No wonder millennials can't afford a mortgage

listermint

listermint wrote: »

I dont know anyone that fits into that criteria.

...........

I don't know anyone who has a mortgage payment that's 50% of their gross income.

pxdf9i5cmoavkz

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Everyone acts as if abandoning one's family and social network is as simple as "just doing it". The effects of social isolation on mental health aren't just an issue for the individual, but they end up harming society as a whole. So telling people "touch sh!t, leave your lifelong community behind" as if there are no negative consequences beyond individuals being unhappy and lonely (which clearly many here don't give a bollocks about) is ridiculous. These issues come back to haunt society as a whole, not just the people you are demanding this of.

Two words: Sweeping statements

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

but they end up harming society as a whole.

And you know this how?

Wanderer78

Myla Rapping Martini wrote:

And you know this how?

Many mental health professionals would have this kind of understanding, so I'd imagine there's been a lot of research done on it, you d probably find them in mental health journals and publications

hatrickpatrick

mariaalice wrote: »

Very good post but how far is too far away?

Depends on the transport infrastructure and how much tickets / fares cost per journey. Both of these factors are absolutely appalling in Ireland, but of course nobody at any level is willing to do anything about it.

also its very hard not to switch off when a poster says something like the affordable houses are going to be in less desirable areas i.e Ballymun and the like, Dublin is a capital city.

IMO, the idea of undesirable areas which are undesirable purely because of anti social behaviour should be entirely hypothetical. These areas wouldn't be dangerous if our justice system dealt with criminals properly. It's a subject for another threat but it links in with the property issue in many ways - for starters, it's yet another example of the state confusing "can't" with "won't" when it comes to dealing with problems. No area is impossible to liberate from rampant anti social behaviour, but it takes actual policy decisions to achieve it.

If Ballymun was connected to the city by decent public transport and if criminals, vandals, violent individuals etc were jailed when convicted like they should be, it would no longer be considered an undesirable area. Of course, it would take a while to shed its former reputation, but you'd be amazed at how quickly this would happen - most of my friends lived in the vicinity of Cork Street and Dolphin's Barn when I was in college and while there was some amount of bullsh!t and burglary (which in fairness you'd get anywhere in Dublin), the area is a far cry from the "Jaysus, you'll get murdered twelve times a day around there" warnings we'd get from our parents when they found out where we were going for a house party. And part of this is down to the fact that new, young communities are cropping up in the area and diluting many of the known dodgy ones of the past - this would be accelerated ten fold if the courts would deal with scumbags when they're caught.

That's been my own experience anyway - the majority of places I've been told are "dangerous areas" aren't dangerous because of a generally hostile community, they're dangerous because of a small number of local douchebags who act with impunity, while the rest of the community just tries to ignore it and get by because the justice system has repeatedly failed to keep them safe. There are some genuinely dangerous areas I've encountered (Basin Street near the Guinness factory is like something out of Love/Hate) but again, why is this? The violence, vandalism, rioting and fighting which seems to occur there on a regular basis wouldn't be a problem if those responsible were caught, arrested, charged, and jailed upon conviction.

IMO, these issues are all inextricably intertwined and they can be traced back to the same root cause - a lethargic, unacceptable slow moving state apparatus which spends more time, money and effort coming up with excuses not to do anything, than it would spend if it actually went and did the things it's avoiding doing.

burkey2k0

Augeo wrote: »

I'm in my 30s, I work in Dublin (not the city centre), live in Kildare. you'll get plenty 2 bed apartments for the figures I mentioned.

that aside, is this topic just about Dublin?

Also my comments were in direct reply to "Mortgage payments are 30/40/50% of people's gross wages". The mentioned €175k wasn't speculative it was to illustrate a point. Use whatever figures you want that are within the CB guidelines and a mortage repayment calculator.

Unfortunately that only makes it more strange of where your view of the housing market is.

And yes, really is just about Dublin. I don't think I'd entertain an argument about affordability of places anywhere else but Dublin. Anywhere else a mortage of €175k is far more realistic. So, outside of Dublin an 18% figure is doable. In Dublin, not so much (again when talking about a single person)

'The mentioned €175k' was used to refute the maths of another poster, so the point you illustrated wasn't really applicable. If you possibly move your figures to closer the €300k mark you'll improve the points you illustrate is what I'm really trying to say. Not looking for an argument with you or anything. Really just saying your view on the size of mortgages being taken out by people is out of kilter with reality when talking about a single person. If you argued about a couple buying, I would have agreed with you about the percentage of peoples income being spent, which in my opinion is 'affordable' to a lot of people. But not ideal.

hatrickpatrick

Myla Rapping Martini wrote: »

And you know this how?

