FF/FG/Green Government - Part 3

Marine Layer wrote: »

Its not but but the shinners
The shinners are giving out about government spending money buying homes that people want,yet they're happy to buy them themselves pushing first time buyers out (instead of building new ones)
Its typical both sides of mouths territory

The statement was from Richard Boyd-Barrett (PBP), and said that the government had a stake in institutional (private) funds who were buying up houses. The shinners do not come into it.

And as to you assertion that shinners are buying homes on behalf of local authorities, I refer you to my earlier post.

blanch152

Fann Linn wrote: »

In other words, suck it up. Straight from the FFG playbook.

No, not suck it up. Be realistic.

There is no more room to build four-bed houses with a garden big enough for a trampoline beside mammy anywhere inside the M50. The few sites that are available must be reserved for high density, as we see in Cherrywood.

blanch152 wrote: »

No, not suck it up. Be realistic.

There is no more room to build four-bed houses with a garden big enough for a trampoline beside mammy anywhere inside the M50. The few sites that are available must be reserved for high density, as we see in Cherrywood.

Thats a totally different point from your assertion that current rents in Dublin are acceptable. In 2019 Dublin had the 8th highest rental prices in the world - do you think that is normal? For a city with such a small population and so much undeveloped land, to have the 8th highest rental prices worldwide. Higher than Milan, Stockholm. Its mental

Oymyakon

blanch152 wrote: »

Have you looked at the cost of rental in any part of Europe?

If you want to live in a capital city like Dublin, and within reasonable commuting distance, you will pay at least the same as Dublin.

Yes I have. I've applied for jobs in cities such as Arnhem, Brussels and Dusseldorf and renting an apartment is actually affordable based on the wage I'd expect to get, even after the much higher tax rates.

Expensive housing isn't exclusive to Dublin, but Dublin is by far the most outrageously unaffordable city from what I've researched. The Dutch even consider themselves to have a housing crisis, which is kind of true, but not to the extent of Dublin.

timmyntc wrote: »

The statement was from Richard Boyd-Barrett (PBP), and said that the government had a stake in institutional (private) funds who were buying up houses. The shinners do not come into it.

And as to you assertion that shinners are buying homes on behalf of local authorities, I refer you to my earlier post.

I wasnt talking about RBB
My question is where is the pecking order here
People bid out of buying their own homes by local authorities or renters who will be forever renters as there always are ?
The irish institutional investers are pension funds,whose investers include an awful lot of joe public private pensions
Their involvement is a drop in the ocean

blanch152

timmyntc wrote: »

Thats a totally different point from your assertion that current rents in Dublin are acceptable. In 2019 Dublin had the 8th highest rental prices in the world - do you think that is normal?

Well, it is not acceptable, but it is an inevitable consequence of the inaction of DCC. We have had seven years now of city councillors blocking high-rise development and choking supply. That inevitably results in higher rents.

blanch152

Oymyakon wrote: »

Yes I have. I've applied for jobs in cities such as Arnhem, Brussels and Dusseldorf and renting an apartment is actually affordable based on the wage I'd expect to get, even after the much higher tax rates.

Expensive housing isn't exclusive to Dublin, but Dublin is by far the most outrageously unaffordable city from what I've researched. The Dutch even consider themselves to have a housing crisis, which is kind of true, but not to the extent of Dublin.

You won't get anything reasonable in Brussels anywhere near the city centre, or in reasonable commuting distance.

Oymyakon

blanch152 wrote: »

You won't get anything reasonable in Brussels anywhere near the city centre, or in reasonable commuting distance.

I'm not sure where you are getting that information from, but a quick look at Immoweb brings up absolutely tonnes of apartments in the city for <1,200 €. A quick look at the Brussels subreddit as well indicates that getting an apartment is reasonably straight forward.

McMurphy wrote: »

Just on that ..... Didn't hear it myself, but if this is true......

https://twitter.com/olivercallan/status/1394944034255298560?s=19

Do the gombeens in cabinet literally draw up their plans using crayons?

Callan is a leading SF cheerleader , not saying there is anything wrong with that , hes from Iniskeen in Monaghan where even the sheep vote SF

just pointing his motivation out

Fann Linn wrote: »

In other words, suck it up. Straight from the FFG playbook.

what are FG or FF supposed to do about rental market in other European capitals ?

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Callan is a leading SF cheerleader , not saying there is anything wrong with that , hes from Iniskeen in Monaghan where even the sheep vote SF

just pointing his motivation out

That doesnt invalidate what was said - all Oliver Callan did was tweet including a quote from RBB.

The claim came from RBB on the radio - Callan didnt make it up or anything, so his "motivations" are irrelevant.

timmyntc wrote: »

That doesnt invalidate what was said - all Oliver Callan did was tweet including a quote from RBB.

The claim came from RBB on the radio - Callan didnt make it up or anything, so his "motivations" are irrelevant.

Callan spends more time attacking this government than he does being funny

BASHIR

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Callan spends more time attacking this government than he does being funny

In fairness they make it easy for him

McMurphy

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Callan is a leading SF cheerleader , not saying there is anything wrong with that , hes from Iniskeen in Monaghan where even the sheep vote SF

just pointing his motivation out

Callan is an "SF cheerleader", by tweeting about RBB and PBP?

Yep, makes sense.

Not sure what one has to do with the context of the tweet regardless.

