Inside Dublin’s Housing Crisis

AndrewJRenko

CatFromHue wrote: »

When did Casey get a regular slot on Newstalk?

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/peter-casey-working-with-newstalk-on-radio-project-to-broadcast-next-year-37581835.html

oceanman

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/peter-casey-working-with-newstalk-on-radio-project-to-broadcast-next-year-37581835.html

newstalk is exactly the kind of radio station that would give a tool like casey airtime.

CatFromHue

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/peter-casey-working-with-newstalk-on-radio-project-to-broadcast-next-year-37581835.html

The link you posted disagrees with what you said

However, Newstalk has stated that "Peter Casey will not present his own show on Newstalk or host a regular slot".

Eric Cartman

oceanman wrote: »

newstalk is exactly the kind of radio station that would give a tool like casey airtime.

Peter Casey is saying what we're all thinking with regards to travellers or welfare, but I guarantee he'll wash away all that good with something mental.

Roberto_gas

syndrome777 wrote:

Singapore has an area that's about 12% less than county Dublin and now has a population of around 5.6 million, around 1 million more than the Republic and around 1 million less than the entire island of Ireland. Their GDP per capita is just over €15,000 higher than the UK's.

Tenants are sharing 2 bhk between two families...the path dublin is quickly moving to...

Ronaldinho

The_Conductor wrote: »

Singapore?
They got a housing agency to build 30,000 public housing units- to rehome a portion of the population who were living in slums- back in the 1950s. No-one wanted to live in them. In 1961-62- a mysterious fire in the slums made over 16,000 families homeless- but luckily only killed 3-4 people and hospitalised another 20. Quite remarkable. The government used the happenchance to declare the slums a special development zone for high density housing- and commenced building immediately. Meanwhile- they had enough vacant social housing units to rehome all those made homeless through the great fire. Within 4 years- they rebuilt the entire slums with high density housing units- which they offered for sale back to the original people they had cleared from the slums- on multigenerational mortgages- which are still being repaid 60 years later..........

Have I missed anything?

Singapore is a remarkable country- but by God, I'd not be holding them up as a model that anyone else should aspire to. The 'accidental' fire that successfully cleared their slums- and the miracle of so few deaths or casualties- alongside an ability to immediately house everyone- as their mad building project had a glut of vacant homes? Lots of very very convenient happenings...........

When all is said and done though - it sounds like the net result is much better living standards for those that were re-housed?

Their reluctance to move to begin with sounds a lot like here, with people picking and choosing depending on proximity to their folks/mates, stables and grazing, space for trampoline etc.

I don't see anything inherently wrong with inter-generational mortgages either. I'm sure it was an imperative that they be so long dated in order for them to be affordable. The benefit is that they're not just paying away 'dead money' and it ought to increase their 'buy-in' or attachment to building/area/community.

AndrewJRenko

CatFromHue wrote: »

The link you posted disagrees with what you said

This subsequent article gives a bit more detail on his planned slots
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/casey-delighted-to-get-radio-role-with-newstalk-37583665.html

AndrewJRenko

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Peter Casey is saying what we're all thinking with regards to travellers or welfare,

Speak for yourself. He doesn't speak for me.

CatFromHue

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

This subsequent article gives a bit more detail on his planned slots
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/casey-delighted-to-get-radio-role-with-newstalk-37583665.html

He is now expected to team up with the broadcaster on a number of 'one-off' pieces.

that doesn't back up your point about him getting a regular slot.

I know we're going off topic but there is people out there who think Newstalk is right wing but when you look at their presenters it's not backed up

Pat Kenny - centre
Ciara Kelly - left wing
Sean Moncreif - definitely left wing
Ivan Yates - unknown as he just tries to wind up everyone
OTB - left wing

I don't listen to the breakfast show but I would have thought both Shane Coleman and Jonathan Healy would be left wing.

Even George Hook was pro gay marriage

AndrewJRenko

CatFromHue wrote: »

that doesn't back up your point about him getting a regular slot.

I know we're going off topic but there is people out there who think Newstalk is right wing but when you look at their presenters it's not backed up

Pat Kenny - centre
Ciara Kelly - left wing
Sean Moncreif - definitely left wing
Ivan Yates - unknown as he just tries to wind up everyone
OTB - left wing

I don't listen to the breakfast show but I would have thought both Shane Coleman and Jonathan Healy would be left wing.