Maybe you haven't personally noticed the avalanche of media and research over the last decade or so about how loneliness and social isolation play absolute havoc with mental health?

Or are you asking me to justify my assertion that bestowing widespread mental health issues on an entire generation won't lead to societal-level problems...?

Ray Palmer

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Technology moves on. However the cost of a mobile phone over 2-3 years isn’t that much. Look at what people paid for in the 90s for CDs and DVDs and box sets. We know that these industries have migrated to devices where they are less expensive. Also people don’t buy cameras or gps systems etc. Also the landline phone was extremely expensive.

People in their 20s and 30s didn't pay for landline, internet or mobile phone bills. Now they pay for this stuff along with extras like cable tv and addons. We simply didn't have the need nor money. Some people bought cds,dvd etc... regularly but most did not. They are spending more than we did. I saw the attitude change where I was wondering about buying an expensive phone kids owned them. I have younger sister in law and she was always buying stuff

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Not at all. There was no comparison between the 50s and the 90s. There was in fact massive technological change from 1950 -1990 and mobile phones aside not much after.

None of this answers the question of house costs anyway. Yes the millenials could give up a 200 phone they use for 3 years and save themselves a few days rent but it’s not going to help with house ownership.

I said things changed in the 90s but up until that point people were flat broke with mass emigration. The standard of living is hugely different now from the 80s early 90s. Having family in the states and living there a while I saw the lifestyle in the US and how it was copied here. The idea of having the latest gadget was frowned upon here as flashy before then it became brash and in your face as something to be proud of. Everybody expecting the best and that you could do it yourself. The more humble view was gone and the current generation were brought up in that time.
To increase home ownership isn't needed we actually needed it to drop as we had the highest in the world before we start to equalise. There are people who will never own. If they missed their chance with the celtic tiger and are now past 40 they can't get a mortgage easily without lots of savings. Means most will never buy but may inherit.
We need more housing but also need better use of existing stock. Huge parts of Dublin are heavily under occupied filled with mostly retired people. These properties will come on to the market over the next 10-15 years. These large family homes will get split into separate flats as the price to buy an entire house will be too much and too much space.
You also missed the massive amount of money people waste on cars which wasn't the norm. People living at home with expensive cars started in the 90s with most people seeing it as a ridiculous expense yet many buy them now.
Things aren't easy but they weren't easier for reasons stated here. The 80s were very rough and while things got better in the 90s it was not equal or very spread. One of my friends was given share options in a company and when it was bough he was able to buy a house outright. Up until that point we earned about the same as each other. Then there was one guy who blew the lot and is still at the same level as when he was in his 20s with no assets

suicide_circus

listermint wrote: »

Divisive nonsense solves nothing, There is a need and a want for Social and Affordable housing AND private housing. They are not mutually exclusive.

What's divisive? that fact that it's true or the fact that people point it out? Stop resentment and social divisions by not giving people in receipt of social housing choices not afforded to or out of reach of those who pay for their housing. I don't think I'm suggesting anything here but fairness.

hatrickpatrick

suicide_circus wrote: »

What's divisive? that fact that it's true or the fact that people point it out? Stop resentment and social divisions by not giving people in receipt of social housing choices not afforded to or out of reach of those who pay for their housing. I don't think I'm suggesting anything here but fairness.

But the answer here should be to make those choices accessible to everyone, not to take them away from even more people than they already have been.

suicide_circus

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

But the answer here should be to make those choices accessible to everyone, not to take them away from even more people than they already have been.

Well obviously but in the mean time you build inner cities populated by the rich and the poor with the middle income engines of the economy out in commuter land.

hatrickpatrick

suicide_circus wrote: »

Well obviously but in the mean time you build inner cities populated by the rich and the poor with the middle income engines of the economy out in commuter land.

That's what we have been doing, and it's total bullsh!t. We're in agreement on that. What I'm suggesting is that a public housing initiative wherein the state charges what we decide as a society is a reasonable proportion of peoples' income for rent in order to make not a single cent more than is necessary to break even, as opposed to leaving it to those whose motivation is to make as much as they can get away with making.

suicide_circus

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

That's what we have been doing, and it's total bullsh!t. We're in agreement on that. What I'm suggesting is that a public housing initiative wherein the state charges what we decide as a society is a reasonable proportion of peoples' income for rent in order to make not a single cent more than is necessary to break even, as opposed to leaving it to those whose motivation is to make as much as they can get away with making.

