The great myths of housing

Ace2007

fvp4 wrote: »

Are we arguing the dimensions of the city here? Is that where you are now.

You stated that we weren't talking about Howth, and that one should be able to buy in city,so for clarity it's important to state what counts as the city. Does Dalkey, Drumcondra, Clontarf, Malahide?

Brian?

Cyrus wrote: »

are the average prices quoted incorrect?

No idea.

Wanderer78

timmyntc wrote: »

It would here in Ireland. I presume there are other factors at play in NL to stop prices rising uncontrollably. Or maybe just enough supply that its a buyers market?

Thats the problem with housing as a market - if theres a drop in supply and prices start to rise, people still *need* housing. So the demand doesnt go away as prices rise. So throw 100% mortgages into the mix and you have runaway prices.

People getting "priced out" of the market is markets behaving correctly in a period of short supply, which doesnt happen with 100% mortgages. But you could also say that we should aim not to price anyone out of the market, because housing is not just an asset but you know, a house. Somewhere to live - a fundamental need.
That would take a fundamental change in how we treat housing - less of an investment and more of a basic human need.

always baring in mind, increasing the money supply towards property markets leads to an increase in demand, therefore an increase in price, i.e. a positive feedback loop

Cyrus

Brian? wrote: »

No idea.

ok lets assume they are correct then, if you dont care to refute them.

Ace2007

Brian? wrote: »

Punish vacant properties, increase supply, increase mixed cost development, increase social housing, control development land first.

Large amount of vacant properties are vacant because of legal disputes, or issues surrounding fair deal scheme, or because in some areas people were forced out of their homes and no one will buy them.

Where are you going to increase the supply and were is the development - I've asked a few times and that question is side stepped, as it's not a comfortable answer.

Anybody who has access to the Indo have any idea what the op means by the 0.3% first time buyer transactions or how that even justifies his argument about there being no crisis, if true.

Brian?

timmyntc wrote: »

It would here in Ireland. I presume there are other factors at play in NL to stop prices rising uncontrollably. Or maybe just enough supply that its a buyers market?

Thats the problem with housing as a market - if theres a drop in supply and prices start to rise, people still *need* housing. So the demand doesnt go away as prices rise. So throw 100% mortgages into the mix and you have runaway prices.

People getting "priced out" of the market is markets behaving correctly in a period of short supply, which doesnt happen with 100% mortgages. But you could also say that we should aim not to price anyone out of the market, because housing is not just an asset but you know, a house. Somewhere to live - a fundamental need.
That would take a fundamental change in how we treat housing - less of an investment and more of a basic human need.

What happens here is the government control the supply of development land. Sell the land to developers with strict agreements on what they do with and when.

Don’t build too many to crash the market, build enough to keep prices stable.

Eindhoven is experiencing a mini boom because Philips and ASML are hiring people from all over the world on good salaries. ASML hired about 8000 people in the last 2 years. That’s a lot of demand.

Brian?

Ace2007 wrote: »

Large amount of vacant properties are vacant because of legal disputes, or issues surrounding fair deal scheme, or because in some areas people were forced out of their homes and no one will buy them.

Where are you going to increase the supply and were is the development - I've asked a few times and that question is side stepped, as it's not a comfortable answer.

Build up in the city and infill where available.

Incentivise older people downsizing by having smaller units readily available for them close to devices.

Brian?

Cyrus wrote: »

ok lets assume they are correct then, if you dont care to refute them.

What’s your point? The property prices could be correct, it doesn’t undermine a single point I mde about affordability

PMBC

timmyntc wrote: »

It would here in Ireland. I presume there are other factors at play in NL to stop prices rising uncontrollably. Or maybe just enough supply that its a buyers market?

Thats the problem with housing as a market - if theres a drop in supply and prices start to rise, people still *need* housing. So the demand doesnt go away as prices rise. So throw 100% mortgages into the mix and you have runaway prices.

People getting "priced out" of the market is markets behaving correctly in a period of short supply, which doesnt happen with 100% mortgages. But you could also say that we should aim not to price anyone out of the market, because housing is not just an asset but you know, a house. Somewhere to live - a fundamental need.
That would take a fundamental change in how we treat housing - less of an investment and more of a basic human need.

The supply demand thing would seem to make sense. But when we built almost 90,000 one year, prices still went up. Just an observation

Idbatterim

ridiculous planning laws need to be changed. Tax undeveloped sites at a significant level. Reduce the cost of building apartments, telling people with a Hyundai budget, to buy bmw :rolleyes: they don't have the bloody bmw budget and its a roof over the head we are talking about...

