How can someone in their 30s afford a house - PLEASE READ MOD WARNING IN OP

mrkiscool2

Cyrus wrote: »

An unwillingness to work in most cases

I'm technically on social welfare but I do work. I'm a carer. Never a hope of me being able to afford my own place. Difficult choosing between working and having money but leaving the person I care for to fend for themselves multiple hours a day or caring for that person and getting 219 a week.

Cyrus

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I'm technically on social welfare but I do work. I'm a carer. Never a hope of me being able to afford my own place. Difficult choosing between working and having money but leaving the person I care for to fend for themselves multiple hours a day or caring for that person and getting 219 a week.

I said most cases not every case there will always be exceptions

Cyrus

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I always wondered about those who say this, have you ever actually tried to survive long term on welfare? spare a thought for those that do, add in a few other things such as little or no education, particularly to third level etc

Well if someone doesn’t have a 3rd level education in Ireland can’t really blame anyone but themselves now can they

It’s about as accessible as it can be.

The Student

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I always wondered about those who say this, have you ever actually tried to survive long term on welfare? spare a thought for those that do, add in a few other things such as little or no education, particularly to third level etc

There is no reason why anybody should be long term unemployed. You don't need a third level qualification for all roles. For example you do not need a third level qualification to work in a factory, warehouse, call center etc.

Our welfare system is too generous. We refuse to deal with abuses of the system.

Springy Turf

Springy Turf wrote: »

https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-tax. No mention of 1 million. No reference to back up your assertion. Not sure I would want to model anything about Ireland on the U.K. anyway. Brexit is what happens when you have so much inequality a country starts to implode.

It’s written in the very article you linked, you obviously didn’t read it. Hint: ignore headline figures and keep in my the system is different in the Uk it’s 325k per person not 325k in total and there are top ups.

That’s just the Uk also even they are higher than many counties, who have low or zero inheritance tax.

Springy Turf wrote: »

Believe it or not, people can have political views that go against their own financial interest. People who understand that a fairer society makes life better for everyone. What's childish is calling people who disagree with you begrudgers and children.



So we shouldn't try to make it more fair?

Because they are begrudgers as the only reason anyone could have for wanting to take large amounts of a families money rather than the next generation of that family benefitting is pure and utter bugrudgery.

No we shouldn’t aim for equality if it means taking money from people who earned it (and paid massive amounts of tax on it) rather than letting their children have the full benefit and use it to make their life easier and get ahead of others. Helping “society” translates to handing money to people who do nothing - their parents had the same opportunities and accesss to education as anyone else if they want to leave money they should have gone out and earned it rather than expecting those who did to hand it over.

Thankfully with planning you can minimise or eliminate the amount of CAT you pay but it shouldn’t have to be done parents should be able to freely hand over as much as they want to their children and the children receive the full benefit.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's argued that inheritance tax is the absolute fairest tax and most socially progressive -whats even better is that it isn't a tax on anyone that's alive, so no one can complain about having to pay it..

Socially pregotessive = legalised theft. Taking from those who have done well, paid vast amounts of tax to hand to those with the paw out, disgusting.

Also it very much does impact living people as the same tax regimes applies to gifts.

Pkiernan

Wanderer78 wrote: »

So what causes long term unemployment?

Incentivising people not to work, by making them better off on welfare than by working.

I would've thought that was blatantly obvious.

But you're taking this thread off track.

Yellow_Fern

beanyb wrote: »

Nobody is begrudging anything, we're just suggesting that taxing inherited wealth (which is currently set at quite a high level) to fund public services is a good way to even the inherently unfair playing field that is our society.

If it is a good way why stop at 33% tax. Why not 50 % or 80 %?

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's argued that inheritance tax is the absolute fairest tax and most socially progressive -whats even better is that it isn't a tax on anyone that's alive, so no one can complain about having to pay it.

The real problem with inherited wealth is that it drives inequality. Wealth begets wealth and inheritance is an unearned advantage.

I dont it is the prerogative of the state to reduce wealth inequality. As far as I am concerned their prerogative is to make sure all have enough food, water and shelter and for all kids to have a fair crack of the whip.

Pkiernan

Pkiernan wrote: »

Incentivising people not to work, by making them better off on welfare than by working.

I would've thought that was blatantly obvious.

