasonably paranoid.
But I watched people think the Celtic Tiger wouldn't end and we all saw how that ended. This time around its Educated people that need a particular type of job and those jobs are mainly coming from companies that want to set up here for cost.
Sure we have an educated work force but I dont think we are unique for that.

bk wrote: »

What you are missing out on is we are once again approaching low unemployment rates, so what would be the point in trying to be a low cost country, when most people are already happily employed and earning comparatively decent wages?

More disposable income, better quality of life!

bk wrote: »

And the thing is, there really is no alternative.

We still have agriculture, but automation means nowhere near as many people are employed in it as in the past.

We were never an industrial power due to missing the whole industrial revolution and tell me do you really want to earn €1 a day working for 12 hours in a factory? Because that is what you need to do to compete with China, etc. in manufacturing.

I think there may have been a misunderstanding I want us to have a lower cost of living and I think it would benefit people working in higher skilled jobs as well.But I do think having that back up of manufacturing work is overall better for the country.
For example, I was chatting to a guy setting up a company selling an electronic device. He had to get it manufactured in China, for cost reasons, fair enough very little we can do there. But then theirs Germany, which has a very active manufacturing industry and if Germany can strike the balance between high and low skilled work then maybe its something we should try to emulate as well.

bk wrote: »

But lets not try and wish back the idiocracy of the 50's to 70's.

I want us to have lower costs so we can attract higher skilled work as well.

bk wrote: »

We really need to get over our inferiority complex and realise that we have all the tools to be a rich and successful small northern European country.

Its not that, but we can and do have the ability to loose the run of our selfs. Especially if we allow the cost of living to be dependent on industries that can be upped and moved in a year or two. Now I dont want these industries to go away.But If demand for wage increases gets too high, we could end up chasing them away. Its the cost of living and lack of disposable income that drives people to need more wages.

I grew up in the 90s and having seen Ireland go from strength to strength It would be easy to think this is just way things are and this is how things will continue. But I think what we need to understand is we grew up in an economic anomaly with the ramifications that we have a skewed sense of the reality we face.

Do you believe things will continue like this in the medium 5-10 years because I'm not sure I do?

kilopret

RDM_83 again wrote: »

One thing they could tackle but they won't is insurance and the legal sector (the two are in some ways intertwined).

The government could fairly easily change various laws/guidelines/books of qorum(?) to bring Irish insurance costs more in-line with European averages.
This isn't just something affecting personal motorists or home-owners, there has been substantial increases in costs for businesses too.

The rental/housing crisis is something that will be difficult to tackle and may have a longer lead in time, insurance costs could probably be fixed with much less effort- it may damage certain legal professionals bank accounts though so nothing will likely be done

I think they have, didnt they raid a bunch of insurance companies in Ireland and they were accused of being a cartel. Your premium should be much lower this year, if not you should shop around.

James Brown

Some moves in the right direction today;

The legislation is intended to give better predictability and security of hours for workers on insecure contracts, and will ban zero hour contracts "in most circumstances".
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/1207/925658-employment/

Not sure of the details on 'in most circumstances' but hopefully an improvement for the often forgotten working poor.

FreudianSlippers

Why should the government control private sector costs?

What's next, mandated price for cups of coffee, a sandwich?

kilopret

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Why should the government control private sector costs?

What's next, mandated price for cups of coffee, a sandwich?

In saying that, the private sector would also benefit from cheaper living conditions because relatively people would need less money, so their cost are less.And their profits would go further because of lower day to day expenses.
In fact the only sector that would really loose would be people selling into the country would make less profit but considering we are called "the rip of republic" that might not be such a bad thing.

I wasn't suggesting price fixing but TBH, I think 1 euro for some hot water,a tea bag and the physical exhaustion of pouring is a bit much.

In saying that, if there are any of my points in particular in my last post you dont agree with,let me know.

CroFag

Family's first home can not be exclusively a "free" market commodity, it is a sanctuary and therefore public sector needs to start building homes in this country!

