fliball123 wrote: » NO why should people who have already paid tax on earnings to buy the properties. Then further taxes when they bought. Why should they have to pay again. They have paid enough. If they own it its their business what they do with it. Next we will be allowing people ride the wives of guys who are not servicing them because they are not "in use" .... Or if there is a car not being driven feel free to take it as its not "in use" In fact if you hang your coat up when you go to a restaurant or bar feel free to take it as its not "in use" Change your name to CommieQueries. If you want this go live in Russia
JimmyVik wrote: » Why is the answer to everything in Ireland to tax them? I pay enough tax. Fcuk off with your suggestions of more tax.
PropQueries wrote: » Well then it looks like FG are going to turn communist because I'm 99% certain that big big rises in property taxes are going to be a big big part of the states revenue streams in the very near future IMO
fliball123 wrote: » Do you know this for sure. I can tell you now if they do this they will lose a lot of their voting base. People have paid tax on earnings to buy a property and stamp duty on top as well as the existing property tax. I dont think they will go near it as its a hand grenade with the pin pulled out. FF/FG will not put taxes up while they are in charge unless the economy starts to thank after covid is gone. Sure in 2.5y ears time if voting goes the way of Sinn Fein they will be left holding the baby. Be funny seeing how they try to sort it out
awec wrote: You've officially jumped the shark. We're now on to how good public transport is actually bad.
fliball123 wrote: Come on your stretching now for god sake we need public transport , the builders didnt all get together and say lets get them to build more roads and put more buses and trains on to make land more valuable.
timmyntc wrote: If there is public transport to efficiently bring people to where they need to go then I wouldn't say it's the "wrong" place at all.
schmittel wrote: » You know all is well in the property market when it only takes 850,000 of your hard earned/borrowed euros to buy a detached house with large garden in prime SCD:https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/detached-house-24-dundela-avenue-sandycove-co-dublin/2953175
Hubertj wrote: » Is that a €1m + house when complete?
DataDude wrote: » I think easily. But after renovations it's going to run you well over €1m. The house directly across from it (number 25) sold for 860 last month (895 asking). It was a corner site, with a better west facing garden aspect (although considerably smaller), a similar size and in marginally better condition. I think number 24 is priced about right all things considered. If I was a betting man, I think it'll exceed asking by a bit.
schmittel wrote: » Wow. That surprises me, but I don't follow that market. I think that is insane. 1m for what is in my opinion a house that is small and ugly!
DataDude wrote: » I don’t disagree but I just think a site of that size in that location is going to make decent money. The house itself isn’t worth a whole lot. Cyrus would be more of an expert on the localities, but it’s very close to Albert Road so I suspect it’s highly sought after. We’ve looked at a few fixer uppers in and around it, and anything with a decent garden seems to go for €1m+.
fliball123 wrote: » Is anyone forcing you to buy this. Sandycove would be a very desirable location There you go there are a few detached houses in Dublin for you all under 250khttps://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/23a-st-catherines-drive-rush-co-dublin/4485962https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/28a-virginia-park-finglas-dublin-11/4333193https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/91-brookford-rush-co-dublin/4483402https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/91-brookford-rush-co-dublin/4483402 and ifs southside theres one for under 300khttps://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/13-killakee-court-firhouse-dublin-24/4353005
schmittel wrote: » Would you consider it? its seem like right location, you could get it renovated and still be under top end of your budget.
fliball123 wrote: » Is anyone forcing you to buy this. Sandycove would be a very desirable location There you go there are a few detached houses in Dublin for you all under 250k and ifs southside theres one for under 300k
woejus wrote: » Oil Fried Central Heating
K.Hawksworth wrote: » Retrofitting bulletproof windows and security gates to live in those areas might be an additional price factor to consider.
DataDude wrote: » I wouldn’t rule it out completely but probably not. I also think it’s an ugly house which you can’t really change. Doesn’t seem like any of the houses along the road have done anything eye catching with regards to extensions etc. Not sure if that means you can’t do it, or more likely that it’s an old ‘cash poor’ demographic in there with lots of beat down houses like that one.Would love to live in that area but coming to the realisation we can’t afford it. Greystones bound!
schmittel wrote: » My point exactly. You're a perfect example of how I see the market playing out over the next few years. You are the target buyer for that house. You can afford the house and it is in your ideal area, but it sounds like you don't see value in it. Your c. 1m budget will buy you a better house somewhere else eg Greystones. I'd say in the current market there is a greater fool out there who will be the marginal buyer at that price (or higher), but it seems to me that the supply of greater fools is diminishing, and more and more of those buyers are thinking along your lines. i.e Are we really going to spend 1m+ on a small and ugly house? If people in the top 1% of earners with a budget of over 1m are turning their back on them, who is going to buy these houses at these prices over the next few years? And there are thousands of them. I am not saying I think that house is suddenly going be worth sub 400k, just that I think it is currently very close to the highest price the market will bear (barring significant inflation which I think is a possibility).
schmittel wrote: » Often wondered if there is something wrong with it (other than the price), been for sale for a very long time. I agree it looks like a fabulous house.
PropQueries wrote: » No need to nationalise. Just implement a similar derelict property tax like the socialist paradise that is Washington D.C. has of 10%. That would be incentive enough to bring many of them back into use IMO A similar tax for under-utilised commercial properties in our towns and cities and the market will take care of the rest IMO
cnocbui wrote: » So lets say you are the owner of an old building with your shop on the ground floor and three empty floors above, but you use one of them for storage. You bought all this with a bank loan. The shop just makes enough to pay the loan with something left for you to live on. Then along come the marxists with their tax to tell you what to do with the banks property. You approach the bank for the €70,000 estimated necessary to rennovate the floors above to a habitable standard. The bank says no. The tax has put you below the poverty line. Now what?
timmyntc wrote: » You have extra property that is not being used - either you rent it or sell it. Whats the problem?
woejus wrote: » "The shop just makes enough to pay the loan with something left for you to live on." That's one problem. The second would be the Ben Shapiro-esque "sell the houses to who, Ben?" issue.
Irish property developer Ballymore, which has been the subject of criticism from residents at its London developments, is hoping to fulfil its social housing obligations at its new Connolly Quarter scheme by leasing units to Dublin City Council. The units would be let at market rates, which could mean rents for the council of more than €2,500 for a two-bedroom unit.