But you're taking this thread off track.

Its usually a load of lefty w@nk from Wanderer regardless of the topic.

limnam

Augeo wrote: »

Its usually a load of lefty w@nk from Wanderer regardless of the topic.

I thought the unionise construction to reduce building costs was interesting

Wanderer78

Augeo wrote: »

Its usually a load of lefty w@nk from Wanderer regardless of the topic.

so whats your knowledge on the subject, if mines ****? id class it as deeply uninformed, ignorant, prejudice and incredible lazy research, a quick google would reveal all this, and a quick chat with some professionals in the know

joeharte123

The obsession of buying here is driven by the higher cost of rents which force people to buy, thus forcing house prices up etc. Renting should be encouraged.

McCrack

Cyrus wrote: »

Well if someone doesn’t have a 3rd level education in Ireland can’t really blame anyone but themselves now can they

It’s about as accessible as it can be.

You're displaying a level of ignorance with that statement

Wanderer78

joeharte123 wrote: »

The obsession of buying here is driven by the higher cost of rents which force people to buy, thus forcing house prices up etc. Renting should be encouraged.

the availability of credit is one of the main causes of rising house prices

joeharte123

limnam wrote: »

I thought the unionise construction to reduce building costs was interesting

There needs to be some intervention. We have a generation of young people post 2008 that haven’t even got their life started yet, and they’re now in their 30s. While people in their late 30s have had a house for that past 15 years, some of them own another house which they’re renting out at extortionate rates, namely in the Dublin region.

limnam

joeharte123 wrote: »

The obsession of buying here is driven by the higher cost of rents which force people to buy, thus forcing house prices up etc. Renting should be encouraged.

Our obsession with buying was around long before high rents to be fair.


"I'm not paying a landlords mortgage" has been ringing out for decades

joeharte123

Wanderer78 wrote: »

the availability of credit is one of the main causes of rising house prices

Are you saying getting a mortgage is easy?

limnam

joeharte123 wrote: »

There needs to be some intervention. We have a generation of young people post 2008 that haven’t even got their life started yet, and they’re now in their 30s. While people in their late 30s have had a house for that past 15 years, some of them own another house which they’re renting out at extortionate rates, namely in the Dublin region.

Whats your suggestion to fix it ?

Wanderer78

joeharte123 wrote: »

Are you saying getting a mortgage is easy?

oh god no, getting a mortgage is difficult, but one of the main reasons we ve been experiencing rapid house price inflation has been the easier availability of credit from financial institutions over the last couple of decades due to the deregulation of the sector

joeharte123

limnam wrote: »

Our obsession with buying was around long before high rents to be fair.


"I'm not paying a landlords mortgage" has been ringing out for decades

True - and I don’t blame people for not wanting to pay a landlords mortgage. If rent rates were lower you’d have a lot less people complaining of paying a landlords mortgage as they’d actually see benefit to renting in comparison to buying homes. This benefit comes in the form of more discretionary income compared to their peers who have decided to buy. The obsession to buy today is linked to people wanting to free up money for themselves to live as they’d have more money in their pocket at the end of the week if they’ve a mortgage rather than renting a home.

joeharte123

limnam wrote: »

Whats your suggestion to fix it ?

Long term - I would suggest the state to purchase land for development to build affordable houses and apartments. Remove the 60ft height restriction. Remove the stigma toward social housing throughout Ireland.

Landlords should have their rents capped. If they find it’s too difficult to pay their bills they have the option to sell. This laissez-faire approach isn’t sorting anything out.

Wanderer78

joeharte123 wrote: »

Long term - I would suggest the state to purchase land for development to build affordable houses and apartments. Remove the 60ft height restriction. Remove the stigma toward social housing throughout Ireland.

Landlords should have their rents capped. If they find it’s too difficult to pay their bills they have the option to sell. This laissez-faire approach isn’t sorting anything out.

its clearly obvious that the construct of 'the market' is capable of providing us with all our needs, is in fact false!

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so whats your knowledge on the subject, if mines ****? id class it as deeply uninformed, ignorant, prejudice and incredible lazy research, a quick google would reveal all this, and a quick chat with some professionals in the know

My knowledge on the subject would be that with essentially free housing for wasters along with pocket money for life too many folk don't need to work.... Couple that with they don't want to and you have loads on the welfare train. Their kids expect the same.