Then lets get onto the moral disgrace of free luxury, prime location homes for free. Paid for those breaking their balls, who don't have a hope of every renting or owning the equivalent...

FFG and FG in particular, have an issue. they had a sizeable vote, the problem is, the rip off prices they lust for, are supported by a good chunk of their voters, while the others, young urbanites, who believed the lies about rewarding the early risers, are absolutely hammered...

Its the typical Irish cowardice of trying to please everyone. They are such cowards, that they will turn their back on their own voters and throw a fortune into the homeless etc, who despise them and would never vote FG, than they would , for not being apologetic about helping people who work. Easier doing that, than the far left popular and populist mouthpieces for rte and joe duffy...

I delight in what they have created for themselves politically, FFG! I mean look, the left at least, we know who they represent. Its people having voted centre in Irish fashion, then getting robbed on housing and worse living standards for many, that doesn't compute...

Ace2007

Brian? wrote: »

Build up in the city and infill where available.

Incentivise older people downsizing by having smaller units readily available for them close to devices.

Build up? How does that get you a house with a garden?

Brian?

Ace2007 wrote: »

Build up? How does that get you a house with a garden?

It doesn’t. Who said it should?

It actually helps keep the price of the houses with gardens down though because your don’t have 2-3 professional couples sharing them anymore. They buy an apartment

timmyntc

fvp4 wrote: »

Anybody who has access to the Indo have any idea what the op means by the 0.3% first time buyer transactions or how that even justifies his argument about there being no crisis, if true.

Poster incorrectly stated 0.3% of transactions - they are 25% of transactions and 0.3% of all homeowners or something - its a weird stat by the author given that you are a FTB until you buy your house.

Cyrus

Brian? wrote: »

What’s your point? The property prices could be correct, it doesn’t undermine a single point I mde about affordability

i made my point, you refuted it saying the source wasnt a good one, then admitted you werent sure if the figures were accurate or not.

this land of milk and honey has similar average house prices to Dublin, so unless average salaries are a lot higher i presume there is a similar thread on the dutch version of boards saying similar things :pac:

timmyntc

PMBC wrote: »

The supply demand thing would seem to make sense. But when we built almost 90,000 one year, prices still went up. Just an observation

The demand that time was because people kept remortgaging and buying more and more. Then trying to flip it based on the ever-growing prices. So the volume of sales and builds were real. But there wasnt actually demand to own and live in a lot of those units. Nobody bought to own, they bought to speculate then sell.

I see what you're getting at, it was just a very unusual property frenzy.

Brian?

Cyrus wrote: »

i made my point, you refuted it saying the source wasnt a good one, then admitted you werent sure if the figures were accurate or not.

this land of milk and honey has similar average house prices to Dublin, so unless average salaries are a lot higher i presume there is a similar thread on the dutch version of boards saying similar things :pac:

I didn’t refute your point. I didn’t even disagree with your point.

Ace2007

Brian? wrote: »

It doesn’t. Who said it should?

It actually helps keep the price of the houses with gardens down though because your don’t have 2-3 professional couples sharing them anymore. They buy an apartment

So those looking to buy a family home are still no better off?

Instead we will have years of legal battles and appeals because no one wants high rise apartments in their area.

Who do you want to fund these apartment blocks, and the legal challengers that will follow because of planning laws?

All you have to do is use google - you had houses earmarked for St. Anne's Park granted premission, appealled, appealed again - no idea what's happened with it now, but folk want houses, but not in green areas, so where do they build them - on the outskirts of Dublin?

Idbatterim

Idbatterim wrote: »

FFG and FG in particular, have an issue. they had a sizeable vote, the problem is, the rip off prices they lust for, are supported by a good chunk of their voters, while the others, young urbanites, who believed the lies about rewarding the early risers, are absolutely hammered...

Yes, no reason for any young person or renter in fact to vote FFG. As for the rip off prices beloved of the old brigade, that just shows how people like to feather their own nests not just at the expense of younger generations, but in many cases their own children. The "move to Longford" brigade aren't helping things on here.

I delight in what they have created for themselves politically, FFG! I mean look, the left at least, we know who they represent. Its people having voted centre in Irish fashion, then getting robbed on housing and worse living standards for many, that doesn't compute...

