Would you like to attend a housing protest?

Berserker

Old diesel wrote: »

That housing needs change - it needs sorting out.

Fine Gael won't take notice of an 18 page boards thread.

They will have to take notice of 20 k people matching outside the dail.

I'm not fan of FG or any of the mainstream political parties in this country but I think it's unfair and then some, to suggest that they are not aware of the problem. I sincerely doubt that there is any other single issue they spend more time discussing.

realdanbreen

Old diesel wrote: »

I'd happily go to a housing protest.

It's a massive issue and needs as many numbers on the streets as possible to send a message to government

OK so if the government message is yes we can fix it but it will mean a 1% increase in taxes then all the 'concerned' protesters say fuk that and vote out the government. The hypocracy is mindboggling!

Seth Brundle

Old diesel wrote: »

That housing needs change - it needs sorting out.

Fine Gael won't take notice of an 18 page boards thread.

They will have to take notice of 20 k people matching outside the dail.

What needs to change with housing?
What might Fine Gael (or if it were the case, any other party in government) do differently once they see the 20k protesters?

facehugger99

Deleted User wrote: »

What is that message?

'Give me a free gaff.'

padd b1975

Old diesel wrote: »

That housing needs change - it needs sorting out.

Fine Gael won't take notice of an 18 page boards thread.

They will have to take notice of 20 k people matching outside the dail.

Dàil doesn't sit on a Saturday Chief.

Old diesel

Ush1 wrote: »

Do you think the government aren't aware or do you have a solution?

Well it seems Vienna have a nice set up.

Just looking at an article from 2017....

Over 60 percent of citizens inn Vienna live in either municipal owned or publically subsidised homes.

8 out of 10 flats are financed under Viennas public subsidy scheme.

Sounds like a plan to me.

Co op housing as delivered by Hugh Brennan is another option and perhaps the public subsidy idea of Vienna could be deployed to address the expensive land issue.

With assistence from the local authority in terms of waiving the development levies and ultra cheap plots of land.

Hugh Brennan has been able to deliver 3 bed A2 BER rated homes for 170 k.

Mortgages for these are claimed to be 850 a month.

Now you might ask how are we going to pay for it.....

I'd like to turn that question around 360 degrees and ask - how are we going to pay 2,000 euro a month rent.

How are we going to pay the costs social, enviromentally and quality of life of commuting in a diesel car from Carlow to Dublin 5 days a week.

Now the other option is that if a companies staff all commute in from Regional towns like Mullingar - then you look at moving the company to Mullingar having deployed good broadband into Mullingar if that's needed.

Getting someone to get out the digger and dig up to lay fibre in Mullingar seems potentially more doable then getting thousands of random daft.ie suppliers of accommodation to buy into been part of sustainable solutions.

We could even set up meeting spaces in Dublin so that if a Client from Japan cant handle going out to Mullingar he can have the meetings with Mullingar personnal in Dublin.

Ush1

Old diesel wrote: »

Well it seems Vienna have a nice set up.

Just looking at an article from 2017....

Over 60 percent of citizens inn Vienna live in either municipal owned or publically subsidised homes.

8 out of 10 flats are financed under Viennas public subsidy scheme.

Sounds like a plan to me.

I don't have access to the article you are referencing but 80% social housing in Dublin sounds insane and costly to me.

Old diesel wrote: »

Co op housing as delivered by Hugh Brennan is another option and perhaps the public subsidy idea of Vienna could be deployed to address the expensive land issue.

With assistence from the local authority in terms of waiving the development levies and ultra cheap plots of land.

Hugh Brennan has been able to deliver 3 bed A2 BER rated homes for 170 k.

Mortgages for these are claimed to be 850 a month.

Now you might ask how are we going to pay for it.....

No no, I don't need to anymore, it's the Sinn Fein/PPP/AAA money tree of course!

Old diesel wrote: »

I'd like to turn that question around 360 degrees and ask - how are we going to pay 2,000 euro a month rent.

How are we going to pay the costs social, enviromentally and quality of life of commuting in a diesel car from Carlow to Dublin 5 days a week.

Now the other option is that if a companies staff all commute in from Regional towns like Mullingar - then you look at moving the company to Mullingar having deployed good broadband into Mullingar if that's needed.

Getting someone to get out the digger and dig up to lay fibre in Mullingar seems potentially more doable then getting thousands of random daft.ie suppliers of accommodation to buy into been part of sustainable solutions.

We could even set up meeting spaces in Dublin so that if a Client from Japan cant handle going out to Mullingar he can have the meetings with Mullingar personnal in Dublin.

You pay the cost because life isn't fair. You are not going to be just handed a perfect life with everything you want. Where and how you live and where your job is etc..

Companies set up in Dublin not just for infrastructure but also for access to the largest workforce with various skillsets. Cities are cities for a reason and the same reason people are attracted is the same reason companies are attracted.

Old diesel

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

What changes do you want? Exactly?

Suggest a policy. A change.

