Topgear on Dave wrote: » Of course its all about votes. The crisis only effects a very small number of people in comparison to the total population, its a part of why it is so hard to solve.
hmmm wrote: » ... The problem we have is people keep saying this is a simple problem, when it's a hugely complex problem with lots of bits interconnecting...
awec wrote: Houses are still just 4 walls and a roof in the same way that a 2021 car is the same as the one Henry Ford built, a few doors and 4 wheels.
Amadan Dubh wrote: I was a card carrying member of the communist party of Ireland back in 06 before becoming a card carrying member of FG in 08. What would that make me?
Villa05 wrote: » Oddly enough they got more affordable and better over time in real terms despite heavy taxation, while housing got smaller and less affordable with numerous tax incentives and buyer grants
hmmm wrote: » The best thing we can do is not vote for whatever the next merry-go-round of political parties is, but appoint some sort of Tsar or super-authority, independent of the politicians, whose job is to fix this. I don't see any other way out of this.
awec wrote: » We’re still waiting on someone to invent robots that can build houses.
Amadan Dubh wrote: » I was a card carrying member of the communist party of Ireland back in 06 before becoming a card carrying member of FG in 08. What would that make me?
awec wrote: We’re still waiting on someone to invent robots that can build houses.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » His views on the property market are Marxist only when viewed through an overton window that places centrism as selling the country to vulture funds and the ESRI saying things like "“Each successive generation are less likely than the last to own their own home at the same age" From what i gather one of Hearne's worries is will his kids be able to afford housing in the future and judging by today's ESRI report he has every right to be worried!
Mad_maxx wrote: He fully supports the o gorman plan to house "refugees " after four months, anyone doing that can sit down re_ housing shortage speeches
Villa05 wrote: » It would make no difference because land would rise quickly to swallow the savings in our system
hmmm wrote: » I think it's the other way around. The problem we have is people keep saying this is a simple problem, when it's a hugely complex problem with lots of bits interconnecting. Putting a cap on rents decreases the amount of rentals available. Banning "cuckoo funds" decreases the funds for builders who now can't build apartments. Planning permission is archaic. Government tries to increase density, which sets off complaints from NIMBYs. Government tries to build more social housing which also leads to complaints. Ignore the complaints and you get SHDs, which opposition parties are opposed to. Everything is connected and nothing is fixable in the term of the average government - it's like health. None of the political parties have a sensible position. The best thing we can do is not vote for whatever the next merry-go-round of political parties is, but appoint some sort of Tsar or super-authority, independent of the politicians, whose job is to fix this. I don't see any other way out of this.
SmokyMo wrote: » Housing is a hard issue but not complex to solve. This is not cancer treatment. There are literally hundreds of books written on solving housing crises if you lack imagination and critical thinking.
fliball123 wrote: » The only way to get back to a market that is fair is take all subsidies away for both rental and buying. Then even out what Vultures/REITS are paying. The government should hire a private developer and give them a contract that is iron clad and which prices agreed cannot be upped ala the childrens hospital. I mean has anyone got any building work done, you agree a price a time frame and what work has to be done and you pay them a daily rate while working if they dont show up they dont get paid. I know its not that simple but it should be the public sector completely over egg the pudding with things creating cost and confusion instead of just keeping it simple. These houses built in the scenario above should be used to help those on the lower wage first then anyone on the social should be rehoused in areas that are away from highly populated areas where people who want to work can work. Also these houses given to the low paid and on welfare should not I repeat should not ever become the property of that person. It should remain with the state and used for the next person who needs it. I dont see why anyone including their offspring should remain in an asset that they have been subsidized to live in for a long period of time. Anyone here think this will happen? Not a chance as Young Mary with 5 kids has to live beside mammy as who will mind the nippers on micky money day. The whole system needs a reboot but no one in government has the balls to stand up to our left leaning policies and our right leaning policies that make it hard for the average working person to live and gives preferential treatment to those who cant or don't want to work and to the big boys who are so rich they almost bow to them.
Bulk buying of homes could be banned by summer Ministers want to change planning regulations within weeks to ban multiple property purchases in developments below a certain density. Paul Gallagher, the attorney-general, is studying the Planning Act 2000 to determine if the restrictions can be made without new legislation, which would allow a ban before summer. The move, led by Darragh O’Brien, the housing minister, would not apply retrospectively to any developments that already have planning permission. One government source said the plan would rule out multiple purchases in developments with a density below 40 units per hectare. Bulk buying could be limited to densities above 50 units per hectare. Sources said O’Brien was unlikely to implement a geographic ban on venture funds purchasing homes outside city centre areas, one of the strategies that was being considered by government to force institutional buyers out of the family home market. Paschal Donohoe, the finance minister, is understood to be examining a form of punitive stamp duty that could be levied on bulk property purchases stop or discourage the purchase of 100 or more houses in a single estate as happened last month in Mullen Park, Maynooth, Co Kildare. Sources say a punitive stamp duty on such purchases or a change to the tax code restricting REITs to high density developments like apartments are among the measures being considered.