FrancieBrady

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Callan is a leading SF cheerleader , not saying there is anything wrong with that , hes from Iniskeen in Monaghan where even the sheep vote SF

just pointing his motivation out

Heather Humphries wants a word about making ridiculous generalities on the internet.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Heather Humphries wants a word about making ridiculous generalities on the internet.

Didn't know HH was from Iniskeen?

Fann Linn

O Duffy the fascist cancelled in Monahan also I believe.

RandomViewer

Mad_maxx wrote: »

what are FG or FF supposed to do about rental market in other European capitals ?

Other Capitals with ten times the population, Dublin should be comparing to Cardiff or Palermo rather than Paris and New York

RandomViewer wrote: »

Other Capitals with ten times the population, Dublin should be comparing to Cardiff or Palermo rather than Paris and New York

Bad comparisons across the board there

RandomViewer

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, it is not acceptable, but it is an inevitable consequence of the inaction of DCC. We have had seven years now of city councillors blocking high-rise development and choking supply. That inevitably results in higher rents.

Ballymun was a disaster, you want to repeat it.

Fann Linn

Enough said. Lorcan Sirr has shot it down and the Greens are right to be worried.
'Tinkering around the edges with no real difference.'
Could we leave his quote as a sticky on the FFG thread?

As is always the case, other opinions do vary.
Dermot o'leary chief Economist at Goodbodys on morning Ireland today said the measures were a good balance
Basically heading off any more growth in fund housing estate ownership whilst leaving their money still coming in to build what would otherwise be City centre apartments not built
Culling their involvement there would choke supply further

“It does take some demand pressure away from housing estates in particular, because you are effectively blocking off one source of the demand, the institutional buyer, but they were small in any case,”

“There was a potential for it to grow over the next number of months and years but the number of housing units being purchased by investors was quite small in any case. It is really preventing something that may have happened on a larger scale in the future, rather than what was happening on a larger scale in the past,” he added.
About 20% of the 20,000 housing units in the year leading up to the Covid pandemic were built by tapping investment from “institutional” investors and international funds will continue to play a role in building houses for rent and in providing financing for housing, Mr O’Leary said."

Marine Layer wrote: »

As is always the case, other opinions do vary.
Dermot o'leary chief Economist at Goodbodys on morning Ireland today said the measures were a good balance
Basically heading off any more growth in fund housing estate ownership whilst leaving their money still coming in to build what would otherwise be City centre apartments not built
Culling their involvement there would choke supply further

But the measures proposed wont have any impact on housing estate ownership.
Investment funds can still buy 10+ houses and just take the hit on the extra stamp duty. The UK did similar previously and it did nothing to curb institutional investors. They will still profit in the long term and its still worth it for them to buy, stamp duty of 1% or 10%.

Not only that, but they can create subsidiary companies to buy 9 units each and avoid extra stamp duty entirely!

Wanderer78

Marine Layer wrote: »

As is always the case, other opinions do vary.
Dermot o'leary chief Economist at Goodbodys on morning Ireland today said the measures were a good balance
Basically heading off any more growth in fund housing estate ownership whilst leaving their money still coming in to build what would otherwise be City centre apartments not built
Culling their involvement there would choke supply further

goodbodys is a financial services company, so its biased towards such outcomes, its economists are probably largely neoclassical as well, so.... the main causes of our housing situation is largely due to the dysfunctional behaviors of the fire sectors(finance, insurance and real estate), so always be wary of their comments

Wanderer78 wrote: »

goodbodys is a financial services company, so its biased towards such outcomes, its economists are probably largely neoclassical as well, so.... the main causes of our housing situation is largely due to the dysfunctional behaviors of the fire sectors(finance, insurance and real estate), so always be wary of their comments

I introduced it as an other side comment
I'm wary of all comments

timmyntc wrote: »

But the measures proposed wont have any impact on housing estate ownership.
Investment funds can still buy 10+ houses and just take the hit on the extra stamp duty. The UK did similar previously and it did nothing to curb institutional investors. They will still profit in the long term and its still worth it for them to buy, stamp duty of 1% or 10%.

Not only that, but they can create subsidiary companies to buy 9 units each and avoid extra stamp duty entirely!

The UK has opt out clauses for that stamp duty, so not a like for like comparison

Wanderer78

Marine Layer wrote: »

I introduced it as an other side comment
I'm wary of all comments

ah shur look, i dont think anyone truly knows what to do here, but you can be damn sure, our politicians are not listening to sense, and havent been for years, and this situation is becoming extremely dangerous, its starting to have serious negative effects almost everywhere now

Wanderer78 wrote: »

ah shur look, i dont think anyone truly knows what to do here, but you can be damn sure, our politicians are not listening to sense, and havent been for years, and this situation is becoming extremely dangerous, its starting to have serious negative effects almost everywhere now

Its not a pretty situation
But I don't believe that the options the government are taking now to be kamikaze ones like the opposition suggest
Governments cannot run with the radical approach all the time
Too many needed financiers would just run
Government's govern on a largely damned if you do this and damned if you don't do that basis

Wanderer78

Marine Layer wrote: »

Its not a pretty situation
But I don't believe that the options the government are taking now to be kamikaze ones like the opposition suggest
Governments cannot run with the radical approach all the time
Too many needed financiers would just run
Government's govern on a largely damned if you do this and damned if you don't do that basis

we may have needed these financial institutions in the past, we dont need them now, their activities are now endangering our whole economy and society, its time for them to go, we have the means to do this ourselves, but we re stuck in highly dysfunctional ideologies, that are just extracting wealth from it all, and endangering us all