Parts of Dublin are becoming a slum city, as 100 years ago, as the Prime Time documentary a few weeks ago showed, 50 people living in a single house.

Let's get over the taboo's & start talking common sense.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1102/916956-rental-accommodation/

kilopret

CroFag wrote: »

Family's first home can not be exclusively a "free" market commodity, it is a sanctuary and therefore public sector needs to start building homes in this country!

Parts of Dublin are becoming a slum city, as 100 years ago, as the Prime Time documentary a few weeks ago showed, 50 people living in a single house.

Let's get over the taboo's & start talking common sense.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1102/916956-rental-accommodation/

I dont understand how this relates to my topic, I am exploring if theirs a good reason why the government isn't trying to reduce the cost of living.

Seth Brundle

kilopret wrote: »

I wasn't suggesting price fixing but TBH, I think 1 euro for some hot water,a tea bag and the physical exhaustion of pouring is a bit much.

Where can you get tea for €1 where all you're getting is a tea bag and hot water and someone to pour it?
Everywhere I go has wages, water and other rates, electricity, heating, insurance, seating, and so on, none of which are free.

Anyhow if you object to a cost for tea then nobody is forcing you to buy it.

Seth Brundle

kilopret wrote: »

I dont understand how this relates to my topic, I am exploring if theirs a good reason why the government isn't trying to reduce the cost of living.

By doing what exactly?
Every action has an impact. What will the impact if your proposed changes be?

kilopret

kbannon wrote: »

Where can you get tea for €1 where all you're getting is a tea bag and hot water and someone to pour it?
Everywhere I go has wages, water and other rates, electricity, heating, insurance, seating, and so on, none of which are free.

Anyhow if you object to a cost for tea then nobody is forcing you to buy it.

I used to get it in the university,
No your right, no one is forcing me to buy tea, but again, if the cost of living was lower all those factors that contribute to to wages,water,ect would be lower as well.
What I'm saying is I think everyone benefits from having a lower cost of living because the dangers of having a high cost of living are a lot worse for us in Ireland.

kbannon wrote: »

By doing what exactly?
Every action has an impact. What will the impact if your proposed changes be?

I'm not sure, I was kind of hoping having a discussion would bring something up.
I made a rebuttle to BK in a post above, do you have any comments on any of those, I think they are fairly fundamental to my argument. It would be great to see it from another angle?

Jim2007

kilopret wrote: »

I dont understand how this relates to my topic, I am exploring if theirs a good reason why the government isn't trying to reduce the cost of living.

Well perhaps in trying to figure out how they would go about doing it in a way that would be acceptable to the voter, you will realise that in reality it difficult to impossible to do it.

Furthermore, trying to compete on cost is simply a race to the bottom. That is why like all other modern economies we try to concentrate in producing high value added products instead.

gar32

https://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/ireland

Until this is sorted out there is nothing that will be cheap in Ireland. !!!!

CroFag

@kilopret, you wanna have a discussion about the cost of living without mentioning the biggest cost, one of lodging?

fash

Jim2007 wrote: »

Furthermore, trying to compete on cost is simply a race to the bottom. That is why like all other modern economies we try to concentrate in producing high value added products instead.

All countries and all people are competing on the basis of cost. The reason some can charge more is that they add greater value. German companies can charge a lot more for its machinery than other companies because of the superior build quality and advanced designs. It is more expensive to set up (some types of) factories in America than in Zimbabwe - yet the Americans can guarantee utilities, a stable investment environment and low corruption - added value that makes it worth while. This "race to the bottom" stuff is public sector union nonsense.

Of note countries like Germany are a lot cheaper than Ireland to live in. Even London is cheaper than cities in Ireland if you know your way around (excluding rents- although you'll get a much better product for your money there than in Ireland).