Amadan Dubh wrote: » https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bulk-buying-of-homes-could-be-banned-by-summer-h0tj7pt7f "Could" ; here's to hoping and of course as always the devil will be in the exemptions. I'd also be shocked if Paul "landlord" Gallagher advises that strong measures stand up to legal scrutiny but we shall see shortly.
Mad_maxx wrote: » He fully supports the o gorman plan to house "refugees " after four months, anyone doing that can sit down re_ housing shortage speeches
PropQueries wrote: » Firstly, there are no highly populated area of Dublin (relative to most other countries). Second, the state knew that "Young Mary" would most likely need a home c. 20 years ago and didn't plan to house her and the bust is absolutely no excuse IMO. That's 100% the states fault and I pay them very high salaries/pensions and I pay very high taxes for them to foresee and plan for such things so that I don't have to feel guilty, provide services and take care of the less well off/vulnerable in society. As per the below, my taxes don't go into "social welfare" in any meaningful sense, so where do my taxes go as they were collecting over €80B per year pre-covid? Of the €21 billion in "social welfare" spending in 2019 (the only comparable year (pre-covid): Admin: €0.722M Pensions: €8.21M Working Age - Income Supports: €3.26M Working Age - Employment Supports: €0.692M Illness, Disability and Carers: €4.51M Children: €2.65M Supplementary Payments: €0.788M Where do you suppose they should cut? And, then can all the young people stop paying PRSI? And, then how will all those existing pensioners get paid? Should carers demand a real wage commensurate to what they actually do? That would cost us a fortune IMO Our social welfare system is amazingly cheap given that it's basically self-financing through our PRSI etc. contributions and that carers work for less than their real worth. The only section that didn't pay for itself was the pensions part IMO
enricoh wrote: » Any refugee coming over for o Gorman's manna from heaven may do so pronto. Paddy is beginning to join the dots on our housing crisis. And ff and ff are beginning to realize there's no votes in outbidding Paddy's kids on a house to hand it to someone in the country 4 months. Twitter likes don't count in the ballot box! Michael Martin on the radio earlier, he thought he'd be basking in reopening the country this week, instead he's on the ropes with ordinary punters being outbid.
awec wrote: It would make a big difference if labour costs were no longer a major factor. It would also reduce material costs as robots make less mistakes.
awec wrote: While houses are very different to what they used to be, the construction methods haven't changed an awful lot, it's still incredibly labour intensive.
fliball123 wrote: » So the state should of been there in the bed telling young Mary to keep her legs together. Does Mary not have any personal responsibility to not keep having kids she cant afford? So this is 100% someone elses fault. Will you give over this is one of the biggest problems in this country no personal accountability, weather its a banker juggling billions to deceive the our amazing financial watch dogs, or a politician pretending like they give a flying phuck and making sure they are covered no mater how the wind blows, or young Mary who has not just had one kid but 4/5 and expects the state to be baby daddy. Who pays?? The tax payer pays, they are left on the hook for the rich the poor and the self serving public servants like politicians. Our welfare spend is 23.3 billionhttps://whereyourmoneygoes.gov.ie/en/ The whole lot needs to be looked at root and branch and if savings can be made they should be made A few examples would be if people are pulling a fast one with regards to working in the black market and claiming. Also Daddy's name needs to go on the birth cert and they should be forced to pay their share for their kid. There is abuse going on in the system to say otherwise is just being blinkered. Really so you think our our social welfare system is cheap we are paying 23.3 billion how much did PRSI bring in? Our welfare system is far from cheap. You of all people should understand that the powers that be normally calculate this as a % of our GDP and with your commentary on our corporation tax which you have been saying this will be getting drained away by at least 6 billion over the next few years. Do you think 23.3 billion is sustainable? Do we just keep borrowing? Do we tax our workers more?
timmyntc wrote: » Prefabricated panels can be mass produced - the problem is in Ireland we don't like wooden houses. We also dont grow enough lumber in this country either.
Bass Reeves wrote: » It's a bit more complex than that. While timber frame are Ok on the internal leaf of a house with exposed wood in Ireland has a limited lifespan. In other countries external wood can last hundreds of years this is not so in Ireland. It has been trialed in different methods and situations but because of our weather exposed external timber frame will not work
fliball123 wrote: » ... Our welfare spend is 23.3 billionhttps://whereyourmoneygoes.gov.ie/en/
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23af546224513cf852af4d456d68d01c.svg)