I am a floating voter but FFg are doomed if they don't fix this. SF will get in sometime.

Brian?

Ace2007 wrote: »

So those looking to buy a family home are still no better off?

Instead we will have years of legal battles and appeals because no one wants high rise apartments in their area.

Who do you want to fund these apartment blocks, and the legal challengers that will follow because of planning laws?

All you have to do is use google - you had houses earmarked for St. Anne's Park granted premission, appealled, appealed again - no idea what's happened with it now, but folk want houses, but not in green areas, so where do they build them - on the outskirts of Dublin?

Why do you ignore my points?

If there are more apartments built in the city then there is less demand for houses. Keeping the prices down.

If older people downsize, the number of 2nd houses for sale goes up. Keeping prices down.

The system is broken and needs to be changed. Planning included. Fiddling round the edges just gets us more of the same.

Ace2007

Ace2007 wrote: »

So those looking to buy a family home are still no better off?

Instead we will have years of legal battles and appeals because no one wants high rise apartments in their area.

Who do you want to fund these apartment blocks, and the legal challengers that will follow because of planning laws?

All you have to do is use google - you had houses earmarked for St. Anne's Park granted premission, appealled, appealed again - no idea what's happened with it now, but folk want houses, but not in green areas, so where do they build them - on the outskirts of Dublin?

We can't build anymore semi detached houses in the centre, or easy suburbs, of Dublin. So apartments is the future.

Ace2007

fvp4 wrote: »

We can't build anymore semi detached houses in the centre, or easy suburbs, of Dublin. So apartments is the future.

But it's family homes that people are complaining about that they are been out bid on and can't buy in the areas they want to.

Those bidding 500k+ on houses are not interested in buying apartments.

Idbatterim

here is another issue, developer lead planning, they build what is easiest to build or mos profitable. Totally understandable...

HOWEVER there are many developments in my area of Dublin, houses were put up, when they should only be giving permission for apartments. You can then have people downsize into these apartments etc, and have much higher density. Rather than 5 bed homes going in. It is totally ridiculous...

Maybe there need to be incentives given to downsize, a proper LPT would do the job, like they have in properly run countries, but cant seem them touching that here. I cant answer how to solve problems here, when they arent prepared to change ANYTHING. Answers on a back of a postcard :rolleyes:

timmyntc

Ace2007 wrote: »

But it's family homes that people are complaining about that they are been out bid on and can't buy in the areas they want to.

Those bidding 500k+ on houses are not interested in buying apartments.

1) There are loads of family houses being rented to students or groups of professionals. These people would definitely rent apartments closer to the city centre if they were there and affordable. This would free up a lot of existing stock for families to rent or buy.

2) We can make apartments large enough to raise a family in. It wont be for everyone, but there will no doubt be plenty of people who would be more than happy to live in a central 3 bed apartment with good transport links and amenities nearby.

Ubbquittious

fvp4 wrote: »

We can't build anymore semi detached houses in the centre, or easy suburbs, of Dublin. So apartments is the future.

Or start pressurising the existing vacant and derelict houses to become usable houses again. Also a lot of the office buildings will be partially empty since the ushering in of working from home, these can be turned into apartments without the need to build anything new

Idbatterim

timmyntc wrote: »

1) There are loads of family houses being rented to students or groups of professionals. These people would definitely rent apartments closer to the city centre if they were there and affordable. This would free up a lot of existing stock for families to rent or buy.

2) We can make apartments large enough to raise a family in. It wont be for everyone, but there will no doubt be plenty of people who would be more than happy to live in a central 3 bed apartment with good transport links and amenities nearby.

YES! back to square one we need well located and reasonably priced apartments! Yet there will be talk here for years to come, over how to solve this, its pathetic and exhausting!

They wont build infrastructure here either, so redeveloping and building in established , serviced areas, makes by far the most sense. Where people can walk, cycle or have some semi decent bus route. That wont take an hour and a half to get into town, which it wont, even with the scandalous transport system here... if you are on 4-6 km out of the centre...

huge amounts of low rise crap commercial was built in the docklands, it should be rezoned for apartments...

Ace2007

timmyntc wrote: »

1) There are loads of family houses being rented to students or groups of professionals. These people would definitely rent apartments closer to the city centre if they were there and affordable. This would free up a lot of existing stock for families to rent or buy.

2) We can make apartments large enough to raise a family in. It wont be for everyone, but there will no doubt be plenty of people who would be more than happy to live in a central 3 bed apartment with good transport links and amenities nearby.