It's always embarrassing for me going to the Eastern European states who recently left communism and joined the EU and to see how much more advanced their infrastructure is compared to Ireland's.
The government could be focused on increased accommodation construction (to reduce rents), reducing unnecessary regulations and looking at ways of reducing legal and insurance costs, increasing the efficiency of the public sector, removing waste and spending money on infrastructure- not on public sector wages and welfare.
The job of ensuring that the economy is competitive is never ending but is necessary

Wanderer78

fash wrote: »

All countries and all people are competing on the basis of cost. The reason some can charge more is that they add greater value. German companies can charge a lot more for its machinery than other companies because of the superior build quality and advanced designs. It is more expensive to set up (some types of) factories in America than in Zimbabwe - yet the Americans can guarantee utilities, a stable investment environment and low corruption - added value that makes it worth while. This "race to the bottom" stuff is public sector union nonsense

Maybe people such as Alan Greenspan are right, 'increasing worker insecurity', is good for the economy! The only thing is, Greenspan was actually talking about the economy of the minority!

fash

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Maybe people such as Alan Greenspan are right, 'increasing worker insecurity', is good for the economy! The only thing is, Greenspan was actually talking about the economy of the minority!

It almost certainly is better for the economy. In some ( but not all) instances worker security is a luxury. If we as a society want to retain that luxury, what else are we going to do to ensure that the value added by our economy is such as to allow us that luxury? Simply demanding the luxury but not being willing to pay for it will simply result in jobs being lost, worse infrastructure and quality of life.

CroFag

It's always embarrassing for me going to the Eastern European states who recently left communism and joined the EU and to see how much more advanced their infrastructure is compared to Ireland's.
The government could be focused on increased accommodation construction (to reduce rents), reducing unnecessary regulations and looking at ways of reducing legal and insurance costs, increasing the efficiency of the public sector, removing waste and spending money on infrastructure- not on public sector wages and welfare.

I'm originally E.European & a country that had a brutal civil war in the 90-ies, still the infrastructure is way better than in IRL, even though the Irish GDP is 4 times bigger! In whose interest is it that this country is so backwards in public infrastructure?

Wanderer78

fash wrote: »

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Maybe people such as Alan Greenspan are right, 'increasing worker insecurity', is good for the economy! The only thing is, Greenspan was actually talking about the economy of the minority!

It almost certainly is better for the economy. In some ( but not all) instances worker security is a luxury. If we as a society want to retain that luxury, what else are we going to do to ensure that the value added by our economy is such as to allow us that luxury? Simply demanding the luxury but not being willing to pay for it will simply result in jobs being lost, worse infrastructure and quality of life.

Wow, what a scary statement, so please let me get this straight, by having a society that is insecure and potentially highly stressed, this is good for the economy, therefore our society?

fash

CroFag wrote: »

I'm originally E.European & a country that had a brutal civil war in the 90-ies, still the infrastructure is way better than in IRL, even though the Irish GDP is 4 times bigger! In whose interest is it that this country is so backwards in public infrastructure?

Politicians: tax in Ireland is high but it is spent on public sector wages and social welfare - which is basically politicians buying their way into power (As well as bailing out the latest government-approved get rich quick scheme that went belly up (insurance, banks etc) - but that is soft corruption stuff that they do once they've bought their way into power).
Since they spend so much on these things, there is no money to spend on infrastructure.

fash

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Wow, what a scary statement, so please let me get this straight, by having a society that is insecure and potentially highly stressed, this is good for the economy, therefore our society?

Please read what I wrote again.

Viscount Aggro

What matters is the number you are left with at end of every month. You have control over that number, by managing outgoings.
For most people, they cant easily increase their income. Someone on 40K could be wealthier than someone on 80K, because they avoided lifestyle inflation.

I laugh when people talk about employees in Google, Facebook etc.
Fact is, most of these are McJobs, foreign workers, working to pay high rents, running to stand still financially.

CroFag

Politicians: tax in Ireland is high but it is spent on public sector wages and social welfare - which is basically politicians buying their way into power (As well as bailing out the latest government-approved get rich quick scheme that went belly up (insurance, banks etc) - but that is soft corruption stuff that they do once they've bought their way into power).
Since they spend so much on these things, there is no money to spend on infrastructure.