I guess I just don't see it happening. I don't think we have the social vision to pull it off.

hatrickpatrick

suicide_circus wrote: »

I guess I just don't see it happening. I don't think we have the social vision to pull it off.

But you're not ideologically opposed, at least?

I know I keep citing the same article but I don't think anyone can put it as clearly as Fintan O'Toole did, in outlining that in economic-war Ireland of the 1920s and 30s, then WWII Emergency Ireland of the 1940s, the state built vast amounts of social housing - including the house he grew up in, in Crumlin.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-opposition-to-social-housing-is-matter-of-ideology-not-economics-1.2397695

We had the social vision to pull it off for most of Ireland's history, and as we're rapidly approaching the point at which this will become a massively toxic election issue for TDs and aspiring TDs, I suspect that our government will miraculously rediscover that social vision sooner or later. The agitation going on at the moment is driven by the fact that it needs to be sooner, while everyone knows it'll probably be later - but I think everyone realises that it's more or less inevitable. As I mentioned in the other thread, when countries don't address stagflation issues (of which the housing problem is a massive component in Ireland), social unrest, political instability and militancy tend to result. The question is whether those in power will see this coming and head it off pre-emptively, or if we'll have to wait until we have a large scale societal breakdown before anyone takes action.

Obviously I (and most of those involved in the current protests and agitation) would much prefer if this issue was dealt with before it devolves into that kind of anarchy. But events around the world in recent years have proven conclusively and frighteningly that social upheavals in response to these kinds of economic pressures can occur in the blink of an eye with relatively little in the way of prior warning signs, so I'd say we're at more of a risk of this than people might realise.

burkey2k0

burkey2k0 wrote: »

Unfortunately that only makes it more strange of where your view of the housing market is.

And yes, really is just about Dublin. I don't think I'd entertain an argument about affordability of places anywhere else but Dublin. Anywhere else a mortage of €175k is far more realistic. So, outside of Dublin an 18% figure is doable. In Dublin, not so much (again when talking about a single person)

'The mentioned €175k' was used to refute the maths of another poster, so the point you illustrated wasn't really applicable. If you possibly move your figures to closer the €300k mark you'll improve the points you illustrate is what I'm really trying to say. Not looking for an argument with you or anything. Really just saying your view on the size of mortgages being taken out by people is out of kilter with reality when talking about a single person. If you argued about a couple buying, I would have agreed with you about the percentage of peoples income being spent, which in my opinion is 'affordable' to a lot of people. But not ideal.

You can use whatever scaled up figures you want..... mortgage payments of 50% gross income won't be found. That's the point I was refuting. As I said use any combination within CB guidelines and a current mortgage payment calculator (with 25 or 30 year term)

I don't have a view on the size of mortgages people are taking out apart from knowing they don't take out ones that require 50% of their gross income to pay back...again that was my point.

Maybe lidtermint doesn't know the difference between gross & net income.

A couple earning 150k combined who borrow 525k won't have a 75k/year (6.3k/month ish ) mortgage.

About the just Dublin thing, you're seriously deluded if you think folk aren't struggling to buy in cork or galway too where demand is greater than supply.

Icepick

One of the biggest reasons is baby boomers' NIMBYism. Almost no apartments being built.

Wildly Boaring

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Maybe you haven't personally noticed the avalanche of media and research over the last decade or so about how loneliness and social isolation play absolute havoc with mental health?

Or are you asking me to justify my assertion that bestowing widespread mental health issues on an entire generation won't lead to societal-level problems...?

Ah here. This is a small country.
2 hours from Dublin get you to limerick, kilkenny, mullinger, Belfast and a whole range of nice and not so nice places in between.

Do you need mammy to do the washing.
Live a little.

You don't move to a nice town to sit in s bedsits and stare at the walls.

You move to have a nice house with a higher standard of living.

As per my last post. Living out of Dublin has enabled me and my wife live without a mortgage. Granted not a palace. But nice and in a lovely town.

Plenty disposable income (and no traffic).

People falling over themselves to get 400k mortgages to be near mammy.