If you house all these folk in estates the place turns into a sh1thole...... With HAP it pushes up rents for workers as a rental floor is provided by the HAP.

If you housed everyone on the housing list tomorrow and cleared the thing you'd find a list twice as long as the original a week later.

A quick Google can reveal any load of t0ss you want

limnam

joeharte123 wrote: »

Long term - I would suggest the state to purchase land for development to build affordable houses and apartments. Remove the 60ft height restriction. Remove the stigma toward social housing throughout Ireland.

Landlords should have their rents capped. If they find it’s too difficult to pay their bills they have the option to sell. This laissez-faire approach isn’t sorting anything out.

I agree to a point, but it needs to be more focused than. There's a bunch of houses. We don't really want Ballymun 2 or Tallaght 2 etc

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so whats your knowledge on the subject, if mines ****? id class it as deeply uninformed, ignorant, prejudice and incredible lazy research, a quick google would reveal all this, and a quick chat with some professionals in the know

Augeo wrote: »

My knowledge on the subject would be that with essentially free housing for wasters along with pocket money for life too many folk don't need to work.... Couple that with they don't want to and you have loads on the welfare train. Their kids expect the same.

If you house all these folk in estates the place turns into a sh1thole...... With HAP it pushes up rents for workers as a rental floor is provided by the HAP.

If you housed everyone on the housing list tomorrow and cleared the thing you'd find a list twice as long as the original a week later.

A quick Google can reveal any load of t0ss you want

.......

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

the availability of credit is one of the main causes of rising house prices

3.5 times income. Quite a reasonable credit restriction IMO.

Plenty folk on decent money isn't a problem either BTW.... If you can't beat them join them
Or wait it out for the free forever home which seems to be the chosen option for many.

joeharte123

joeharte123 wrote: »

There needs to be some intervention. We have a generation of young people post 2008 that haven’t even got their life started yet, and they’re now in their 30s. While people in their late 30s have had a house for that past 15 years, some of them own another house which they’re renting out at extortionate rates, namely in the Dublin region.

Anyone in their late 30s with a house 15 years bought in 2005...... 2005 property prices werent low at all.
Precovid I'd sooner be buying now then 2005 TBH.

joeharte123

Augeo wrote: »

My knowledge on the subject would be that with essentially free housing for wasters along with pocket money for life too many folk don't need to work.... Couple that with they don't want to and you have loads on the welfare train. Their kids expect the same.

If you house all these folk in estates the place turns into a sh1thole...... With HAP it pushes up rents for workers as a rental floor is provided by the HAP.

If you housed everyone on the housing list tomorrow and cleared the thing you'd find a list twice as long as the original a week later.

A quick Google can reveal any load of t0ss you want

As far as I’m aware, you have to pay some sort of rent while living in social housing, and it depends on what you’re able to pay!
Yes, ghettoising people into housing estates has its own problems. Open to correction but 15 - 20% of new developments must be social housing I believe? In most cases, this can’t be a bad thing?

Most people looking for a social house today are actually young couples who are working ordinary jobs but cannot afford to buy private houses. Just like many peoples parents and grandparents lived in a social house for many years while saving up to buy a home later in life, I believe these young people should be given a break. It’s easy to visualise the thugz in your head that will be “getting a free gaff” but this is far less common than you think. Most people just want to get their life started.

Wanderer78

Augeo wrote: »

3.5 times income. Quite a reasonable credit restriction IMO.

Plenty folk on decent money isn't a problem either BTW.... If you can't beat them join them
Or wait it out for the free forever home which seems to be the chosen option for many.

once again, the main issues with the main subject matter of the thread is, we are currently experiencing, and have been for a couple of decades now, the encouragement of high and rapid asset price inflation, low wage inflation, in some cases stagnant, and overall increasing worker insecurities, this is ultimately why young people are struggling to gain access to the housing market. this has only truly benefited previous asset owners, ultimately older generations.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

.......

Beyond a quick Google & reference to some lefty t0ss you never have anything else up your sleeve

joeharte123

limnam wrote: »

I agree to a point, but it needs to be more focused than. There's a bunch of houses. We don't really want Ballymun 2 or Tallaght 2 etc

This is a social issue. You have to understand there’ll be bad areas and good areas in every city/town.