Ok, so what do you want changed? Less people on the doll obviously, but would it worsen the poverty & homelessness crisis?

13 billion given as a present to Apple & all the other cases we don't know about could bring the money for infrastructure, right?

fash

CroFag wrote: »

Ok, so what do you want changed? Less people on the doll obviously, but would it worsen the poverty & homelessness crisis?

13 billion given as a present to Apple & all the other cases we don't know about could bring the money for infrastructure, right?

it's actually things like money wasted in the health service paying for office people who are not needed, paying for five people to do the job of 1 person etc. Long term dole in Ireland is high, but it's things like people on unchecked long term illness benefit that are more problematic for the social welfare spend

tayto lover

When people pay all their bills there simply isn't enough money left for wee treats for themselves. 8 euro for a feckin tea and sandwich in a cafe is outrageous. 4.60 for a pint in some places is taking the mickey.

kilopret

CroFag wrote: »

@kilopret, you wanna have a discussion about the cost of living without mentioning the biggest cost, one of lodging?

What post is this in relation, is it the one where I said "I didnt understand how it was related"?
I'm not against looking at rent or housing costs, I know there high and thats bad.I just didn't understand the posters comment in relation to my own and was hoping for more clarification.
Basically, I'm interested in if this or any past government was interested in doing anything about the cost of living because of the detrimental effect I perceive it to have on the economy. Because they seem to be glaringly obvious to me and I would assume that there is a good reason why this isn't been followed.

server down

CroFag wrote: »

I'm originally E.European & a country that had a brutal civil war in the 90-ies, still the infrastructure is way better than in IRL, even though the Irish GDP is 4 times bigger! In whose interest is it that this country is so backwards in public infrastructure?

It’s actually the right wingers who oppose major infrastructure policies or just support roads, and then blame the cost of the public service for it.

An example here. A leading aconomist warns against over heating by spending on capital infrastructure (but he would equally oppose spending in a bust).

https://m.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/colm-mccarthy/costly-temptations-run-the-risk-of-overheating-economy-36185108.html

He supports another ring road around Dublin, while avoiding why the M50 is a car park (lack of public transport), he supports road spending but opposes metro north as being too expensive while a “much better bus connects” program would work.

Of course in any one spending program it might be that you could get better results with upgraded bus lines over the first 5 years but over 20-40 years you need a metro line, then 4 more.

In your communist country they built infrastructure and proper transportation.

server down

fash wrote: »

Please read what I wrote again.

That’s exactly what you said.

fash

server down wrote: »

fash wrote: »

Please read what I wrote again.

That’s exactly what you said.

Read it again: I said "worker insecurity" ( i.e. the ability to hire/fire at will) in certain areas is very likely to be better for the economy. What is good for the economy is not necessarily what you believe is good for society however. However if you want a society which affords itself luxuries that are not economically efficient ( i.e. for social reasons), you need to offset that inefficiency elsewhere within your economy

kilopret

Jim2007 wrote: »

Well perhaps in trying to figure out how they would go about doing it in a way that would be acceptable to the voter, you will realise that in reality it difficult to impossible to do it.

Furthermore, trying to compete on cost is simply a race to the bottom. That is why like all other modern economies we try to concentrate in producing high value added products instead.

I dont think its a race to the bottom, Ireland shouldn't have as high a cost of living as it does. I suspect its more of a thing of where business like shops and cafes wont drop below a certain price in order that they can benefit from inflated prices.

Heres an example, you can build a 2000sqft house in the country for around 260k, probably less.Usually people who do this type of build have to hire the builders,contractors and do it all part time,because of work commitments. But then I hear that professional building companies wont build 10 or 20 houses as part of an estate and sell them for less then 300k.

You would think 1000sqft house would be constructed for around 180k, given how much the 2000sqft house costs.Not only that, you would be building 10-20 of them. SO even if you sold them at 250 a house,thats 70k profit per house, which is about 1.4 million profit from the whole development.
For a years work, that's not bad.