Plenty jobs, clubs, sports, good schools out there. Open your eyes

listermint

Augeo wrote: »

You can use whatever scaled up figures you want..... mortgage payments of 50% gross income won't be found. That's the point I was refuting. As I said use any combination within CB guidelines and a current mortgage payment calculator (with 25 or 30 year term)

I don't have a view on the size of mortgages people are taking out apart from knowing they don't take out ones that require 50% of their gross income to pay back...again that was my point.

Maybe lidtermint doesn't know the difference between gross & net income.

A couple earning 150k combined who borrow 525k won't have a 75k/year (6.3k/month ish ) mortgage.

About the just Dublin thing, you're seriously deluded if you think folk aren't struggling to buy in cork or galway too where demand is greater than supply.

Plenty of people with one previous earner sick or ill or in a job that's half of what the earned formerly.

You seem to think there is no distressed mortgages in this little idealistic world of yours were everyone bought a cheap as chips house in back arse of Kildare.

Still talking nonsense.

Maybe you don't have a clue about reality.

People are still losing homes . You might close your eyes but the vulture funds own billions of these distressed mortgages

Why are you faking it ? It's reality I'm tired of your snark . Your just a negative waffler and have added nothing to the discussion but derision and self opinion based on your own unique circumstances.

What are the vulture funds buying praytell? Credit card debt ? Let me guess distressed car loans....

And the snide remarks about gross and net. 50% of take homes are going into some mortgages go speak to anyone in miab there and come back to me once have.



Clueless

listermint

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

Ah here. This is a small country.
2 hours from Dublin get you to limerick, kilkenny, mullinger, Belfast and a whole range of nice and not so nice places in between.

Do you need mammy to do the washing.
Live a little.

You don't move to a nice town to sit in s bedsits and stare at the walls.

You move to have a nice house with a higher standard of living.

As per my last post. Living out of Dublin has enabled me and my wife live without a mortgage. Granted not a palace. But nice and in a lovely town.

Plenty disposable income (and no traffic).

People falling over themselves to get 400k mortgages to be near mammy.

Plenty jobs, clubs, sports, good schools out there. Open your eyes

There's few people that can live without a mortgage in a house they own this country it doesn't matter how far you go from Dublin. I don't live in Dublin and haven't for two years but that is fantasy land.

listermint

listermint wrote: »

.....

You seem to think there is no distressed mortgages in this little idealistic world of yours were everyone bought a cheap as chips house in back arse of Kildare.

Still talking nonsense.

Maybe you don't have a clue about reality.

.....

Why are you taking it ? It's reality I'm tired of your snark . Your just a negative waffler and have added nothing to the discussion but derision and self opinion based on your own unique circumstances.
.......

Lol..... I live in a lovely town and my place wasn't cheap at all. All considered. Back arse me hole..... 10 minutes from Dublin...... you wouldn't have your power ranger suit on by the time I enter Co Dublin.

Ironic enough as I reckon you aren't exactly in the centre of Dublin yourself.... no need to get personal though.

Apologies for getting to you, deep breaths .... deep breaths ....:D

Vulture funds are buying mainly buy to let's. And you were portraying professional landlords as the saviour a few hours ago iirc ...... try and be consistent .

listermint

Augeo wrote: »

Lol..... I live in a lovely town and my place wasn't cheap at all. All considered. Back arse me hole..... 10 minutes from Dublin...... you wouldn't have your power ranger suit on by the time I enter Co Dublin.

Ironic enough as I reckon you aren't exactly in the centre of Dublin yourself.... no need to get personal though.

Apologies for getting to you, deep breaths .... deep breaths ....:D

I may be mistaken but you said you paid 175k .if I am mistaken I apologize. If I'm not you life in a flat in Kildare then not a house

Not something any families could reside in. So yes your world view of property requirements are tiny .

listermint

listermint wrote: »

There's few people that can live without a mortgage in a house they own this country it doesn't matter how far you go from Dublin. I don't live in Dublin and haven't for two years but that is fantasy land.

There's fewer with mortgages that are 50% of their gross income

Are you the only one who can use extreme examples in here ?

listermint

listermint wrote: »

I may be mistaken but you said you paid 175k .if I am mistaken I apologize. If I'm not you life in a flat in Kildare then not a house

Not something any families could reside in. So yes your world view of property requirements are tiny .

I did not say I paid 175k so you are indeed mistaken

listermint

Augeo wrote: »

There's fewer with mortgages that are 50% of their gross income

Are you the only one who can use extreme examples in here ?

