Subutai wrote: » Interested Observer wrote: » I'm counting over 450k people above 50k from the table on the 2nd page there. That's about 16%. Don't mean to split hairs but it's a big increase on 10%, in relative terms. Here's a table. It's 10%. If you include the 40-50k band it is about 16%. That band is mostly (if not entirely) people on below 50k. Those on 50k should start in the 50k-60k band.
Interested Observer wrote: » I'm counting over 450k people above 50k from the table on the 2nd page there. That's about 16%. Don't mean to split hairs but it's a big increase on 10%, in relative terms.
Samuel T. Cogley wrote: » That said something needs to be done about the ridiculous cost to build in this country.
OwlsZat wrote: » This seems to be the elephant in the room when it comes to housing supply. We should have a suspension or significant reduction in the tax take on building new homes/apartments until the housing deficit is cleared. Not heard a single mention of any such idea.
The_Conductor wrote: » Honestly- it wouldn't make one iota difference to the supply of new builds to the market. We are at full pelt in the construction sector- we don't have the labour and skills to build much faster than we currently are doing- and even that is imported skilled people- I had no idea that virtually the entire plumbing skillset was the exclusive domain of Polish plumbers- how did that happen? The bottleneck for developers- is cashflow related- our traditional lenders do not want to lend to developers- and who can blame them. Some sort of a scheme to develop massive numbers of council/local authority dwellings, in high density developments- ideally as close to Dublin and/or on public transport links- is critically needed. Outsourcing development to 'housing associations' and other inefficient tax schemes (which is what most of them are)- hasn't worked- akin to the manner that outsourcing the rental sector to private landlords hasn't worked. We need to bite the bullet- acknowledge that it hasn't worked- and move on.......
The_Conductor wrote: » Honestly- it wouldn't make one iota difference to the supply of new builds to the market.
OwlsZat wrote: » The_Conductor wrote: » Honestly- it wouldn't make one iota difference to the supply of new builds to the market. When there is a chance for developers/ builders to make a better return it's obvious it would improve the general interest in doing the building. The last time we needed lots of builders they came in droves from eastern Europe. I wonder why something similar isnt happening this time.
The_Conductor wrote: » The bottleneck for developers- is cashflow related- our traditional lenders do not want to lend to developers- and who can blame them. Some sort of a scheme to develop massive numbers of council/local authority dwellings, in high density developments- ideally as close to Dublin and/or on public transport links- is critically needed.
Marcus Rashford wrote: » The workforce is 2.27 million people. Even if only 4% of those are on €80k or more, that’s still over 90,000 people, the vast majority of whom live in Dublin. To state the obvious, that’s a lot of people chasing a finite supply of properties. And those figures ignore people who are wealthy but suppress their income (by not taking a salary from their company for example). As an aside, around 8,000 people work for the ESB and their average salary is €80k a year. The bottom line is that €40k a year is a yellow-pack salary in this day and age.
Marcus Rashford wrote: » 50% of PAYE collected despite Dublin only having 25% of the people?
snotboogie wrote: » Marcus Rashford wrote: » 50% of PAYE collected despite Dublin only having 25% of the people? Yes Dublin has by far the most high earners but doesn’t have the vast majority. Two very different statements. Looking at PAYE a significant percentage of that 90,000 earning over 80k are living outside Dublin
jay0109 wrote: » The elephant in the room is immigration, the subject of which we shall never speak. Have you seen PPS numbers issued for the past few years!
enricoh wrote: » Vat on new house is 13.5%. What percentage do builders have to hand over as social housing - iirc 15? Who pays for that - home buyers. Was talking to an estate agent recently n he was doing his nut. He had deposits down on a clatter of houses in an estate, then the council dealt direct with the builder n bought a third of the total estate for social housing. When word got out he was handing back deposits left, right and centre. I wouldn't blame them for cancelling buying either
airportgirl83 wrote: » Because in doesn't make sense financially. Back in 2006 unemployment rate in Poland was close to 14%, hence, people were emigrating. It's different now, people can get jobs easily back at home.
Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: » It's funny that viewers / bidders want evidence of offers and bids but would be horrified if there own personal details were leaked regarding interest in a property, let alone the illegality of it.
OwlsZat wrote: » It's funny we don't have a formal process for the largest single purchase of most people's lives.
Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: » I'd say the PSRA / agents are open to suggestions though ! I've had a good think about it myself and I can't come up with a solution that cant be seen as massagable in one way or another. Worth noting the complaints rarely come from successful bidders too.
OwlsZat wrote: » We keep hearing the wages in the construction sector have gone bananas. Surely we can attract overseas construction talent from somewhere. We should be on the overseas charm offensive poaching young workers. Are there no building firms that offer work across other EU countries?
OwlsZat wrote: » Bid in the dark. All bidders must be registered with PPS numbers. Allow all bids up until a fixed time period ie. 1 month. Highest bidder wins. The bidding process should obviously not be managed by a human...
Rex Disgusting Tariff wrote: » Why the 1 month? Owners are surely entitled to hang on for as long as they want to get the best price possible on the biggest asset of their life ? There are automated bidding process already with SherryF online etc.
Wildly Boaring wrote: » Sure the whole industry got shafted in 2008. We all got the sack and anyone self employed got left with a massive dept or bankrupt. Yes money is decent again. It's not bananas in comparison with other industries or other countries. Rent is also bananas. So eastern Europeans ain't coming here to be stung again. I'm in construction management here. Money is reasonable but sure as hell not bananas. I'd be on twice or even there times in Oz. I know QSs flying in and out of London for triple Irish rates.
OwlsZat wrote: » Well Oz seems to be playing daft money to everyone. Hell I might even go myself. You could add in the middle East too. I wasn't making out like everyone in the sector is coining it. Rather there must be a heap of Romanians Turks etc who would consider a couple of years here. The same way we send peoole to Oz/Dubai/London. Is there any company that recruits and employees construction workers using that kind of model?
OwlsZat wrote: » Immigration is at fault for the a housing supply issue? Do explain
Subutai wrote: » Here's a table. It's 10%. If you include the 40-50k band it is about 16%. That band is mostly (if not entirely) people on below 50k. Those on 50k should start in the 50k-60k band.
The_Conductor wrote: » Apparently we're expecting an increase of 137-140k in Dublin by 2022 (ESRI predictions). Where these people are supposed to live- is beyond me.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dd23f423fe14831a2a84d9f17c825ecc.svg)