Lets test out the current housing nonsense shall we.

Wexford builder Michael Bennett delivered Passive house 3 bed for 190 k in Enniscorthy. This believe it or not is actually for Enniscorthy relatively expensive.

Total bargain by Dublin standards mind you.

Now in Dublin you might pay 1800 euros a month to some random daft.ie guy.

In 10 years time you've paid daft.ie guy 216,000 euros in rent - IF rent stays the same.

In 20 years it will be 432,000

In 30 years it will be 648,000

This is with no increase in rent at all - which highlights that rent caps of 4 percent shouldnt be the big oh my god issue theyou are.

Now if we take the Hugh Brennan claimed 850 a month mortgage for his co op housing and run the figures in a similar way

At 10 years we are at 102,000 euros.

At 20 years we are at 204,000 euros.

At 30 years we are at 306,000 euros.

Mortgage rates do vary as interest rates jump up and down. However there is always a link back to the original figure to buy the Hugh Brennan home of 170 k.

Unlike the current rental value today per month of a home a landlord bought for 170 k some years back

Saving 348,000 euros

Mad_maxx

I think the situation here re_ young workers is hugely problematic but it's a big NO from me as regards joining a housing protest, I follow many of the architects of these kind of action groups and to the last man and woman, they are open borders far left ideologues who would be agitating if two bed apartments were 700 per month in rathmines.

They want nationalisation of all housing.

Seth Brundle

Old diesel wrote: »

Lets test out the current housing nonsense shall we.

Wexford builder Michael Bennett delivered Passive house 3 bed for 190 k in Enniscorthy. This believe it or not is actually for Enniscorthy relatively expensive.

Total bargain by Dublin standards mind you.

Now in Dublin you might pay 1800 euros a month to some random daft.ie guy.

In 10 years time you've paid daft.ie guy 216,000 euros in rent - IF rent stays the same.

In 20 years it will be 432,000

In 30 years it will be 648,000

This is with no increase in rent at all - which highlights that rent caps of 4 percent shouldnt be the big oh my god issue theyou are.

Now if we take the Hugh Brennan claimed 850 a month mortgage for his co op housing and run the figures in a similar way

At 10 years we are at 102,000 euros.

At 20 years we are at 204,000 euros.

At 30 years we are at 306,000 euros.

Mortgage rates do vary as interest rates jump up and down. However there is always a link back to the original figure to buy the Hugh Brennan home of 170 k.

Unlike the current rental value today per month of a home a landlord bought for 170 k some years back

Saving 348,000 euros

If it's so wonderful, why are so many landlords leaving the business?

Old diesel

Seth Brundle wrote: »

If it's so wonderful, why are so many landlords leaving the business?

I'm illustrating what's wrong with the current housing model.

Let's look at this abother way.

30 years at 1800 a month to landlord is 648 k.

30 years of 850 mortgage for Hugh Brennan Co Op house 306 k.

What is the benefit to me of giving the landlord an extra 342 k over 30 years.

I accept the mortgage means debt.

But at 648 k over 30 years to avoid debt - I'd be inclined to take my chances with 170 k debt.

I would also take the view that if we can save 342 k over 30 years - then theres a case for Government to say right - we can step in to help you pay 850 a month mortgage if something goes wrong.

Because if you can't pay 850 a month mortgage and market rate is 2000 for rent - it is cheaper for government to help you pay 850 rather then 2,000.

The costing in long term is all wrong at the current high rates.

You are literally paying the full purchase price to the landlord and screwing your finances to do it.

ThunbergsAreGo

I dont want to

Danjamin1

How much money could the government bring in by charging people for their water instead of subsidising it out of general taxation? If that money could be put to better use towards something like housing the government might be able to do something more to alleviate the pressure on the housing market.

padd b1975

Old diesel wrote: »

Lets test out the current housing nonsense shall we.

Wexford builder Michael Bennett delivered Passive house 3 bed for 190 k in Enniscorthy. This believe it or not is actually for Enniscorthy relatively expensive.

Total bargain by Dublin standards mind you.

Now in Dublin you might pay 1800 euros a month to some random daft.ie guy.

In 10 years time you've paid daft.ie guy 216,000 euros in rent - IF rent stays the same.

In 20 years it will be 432,000

In 30 years it will be 648,000

This is with no increase in rent at all - which highlights that rent caps of 4 percent shouldnt be the big oh my god issue theyou are.

Now if we take the Hugh Brennan claimed 850 a month mortgage for his co op housing and run the figures in a similar way

At 10 years we are at 102,000 euros.

At 20 years we are at 204,000 euros.

At 30 years we are at 306,000 euros.

Mortgage rates do vary as interest rates jump up and down. However there is always a link back to the original figure to buy the Hugh Brennan home of 170 k.

Unlike the current rental value today per month of a home a landlord bought for 170 k some years back

Saving 348,000 euros

Does Daft.ie guy not pay any tax on the rent received?