And how much would these apartments cost? Whose going to fund the building of them?

GreeBo

Brian? wrote: »

Because the poster said there are "loads of couples on 125k" each. That's simply wrong, I never said anything about expensive areas.

How is it simply wrong?
in 2016 1.9% of households had an income in excess of 200K, I'll go out on a limb and say that has increased.

I find it bizarre that you disagree that there are loads of couples on 125K, yet you think "quite a lot" of people emigrate from Ireland to The Netherlands...

Fred Cryton

The biggest myth of all is that the Shinners will magic up cheap homes for all, using magically available new land and magically cheap labour and materials to build them.

Especially when Eoin O Brien celebrated the fact that Johnny Ronan didn't get to build a 1,000 homes in Docklands.

Where do the Shinners think the homes are going to come from if they go after the banks, the investment funds and the developers who actually build them.

PauloMN

Many other countries in Europe manage to have families living long term in apartments. The difference is in the quality of the build and what a buyer gets for their money. Typical apartments I've been in in other countries have a really high standard of quality - proper sound proofing between floors and between units, quality fittings, high ceilings, proper storage both within the apartment and assigned storage space in basements etc. (no bikes or other stuff on the balcony), assigned and secure car parking. IMO that quality - which turns an apartment into a proper long term solution for a family to live in rather than a place to crash for a few years - is missing in the majority of apartments I have been in in Ireland.

I simply could not imagine spending the rest of my life living in the typical apartment complex in Ireland, yet I've been in really beautiful apartments on the continent where I could have imagined living long term.

If apartments are a big part of the future in Ireland, and it looks like they have to be, then the ante has to be seriously upped in terms of quality and space. Will people be willing to spend 3 bed semi with garden in the suburbs money on an apartment though?

GreeBo

Brian? wrote: »

It doesn’t. Who said it should?

It actually helps keep the price of the houses with gardens down though because your don’t have 2-3 professional couples sharing them anymore. They buy an apartment

I dont think anyone is saying it should, but to borrow an argument, my parents were able to afford a house with a garden on a single salary, why do I have to live in an apartment with no garden?


Wouldnt reducing the price of desirable houses with gardens increase demand and therefore increase the cost again?

micosoft

kippy wrote: »

There is no 'housing industry' - you simply cannot compare both.

There absolutely is a housing industry. It may be largely artisanal but it is there. And it's an absolutely fair question to ask if our current process to build housing is fit for purpose or could be enhanced. The answer is probably complex (tradition + skills + buyers expectations +etc) but I've no doubt a holistic look at how we build in Ireland would deliver efficiencies...

Cyrus

PauloMN wrote: »

Many other countries in Europe manage to have families living long term in apartments. The difference is in the quality of the build and what a buyer gets for their money. Typical apartments I've been in in other countries have a really high standard of quality - proper sound proofing between floors and between units, quality fittings, high ceilings, proper storage both within the apartment and assigned storage space in basements etc. (no bikes or other stuff on the balcony), assigned and secure car parking. IMO that quality - which turns an apartment into a proper long term solution for a family to live in rather than a place to crash for a few years - is missing in the majority of apartments I have been in in Ireland.

I simply could not imagine spending the rest of my life living in the typical apartment complex in Ireland, yet I've been in really beautiful apartments on the continent where I could have imagined living long term.

If apartments are a big part of the future in Ireland, and it looks like they have to be, then the ante has to be seriously upped in terms of quality and space. Will people be willing to spend 3 bed semi with garden in the suburbs money on an apartment though?

i did in the past, and the apartment had all of the things you mention, large underground storage, secure parking, 1000 sq feet for a two bed, lovely communal grounds. But i have never been in a complex like it since i have to say.

went back recently to see the gardens if anything it looks better than it did 5 years ago.

if building apartments (especially outside the core city centre) developers should be mandated to provide a certain (large) amount of communal green space per unit and underground lockups, that would make them a lot more interesting.

micosoft

PauloMN wrote: »

Many other countries in Europe manage to have families living long term in apartments. The difference is in the quality of the build and what a buyer gets for their money. Typical apartments I've been in in other countries have a really high standard of quality - proper sound proofing between floors and between units, quality fittings, high ceilings, proper storage both within the apartment and assigned storage space in basements etc. (no bikes or other stuff on the balcony), assigned and secure car parking. IMO that quality - which turns an apartment into a proper long term solution for a family to live in rather than a place to crash for a few years - is missing in the majority of apartments I have been in in Ireland.