Even George Hook was pro gay marriage

When you're using George Hook to make a 'left wing' point, you know you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. Pat Kenny is a long way off centre, though he's a bit more subtle than any of the shock jocks. Ciara Kelly is socially liberal but on economics she toes the party line on Newstalk of anti-public sector stuff. Yates is further right than Atilla the Hun. You're right about Moncreif though.

garhjw

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

When you're using George Hook to make a 'left wing' point, you know you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. Pat Kenny is a long way off centre, though he's a bit more subtle than any of the shock jocks. Ciara Kelly is socially liberal but on economics she toes the party line on Newstalk of anti-public sector stuff. Yates is further right than Atilla the Hun. You're right about Moncreif though.

Very easy to be anti public sector when it’s such a sH*t show so that doesn’t back up your point. Just because someone doesn’t agree with your left wing boloxology doesn’t mean they are right wing.

AndrewJRenko

garhjw wrote: »

Very easy to be anti public sector when it’s such a sH*t show so that doesn’t back up your point. Just because someone doesn’t agree with your left wing boloxology doesn’t mean they are right wing.

Thanks for proving my point beautifully.

garhjw

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Thanks for proving my point beautifully.

Good lad. Carry on.

L1011

This isn't the radio forum

realitykeeper

The reason for the housing crisis is Enda Kenny. You see back in 2009 when house prices were falling through the floor, Enda Kenny put a false floor under house prices. He did this by guaranteeing a traunche a houses (belonging to the bailed out banks) against negative equity. This caused people to start buying houses before the natural bottom had been reached by the market. Who knows how low house prices might have fallen if kenny had not interferred. This country borrowed 200 billion euro since 2009, most of which was borrowed on Enda Kenny`s watch and this 200 billion was used to inflate house prices. In other words, we borrowed 200 billion euro and have nothing to show for it but high prices for houses that already existed and this distortion of existing house prices means young people now have to wait for new houses to be built. In an un-rigged market, they would look for a house of any age, not just new houses.

So how do we clean up Enda Kenny`s mess?

First, we need much higher taxes on existing properties. This will do three things. It will incentivise the owners of those properties to sell and it will lower house prices by increasing the supply of houses for sale. It will also ensure that those who benefitted from the 200 billion euro Enda Kenny borrowed, will be the ones to pay for it.

Second, we need to exempt new builds from property tax. This will cause the sellers of existing houses to buy new houses (to escape the property tax) and it will cause a market driven construction boom and bring plenty of new jobs in construction and support industries, which will counter the impact of a global downturn on our multinational sector.

Third, we need to exempt first time buyers from property tax. This will ensure a market for now affordable existing housing stock for sale and it will ensure that those who were not participants in the madness of the Celtic tiger years, will no longer have to pay for the foolishness of those who did participate.

Forth, the revenue from the higher property tax will help repay Enda Kenny`s borrowing binge.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121103443#Comment_121103443

Ya because lumping extra fees on those who are already paying property tax and mortgages will fix all the current issues.

Only thing that will work is building more properties and encouraging full occupancy of existing stock.

RichardAnd

This thread was nearly five years old. It would be nice to say that things have improved, but no such luck...

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121103443#Comment_121103443

2009 would you get a grip.

Horse was long bolted by 2009. Boom and bust economic policies by FF for decades previous caused it here. FG done very little to fix it since, in fact they've made it worse.

mariaalice

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/108753281#Comment_108753281

That's one of tbe main causes of tbe issue seeing a home as an investment.

realitykeeper

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121103661#Comment_121103661

I could not disagree with you more. If you think the government can solve this, you will be very disappointed. The only thing the government can do to address these problems would be to undo everything they did to cause them.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121103829#Comment_121103829

Problem is scarcity at the low end not investment.

Because of the scarcity of supply in public, social and affordable housing. That demand is pushed into more expensive housing. It's only at that point it conflicts with "investment". Investment isn't the source of that problem.

It's the lack of building at the low end, and the outsourcing of that capacity to the private. It's cost cutting policy. Was common worldwide just followed like sheep.