Are you the only one who has offered nothing to the discussion about the theme of the thread why millennials can't afford houses....


Still exposing your lack ..

listermint

listermint wrote: »

Are you the only one who has offered nothing to the discussion about the theme of the thread why millennials can't afford houses....


Still exposing your lack ..

There are plenty of millenials who have bought houses. Bucketlloads of them.

Topic is mortgages BTW...not houses. Bungalows etc all allowed.

listermint

Yep I was right so.


Still at it.

Good luck. Someday you might impact something. Someday..

Ah diddums..... talking through your hoop on here impacts no one. Someday you might realise that after you learn about gross & net incomes and percentages

If you think almost 200k is cheap as chips you must have been robbed for the thing you bought in the back arse of wicklow.

BBFAN

This is boring now.

s7ryf3925pivug

My house cost 175k this year. It's on a half acre of nice garden, nice views, house is grand, big block built garage, 20 min from my job and all amenities, nice area. People think they are more restricted here than they really are, just look outside the big cities.

Manic Moran

I've seen a number of interesting proposals, varying from forced relocation to compulsory purchase orders, few of which are practicable or cheap. I am astounded, especially on a board filled with younger folks, that nobody has suggested an incentive for telecommuting.

Ireland is not a large country. You can live almost anywhere and still be in a tolerable distance (eg 90-minutes) to show up at the office two or three times a month. Even if only 10% of Dublin workers can physically do their work from home, and only half of those are permitted to, what would that 5% reduction mean to traffic jams and infrastructure requirements, pollution and costs spent on commuting in both time and Euros? Would even 3% of people deciding that living in Athlone or Portlaoise or wherever on a motorway or rail line because they could earn the same money in a cheaper/bigger house not both aid the rural economies and have an effect on the housing shortage in Dublin? Give companies a tax break for telecommuting, and see what happens. The loss of tax revenue may be equalled by the lesser requirement for travel infrastructure upkeep and expansion.

Augeo wrote: »

I don't know anyone who has a mortgage payment that's 50% of their gross income.

Most of us do around here. (California)
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2018/06/25/san-jose-home-price-vs-income-mortgage-cost.html

Here, more than half — 51.2 percent — of the median family income goes to the house payment. [Moran's note: Family income. Most of us are dual-income families around here, we have to be. For a single-income family, you can see where this would go]

Zillow forecasts that if mortgage interest rates, which are already climbing, hit 5 percent next year as some economists predict, San Jose’s mortgage burden would skyrocket to nearly 61 percent.

I was personally paying somewhere over 40% of my gross, myself, until my recent raise and additional jobs. About 65% of my net take-home. You guys don't have a uniquely Irish problem.

It's annoying as all hell, but we do it because we choose to live here and for some reason think it's worth it.

That said, no more. I'm leaving. And since I telecommute, I'm leaving for somewhere cheaper, and will drive to the office about 90-105minutes away two or three times a month...

That said, a number of companies have decided that leaving expensive places in the US makes sense. Not just because of the cost of the office space, but because they also need to pay their employees more to give them the same effective income, and because the employees are happier not spending 10% of their working lives commuting. You may start to see a 'decentralisation' of private employers from Dublin if things continue and costs escalate.

ceadaoin.

Manic Moran wrote: »

Most of us do around here. (California)
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2018/06/25/san-jose-home-price-vs-income-mortgage-cost.html

Here, more than half — 51.2 percent — of the median family income goes to the house payment. [Moran's note: Family income. Most of us are dual-income families around here, we have to be. For a single-income family, you can see where this would go]

Zillow forecasts that if mortgage interest rates, which are already climbing, hit 5 percent next year as some economists predict, San Jose’s mortgage burden would skyrocket to nearly 61 percent.

I was personally paying somewhere over 40% of my gross, myself, until my recent raise and additional jobs. About 65% of my net take-home. You guys don't have a uniquely Irish problem.

It's annoying as all hell, but we do it because we choose to live here and for some reason think it's worth it.

That said, no more. I'm leaving. And since I telecommute, I'm leaving for somewhere cheaper, and will drive to the office about 90-105minutes away two or three times a month...

A lot of Californians are moving here to Vegas too as it gets more expensive there. This influx is partly responsible for pushing up house prices here as a result, lots of people see them as creating the same problems in other states that caused them to move in the first place.