I wasn't in favor of price controls but considering how much we are inflated maybe that's the only solution to tackling the issue. Either that or some sort of movement where people boycot certain places that are adding to the issue.

Wanderer78

fash wrote: »

Politicians: tax in Ireland is high but it is spent on public sector wages and social welfare - which is basically politicians buying their way into power (As well as bailing out the latest government-approved get rich quick scheme that went belly up (insurance, banks etc) - but that is soft corruption stuff that they do once they've bought their way into power).
Since they spend so much on these things, there is no money to spend on infrastructure.

maybe we need to rethink money, how its created and distributed!

fash

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so again, lets break this down, having a healthy economy in some cases means we must have an unhealthy society? if this is the case, what are the benefits of a healthy economy? /quote]
A healthy economy allows a country to afford luxuries ( i.e. inefficiencies). Furthermore certain things which increase efficiency in the economy have knock on benefits for those living nearby: good motorways are not just good for truck drivers, they are good for visiting your parents in that other city. London had fantastic infrastructure- which means you can get anywhere from anywhere 24 hrs a day- that infrastructure was paid for by a good economy.

fash

Wanderer78 wrote: »

maybe we need to rethink money, how its created and distributed!

The creation of money is not a problem: Zimbabwe was creating quadrillion dollar notes. Creating value in the economy is the issue.

The issue of "redistribution" - or rather spending and wastage by the government on day to day spending is particularly problematic in Ireland- given the exceptionally poor quality of Irish infrastructure despite being one of the richest countries in the world.

ancapailldorcha

Wanderer78 wrote: »

maybe we need to rethink money, how its created and distributed!

The thread is about the cost of living. Take this soapboxing elsewhere.

fash

kilopret wrote: »

Heres an example, you can build a 2000sqft house in the country for around 260k, probably less.Usually people who do this type of build have to hire the builders,contractors and do it all part time,because of work commitments. But then I hear that professional building companies wont build 10 or 20 houses as part of an estate and sell them for less then 300k.

You would think 1000sqft house would be constructed for around 180k, given how much the 2000sqft house costs.Not only that, you would be building 10-20 of them. SO even if you sold them at 250 a house,thats 70k profit per house, which is about 1.4 million profit from the whole development.
For a years work, that's not bad.

I wasn't in favor of price controls but considering how much we are inflated maybe that's the only solution to tackling the issue. Either that or some sort of movement where people boycot certain places that are adding to the issue.

The problem for developers in Ireland is risk: Ireland is a boom/bust place. Say you had €500k in cash - which you earned the old fashioned way, i.e. by working. That is a lot of time and effort on your part. Would you want to sink that into developing a housing estate which if everything goes perfectly and the economy holds up in 4 years time you make 10% return? How risky is Ireland? What will the effects of brexit be? When will the government next smash the economy into the ground? If Ireland was a more normal country with more normal cycles, you would have developers with lower risk profiles - and hence (to some extent) lower prices. So while yes they are charging a lot- especially at the moment, limiting profit would simply mean no-one builds anything.

kilopret

fash wrote: »

The problem for developers in Ireland is risk: Ireland is a boom/bust place. Say you had €500k in cash - which you earned the old fashioned way, i.e. by working. That is a lot of time and effort on your part. Would you want to sink that into developing a housing estate which if everything goes perfectly and the economy holds up in 4 years time you make 10% return? How risky is Ireland? What will the effects of brexit be? When will the government next smash the economy into the ground? If Ireland was a more normal country with more normal cycles, you would have developers with lower risk profiles - and hence (to some extent) lower prices. So while yes they are charging a lot- especially at the moment, limiting profit would simply mean no-one builds anything.

I can understand the risk/reward point, but I don't think that example stands.
If I have ~500k and say build 3 houses, 170 each I think that's 510 total.
If I sell for 250k each that's 80k profit per house, 240k in total. That's nearly 50% return.This is even without discounting supply and demand discounts,not to mention the efficiency you would gain from doing this over and over.