Old diesel

padd b1975 wrote: »

Does Daft.ie guy not pay any tax on the rent received?

Yes.

But what I want to know is how much will come of the 648 k over 30 years if landlord tax was heavily reduced.

realdanbreen

Danjamin1 wrote: »

How much money could the government bring in by charging people for their water instead of subsidising it out of general taxation? If that money could be put to better use towards something like housing the government might be able to do something more to alleviate the pressure on the housing market.

A water charge! now there's a novel idea that should go well

Berserker

Danjamin1 wrote: »

How much money could the government bring in by charging people for their water instead of subsidising it out of general taxation? If that money could be put to better use towards something like housing the government might be able to do something more to alleviate the pressure on the housing market.

Water charges ....

Ray Palmer

Old diesel wrote: »

Yes.

But what I want to know is how much will come of the 648 k over 30 years if landlord tax was heavily reduced.

Why do you care about it given you don't take it into consideration in the first place. You have no mortgage calculation, insurance, prtb or any other expenses. The person renting is getting more than the person who bought as they don't have appliances to buy and maintain or any other costs with owning a property. You conveniently left all of that out.

No consideration for location which is a huge issue with rent and buying. People can't buy in many locations because nothing is for sale but they can rent there instead.

Talk of tenants paying landlord's mortgages is true due to tax. On a basic level rent would need to be double any mortgage for that to be true. Given current laws small time landlords won't invest and REITs won't buy individual houses so restricting supply further.

realdanbreen

realdanbreen wrote: »

A water charge! now there's a novel idea that should go well

The water charges, now there was a REAL protest :-)

Most voters would rather put up with the homeless problem because it doesn't affect them.

Seth Brundle

Old diesel wrote: »

I'm illustrating what's wrong with the current housing model.

Let's look at this abother way.

...snip

No let's look at it from a realistic perspective because it's a very important factor: why are so many landlords leaving the business if so much money can be made?

Wheeliebin30

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

The water charges, now there was a REAL protest :-)

Most voters would rather put up with the homeless problem because it doesn't affect them.

There isn’t a homeless problem, that’s why people aren’t out like the water charges.

mvl

Deleted User wrote: »

Could we not use our extensive train system to transport all the poor people from Dublin? If there's too many, we could probably extend the track from, for instance, Westport to Achill Island straight into their new homes?

Heuston, we have a solution!

- investing in high speed rail sooner may be a solution !

Old diesel

Seth Brundle wrote: »

No let's look at it from a realistic perspective because it's a very important factor: why are so many landlords leaving the business if so much money can be made?

I never claimed the landlord would make 648 k profit.

The model is no longer fit for purpose it's hopeless.

Landlords are leaving because of tax, the system failures in terms of it been hard to get rid of problem tenants.

And regulatory challenges.

These could be fixed - but we'd still have a model of rental thats flawed.

We can't build a housing system around totally random people making totally random decisions for random reasons.

Cost transparency is vital going forward - so we can strike a balance between allowing Landlords to make their profit while ensuring that tenants needs for affordability are also met.

Because tenants have needs too.

Costs need adjusting down for landlords with govt support.

Tax needs to be bought down....

Cost per month needs to be lower - so finance restructuring needs to be delivered so that the mortgage payments are low enough to allow a profit each month.

The problem with that is - the mortgage period is extended.

And the bad tenant risk needs minimising with fast tracking of evictions for breach of lease or property damage.

The_Brood

But it's absurd that water charges, a small amount extra in bills, would stir more indignation than back-breaking, outrageous rents in Dublin, which is the reality.

Wheeliebin30

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

There isn’t a homeless problem, that’s why people aren’t out like the water charges.

There is a huge housing problem. Rents are gone bananas.

rob316

The_Brood wrote: »

But it's absurd that water charges, a small amount extra in bills, would stir more indignation than back-breaking, outrageous rents in Dublin, which is the reality.

Water charges affected everyone. USC is the won we should be pounding the streets about, ****ing scam, but hey anyone who is paying it is working and doesn't have time to go to these protests.

Wheeliebin30

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

There is a huge housing problem. Rents are gone bananas.

Hence me using the word homeless.

Wheeliebin30

rob316 wrote: »

Water charges affected everyone. USC is the won we should be pounding the streets about, ****ing scam, but hey anyone who is paying it is working and doesn't have time to go to these protests.

We have a 20 billion a year welfare bill.

Tell me that you would cut back on so we can abolish usc?

The_Brood

The_Brood wrote: »

But it's absurd that water charges, a small amount extra in bills, would stir more indignation than back-breaking, outrageous rents in Dublin, which is the reality.

Not really. Water charges were sending a bill to every house in the nation.

Rents only affect a much smaller proportion of people, many of whom see it only as temporary and will move on to owning at some stage.

Simple_Simone

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Not really. Water charges were sending a bill to every house in the nation.

With the exception of the 180,000 households in the nation who had their own private water supply and septic tanks so were already paying for their supply of potable water and waste water disposal.