I simply could not imagine spending the rest of my life living in the typical apartment complex in Ireland, yet I've been in really beautiful apartments on the continent where I could have imagined living long term.

If apartments are a big part of the future in Ireland, and it looks like they have to be, then the ante has to be seriously upped in terms of quality and space. Will people be willing to spend 3 bed semi with garden in the suburbs money on an apartment though?

It's a really long term shift though and cultural. A lot of the middle class in the cities have houses in the country. A lot of this was built around climate - you wanted to escape the city in August because the heat was unbearable. So you disappeared to your country house...

Mad_maxx

Brian? wrote: »

It's called having an opinion.

yes but the same opinion over and over again is very tedious ( the capitalist system is the problem etc )

Ace2007

Cyrus wrote: »

if building apartments (especially outside the core city centre) developers should be mandated to provide a certain (large) amount of communal green space per unit and underground lockups, that would make them a lot more interesting.

Again, it's within the city that the huge issue is with prices and within the city that people have certain areas set on. The issue isn't a housing crises that the media portrait, it's houses not available when certain cohort of the population want.

You could build 10,000 luxury apartments in Baldoyle and you probably won't fill them as they aren't what people want.

mariaalice

Mad_maxx wrote: »

yes but the same opinion over and over again is very tedious ( the capitalist system is the problem etc )

And for the sake of balance the two posters who are obsessed with social housing and those who live in them, rarely post about anything else. I use to think one was trolling but on balance not, it more comes across as the ranting is a release and a coping mechanism, the other comes across a quite an unlikeable individual.

GreeBo

Ace2007 wrote: »

Again, it's within the city that the huge issue is with prices and within the city that people have certain areas set on. The issue isn't a housing crises that the media portrait, it's houses not available when certain cohort of the population want.

You could build 10,000 luxury apartments in Baldoyle and you probably won't fill them as they aren't what people want.

There are pretty few vacant lots in the areas that people want to live though, so either they stump up and pay to live in the area they want, or they live somewhere else.

If there were no homes available in certain counties then people would have a point, but not being able to live where you want because you cant afford it is bizarre to me.
I was only able to buy where I wanted 3 houses later, people on low to middle incomes cant seriously expect to live in desirable locations, if they are desirable then its a fight over limited resources and those with more money will win out everytime, unless you interrupt the market.

Cyrus

Ace2007 wrote: »

Again, it's within the city that the huge issue is with prices and within the city that people have certain areas set on. The issue isn't a housing crises that the media portrait, it's houses not available when certain cohort of the population want.

You could build 10,000 luxury apartments in Baldoyle and you probably won't fill them as they aren't what people want.

when i say core city centre i mean D1 and D2 (areas where you probably wont have green space free) but if being built in ranelagh or dalkey then they need green space.

Ace2007

GreeBo wrote: »

There are pretty few vacant lots in the areas that people want to live though, so either they stump up and pay to live in the area they want, or they live somewhere else.

If there were no homes available in certain counties then people would have a point, but not being able to live where you want because you cant afford it is bizarre to me.
I was only able to buy where I wanted 3 houses later, people on low to middle incomes cant seriously expect to live in desirable locations, if they are desirable then its a fight over limited resources and those with more money will win out everytime, unless you interrupt the market.

And we've come full circle, and what my original point was - if you can't afford, stop complaining and buy where you can. To many people today want the dream home from Day 1.

HBC08

hgfj wrote: »

https://outline.com

Works for most sites - but not all.

Wow,that's great! Will be using that a lot in the future,thanks!

bureau2009

Conor Skehan was Head of the Housing Agency at one stage.

I remember hearing him interviewed on radio during this time. According to Conor everything was going to be wonderful, houses would be brilliantly designed, plentiful etc etc. A lot of people raised eyebrows at the time.

So whatever he said in the Sindo I would take with a large pinch of salt. We need many different voices to speak on the housing crisis in Ireland. However, I'm far from convinced that Conor Skehan is a constructive voice on this issue.

Ray Palmer

Cal4567 wrote: »

We are also really behind the curve on being realistic. Many are very late coming to the party that Dublin, like any other capital city, is now very expensive to live in, whereas up until 2008, just about anyone on an average wage, or 2 of them combined, could have been able to buy something within the M50.

It was more exacerbated here because in the Celtic Tiger years banks gave mortgages to many who couldn’t in the end afford to make monthly payments.