At the same time we've reduced supply. We've increased demand through economic and humanitarian policies. Though I don't see thats humanitarian about what the Govt are doing.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121103847#Comment_121103847

It will take a change of govt and policial landscape.

RichardAnd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121103661#Comment_121103661

I'm not having a go at you, but this is not happening with the immigration levels we currently have:

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-pme/populationandmigrationestimatesapril2022/keyfindings/

Maybe the 61k net immigration in 2022 was a once off, but I doubt that it will be a lot lower this year, if at all. There are about 57k vacant properties in Ireland, and we build about 30k units a year. Immigration figures like that quickly take up all available housing, and ramping up production takes time, if it's even possible at all. Even if it were possible to build 100k units a year, the environmental impact of that needs to be considered.

In short, no solution to the crisis will be had until the elephant in the room of immigration is addressed. We can dance around the issue all we want, both sides can call people names, but the reality that we do not have infinite resources is a cold fact of nature.

As mentioned above, the only way for the state to fix this would be for it to reverse the policies that created it. The same people who created this mess (through incompetence, an utter lack of care or just malice) are still there, and we are expecting them to "fix" things?

The only "solution" that I see is a crash, and that will not happen in a vacuum.

mariaalice

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121103867#Comment_121103867

That is true but it's still a large issue, The idea that property is an asset that you pass on to your children and the even dafter idea that a property asset will lift someone out of poverty it distorts everything.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121104129#Comment_121104129

That's not what the commoditization of property is.

The vast majority of property owners have one property, the vast majority of landlords two.

It's not going to lift a anyones kids out of property. That's some socialist narrative that doesn't hold water. It really only applies to mega rich which are a tiny % of the population.

That said disparity of wealth in the population at large is a real issue. Not dismissing that.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121104002#Comment_121104002

It's not immigration itself just demand. Immigration is only a part of that. Generations of Irish emigrated around the globe. Hypocritical to complain about it. It's a net benefit also.

The issues is fueling demand without putting in the resources to service it. That's simply poor govt economic policy.

RichardAnd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121104311#Comment_121104311

The emigration of the Irish has come up before. When it does, it's used to justify enormous levels of immigration to Ireland by telling modern Irish people that we cannot complain because people from Ireland emigrated in the past. Putting aside the logical flaws of this thinking, it is an attempt to apply a moral argument to what is entirely a matter of resources.

Simply put, there is not enough housing here for the people already on the island, and further net immigration in the tens of thousands will compound the issue. It's very easy to say that resources should be made available, but that has not proven possible, and I see no reason why that will change.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121103847#Comment_121103847

...a more state lead approach is actually the only resolution to this, only, we re still waiting for a government with this type of fundamental ideology build into its thinking, ffg are primarily market centric based, i.e. financialised based, they ll never change this type of thinking, its firmly cooked into their thinking, its never going to work, ever, as its ultimately based in sweating assets, not creating them, this is exactly whats currently happening....

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121104452#Comment_121104452

Immigration is only part of the population increase. So while it makes things worse, compounds it as you say. Its not a core issue. So it's hypocritical to complain about immigration while ignoring all the other issues.

In the past people left for better opportunities. People aren't doing that now.

RichardAnd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121104596#Comment_121104596

Immigration is an enormous contributor to the population increase. Indeed, births currently out-pace deaths, but the actual birth rate here is below replacement. Left alone, the population would begin to decline in the years to come. Obviously, that's not ideal, but I don't think that immigration is the solution. It's not hypocritical to complain about a problem simply because there are other issues.

Regarding your second point, the Irish who emigrated in the past largely went to places like the USA, Australia and the UK. In the case of the former two destinations, these were largely unpopulated land-masses with abundant resources. Ireland is a small island with severe growing pains. Regardless of what happened in the past, the issue of the availability of resources overrides whatever ethical reasoning may exist for immigration.

Whilst we're on the topic, and before someone calls me the "r-word" (which you didn't do, and for that I thank you), I want to clear that I have no issues with foreigners. I myself had an Italian grandfather, so I recognise that migration is a part and parcel of human existence. Unfettered immigration, on the other-hand, is dangerous.