Would I make that risk in the current economic situation in Ireland,absolutely.
Is there anything else that can be done with 500k that can give a near 50% return in less then a year, please let me know!

In this regard, I'm surprised the government isnt investing in housing given the current circumstances. They would make a reasonable amount of cash and help with the housing crises.

But, coming back to my original point, I think this is a larger issue with our expectations.Its almost like we dont value reasonable profit margins.Like there is a sense that, I wont get out of bed for less the a 40% return.And I think this is down to the cost of living being so high, that we are unable to be satisfied by,what would be naturally, a healthy profit. My only problem with this is how badly it effects our country in the long run.

server down

fash wrote: »

The problem for developers in Ireland is risk: Ireland is a boom/bust place. Say you had €500k in cash - which you earned the old fashioned way, i.e. by working. That is a lot of time and effort on your part. Would you want to sink that into developing a housing estate which if everything goes perfectly and the economy holds up in 4 years time you make 10% return? How risky is Ireland? What will the effects of brexit be? When will the government next smash the economy into the ground? If Ireland was a more normal country with more normal cycles, you would have developers with lower risk profiles - and hence (to some extent) lower prices. So while yes they are charging a lot- especially at the moment, limiting profit would simply mean no-one builds anything.

Ireland wasn’t boom bust until 2008. Not in property anyway. In fact previous recessions didn’t have huge effects on prices.

server down

fash wrote: »

Read it again: I said "worker insecurity" ( i.e. the ability to hire/fire at will) in certain areas is very likely to be better for the economy. What is good for the economy is not necessarily what you believe is good for society however. However if you want a society which affords itself luxuries that are not economically efficient ( i.e. for social reasons), you need to offset that inefficiency elsewhere within your economy

Actually what is not good for workers is not good for society and not good either for the economy.

Insecure workers don’t buy stuff.

server down

kilopret wrote: »

I can understand the risk/reward point, but I don't think that example stands.
If I have ~500k and say build 3 houses, 170 each I think that's 510 total.
If I sell for 250k each that's 80k profit per house, 240k in total. That's nearly 50% return.This is even without discounting supply and demand discounts,not to mention the efficiency you would gain from doing this over and over.

Would I make that risk in the current economic situation in Ireland,absolutely.
Is there anything else that can be done with 500k that can give a near 50% return in less then a year, please let me know!

In this regard, I'm surprised the government isnt investing in housing given the current circumstances. They would make a reasonable amount of cash and help with the housing crises.

But, coming back to my original point, I think this is a larger issue with our expectations.Its almost like we dont value reasonable profit margins.Like there is a sense that, I wont get out of bed for less the a 40% return.And I think this is down to the cost of living being so high, that we are unable to be satisfied by,what would be naturally, a healthy profit. My only problem with this is how badly it effects our country in the long run.

It’s much higher if you leverage of course. The banks used to leverage at up to 90%. The profits were enormous. Of course they ploughed it all back in to the next development.

FreudianSlippers

gar32 wrote: »

https://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/ireland

Until this is sorted out there is nothing that will be cheap in Ireland. !!!!

US national debt is about $19tn and yet they have fairly low cost of living, so your conclusion is invalid.

James Brown

server down wrote: »

It’s much higher if you leverage of course. The banks used to leverage at up to 90%. The profits were enormous. Of course they ploughed it all back in to the next development.

Isn't NAMA being re-purposed to deliver loans to private developers at rates much lower than available through banks/traditional lenders?

It seems the state getting into the building of houses is ridiculous but funding the private investment in similar is financially sound?
It's ironic that some of this money comes directly from the leavings of the previous property crash.

I'm not sure where tax payer funded loans to private concerns to build and sell for as high a price as possible, is a good deal for the tax payer, especially those tax payers who cannot afford these, if pursued, government backed artificially inflated prices.

It looks like we used tax payer money to bolster a failed economy and any money garnered from failed developers and other concerns is to be used to put them in profit at favourable rates, because building homes the tax payer cannot afford will ease the housing crisis?