It is this shock that is slowly registering with many. That they cannot afford where they want to be, even though there are 2 good jobs and they have deposits in place. That is a very common occurrence now across many cities in other countries.

If I was 40 years younger, I’d be getting a job elsewhere in the country or I’d be heading off to northern England or Scotland. Of course, it all depends what work you do. At the same time, the city needs new social and affordable housing. Key workers – nurses, teachers, shop workers, ambulance drivers, hospital porters, bin men. The list could go on and on.

This really is laughable. You are using 2008 when prices had crashed. The banks wouldn't lend money and people lost jobs. It was not affordable to buy a house for many people.

I was a first time buyer before this and house prices were going up 20% a year and more then. People were lying through their teeth to get mortgages. Fake payroll, saying they were going to rent a room, bonus pay claims etc...

You cannot ignore the public when it comes to the mess that is property market in Ireland. When a property shortage was warned the public were very vocal about the government making it up to help builder friends. So the government didn't invest in building and a hosuing shortage followed. The public insisted on this.

We do not have a lack of houses we have an occupancy issue. There is a ring of property around Dublin of retired people living on their own or a couple occupying large family homes. We are talking about 10-20% occupancy rates for many houses.

We should have places to downsize in these areas so people can stay local have better designed housing for their needs. Very unpopular as it isn't been sold as a real solution. People scream about people being kicked out of their houses ànd bedroom taxes.

So many people cannot discuss the topic of housing without some ideal fairyland solution that never address the money and how they will be built and who does it. It is all doomed to fail because they aren't looking at reality.

I have a place that could be made into a house. Nobody can tax me for a vacant site as it isn't. I won't develop it because landlord taxation and policies that favour the tenants. It just isn't worth it. Many people in a similar boat. Punatives taxes and legislation on small landlords is what a lot of the public want

Brian?

GreeBo wrote: »

How is it simply wrong?
in 2016 1.9% of households had an income in excess of 200K, I'll go out on a limb and say that has increased.

I find it bizarre that you disagree that there are loads of couples on 125K, yet you think "quite a lot" of people emigrate from Ireland to The Netherlands...

Ok I withdraw my "quite a lot statement", that's a fair point.

I would say 2% is rare, but it's subjective.

Cyrus

Brian? wrote: »

I would say 2% is rare, but it's subjective.

the context in which it was raised was in relation to million euro houses in expensive suburbs, in that context it isnt rare.

Ace2007

Ace2007 wrote: »

And we've come full circle, and what my original point was - if you can't afford, stop complaining and buy where you can. To many people today want the dream home from Day 1.

People want to live in the city they work in, you want them to live in Longford. Good luck.

Cyrus

fvp4 wrote: »

People want to live in the city they work in, you want them to live in Longford. Good luck.

i think the argument is if you are working somewhere and what you earn isnt enough to buy a property there and thats what you want, maybe looking at working some place else and living in that location may potentially make more sense?

Fred Cryton

Fred Cryton wrote: »

The biggest myth of all is that the Shinners will magic up cheap homes for all, using magically available new land and magically cheap labour and materials to build them.

Especially when Eoin O Brien celebrated the fact that Johnny Ronan didn't get to build a 1,000 homes in Docklands.

Where do the Shinners think the homes are going to come from if they go after the banks, the investment funds and the developers who actually build them.

Presumably a big state investment scheme. Like back in the day. Whether or not there’s the space is an issue.

jimmycrackcorm

fvp4 wrote: »

People want to live in the city they work in, you want them to live in Longford. Good luck.

This is the reality for many economically successful cities. People have to commute distances from their homes because high-demand city property is too expensive. Plenty of people commuting that distance into London and in San Franciso, it's not uncommon for high-paid IT workers to have to get up at 5 am to commute to work.

But we're not allowed to create higher-density housing in Dublin because of the views.

hometruths

Fred Cryton wrote: »

The biggest myth of all is that the Shinners will magic up cheap homes for all, using magically available new land and magically cheap labour and materials to build them.

Especially when Eoin O Brien celebrated the fact that Johnny Ronan didn't get to build a 1,000 homes in Docklands.

Where do the Shinners think the homes are going to come from if they go after the banks, the investment funds and the developers who actually build them.

I actually think the Shinners plan of achieving affordable housing by building on state owned land in which the state retains the freehold interest in land is a good idea.

Certainly a lot better than anything any other party has come up with.