nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

FF/FG/Green Government - Part 3

Necro

Following on from

this thread

Please remain civil or posting privileges will be removed

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

blanch152

RandomViewer wrote: »

Ballymun was a disaster, you want to repeat it.

Sorry? Who said I wanted to repeat Ballymun?

High-rise done wrong once in Ireland, when the rest of the world does it right all the time, doesn't mean high-rise doesn't work.

A complete strawman argument you are bringing up.

Wanderer78

timmyntc wrote: »

Investment funds are not here to provide a service, they are here to make money whatever way they can.

In buying up housing estates they are not adding to supply, they are adding to demand.
I agree they play an important role in apartment block building - this should be allowed to continue.

The solution is not a stamp duty charge, but a ban on the bulk buying of newly built housing. If they want to acquire units to rent & get their return on investment, they can fund the building of them themselves. That way they either add to supply, or dont buy anything.

i suspect the stamp duty will just further inflate prices, as these institutions would have almost unlimited access to credit

[Deleted User]

timmyntc wrote: »

Investment funds are not here to provide a service, they are here to make money whatever way they can.

In buying up housing estates they are not adding to supply, they are adding to demand.
I agree they play an important role in apartment block building - this should be allowed to continue.

The solution is not a stamp duty charge, but a ban on the bulk buying of newly built housing. If they want to acquire units to rent & get their return on investment, they can fund the building of them themselves. That way they either add to supply, or dont buy anything.

Can you actually ban bulk buying of property without protracted legal battles challenging a ban?

Wanderer78

Marine Layer wrote: »

Can you actually ban bulk buying of property without protracted legal battles challenging a ban?

id say policies could be enacted fairly quickly to do so alright, we just dont have the will at the moment

Shebean

We underestimate the intelligence of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael time and again. This allows them try pass the current housing situation as an unforeseen situation they just noticed the other week.
They knew full well and know full well the consequences. Everything is going to plan except now they are being slapped in the face with it they are doing a little jig around the edges to look like we are all in this together.

They can make it so only housing charities and councils can bulk buy. The funds can still invest in building and make their money that way.
We stepped in to promote and encourage private investment. Who should do the same for the public instead.

Wanderer78

Shebean wrote: »

We underestimate the intelligence of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael time and again. This allows them try pass the current housing situation as an unforeseen situation they just noticed the other week.
They knew full well and know full well the consequences. Everything is going to plan except now they are being slapped in the face with it they are doing a little jig around the edges to look like we are all in this together.

They can make it so only housing charities and councils can bulk buy. The funds can still invest in building and make their money that way.
We stepped in to promote and encourage private investment. Who should do the same for the public instead.

...i disagree here, they clearly dont know whats going on, they havent accepted their fundamental ideologies are done, they died a major death in 08, but theyve been trying to default back to them since, and they keep failing over and over.....

timmyntc

Marine Layer wrote: »

Can you actually ban bulk buying of property without protracted legal battles challenging a ban?

May require a referendum who knows - thats no excuse not to pursue it though.
If it is unconstitutional then who else is going to get the ball rolling on a referendum other than the current government?

Anyways it doesnt have to be a ban on bulk buying, it could be a ban on non-residents buying or new designations for planning permission for owner-occupied units. (Imagine the drama when social housing tenants cant be moved in to an estate because its for owner occupiers only!)
Point is though there are a myriad of ways to go about this, but the current gov have gone for the most ineffective approach

Shebean

Wanderer78 wrote: »

...i disagree here, they clearly dont know whats going on, they havent accepted their fundamental ideologies are done, they died a major death in 08, but theyve been trying to default back to them since, and they keep failing over and over.....

That's assuming they want what's in the best interest of the public.
There is less profit in supplying low cost housing. That's why they try avoid it when possible.
No point being in power if you aren't making.
They are very good at losing money for the tax payer and making profits for private business. I can't believe they've been at that for decades because they weren't aware.

Wanderer78

Shebean wrote: »

That's assuming they want what's in the best interest of the public.
There is less profit in supplying low cost housing. That's why they try avoid it when possible.
No point being in power if you aren't making.
They are very good at losing money for the tax payer and making profits for private business. I can't believe they've been at that for decades because they weren't aware.

arguable, but i suspect they truly dont understand whats going on, theyre still stuck in the whole fire sector approach to running an economy, alongside most other countries across the western world, and theyre still not accepting, its done!

[Deleted User]

timmyntc wrote: »

May require a referendum who knows - thats no excuse not to pursue it though.
If it is unconstitutional then who else is going to get the ball rolling on a referendum other than the current government?

Anyways it doesnt have to be a ban on bulk buying, it could be a ban on non-residents buying or new designations for planning permission for owner-occupied units. (Imagine the drama when social housing tenants cant be moved in to an estate because its for owner occupiers only!)
Point is though there are a myriad of ways to go about this, but the current gov have gone for the most ineffective approach

I would prefer if the government explained why options are in or out
Oppositions dont want to.press them to do that for fear their preferred headline solution is shown to be unworkable

Cluedo Monopoly

Wanderer78 wrote: »

...i disagree here, they clearly dont know whats going on, they havent accepted their fundamental ideologies are done, they died a major death in 08, but theyve been trying to default back to them since, and they keep failing over and over.....

Both FF and FG will now always be known as the parties that broke the housing market and refused to fix it. The backtracking on the cuckoo funds is embarassing having known and facilitated for years.

Wanderer78

Cluedo Monopoly wrote:

Both FF and FG will now always be known as the parties that broke the housing market and refused to fix it. The backtracking on the cuckoo funds is embarassing having known and facilitated for years.

I think we could be coming to the end of their era, and their accompanying ideologies, it's very strange to see such a large cohert of seemingly intelligent people not realise, they're wrong, and so to are their ideologies

[Deleted User]

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Both FF and FG will now always be known as the parties that broke the housing market and refused to fix it. The backtracking on the cuckoo funds is embarassing having known and facilitated for years.

How would you finance house building?
Banks are leaving because the country as a whole isnt giving them enough margin,never mind property funding
Who is going to risk using their money without a return?
Government borrowing puts a tax burden on earners,so that route is limited and is capped anyway by the need for a government within the EU's fiscal realm to budget responsibly
Running a country is not unlike running a household
You cannot have everything and promise everything
Syriza discovered this the hard way in Greece

Wanderer78

Marine Layer wrote:

How would you finance house building? Banks are leaving because the country as a whole isnt giving them enough margin,never mind property funding Who is going to risk using their money without a return? Government borrowing puts a tax burden on earners,so that route is limited and is capped anyway by the need for a government within the EU's fiscal realm to budget responsibly Running a country is not unlike running a household You cannot have everything and promise everything Syriza discovered this the hard way in Greece

With rates at all time lows, we can easily be the primary funder, but we will also need the assistance of private sector financial institutions also.

Funnily enough, by doing what we re doing right now, is putting all of us in great danger, in particular younger generations, so.......

Yup, running a country is nothing like running a household, hence why we can actually do these things, I.e. largely fund it ourselves.

Greece got fcuked nicely by the trioka, so much so, its gdp has dropped since, many younger people have left, those left behind are largely unemployed, I.e. their economy and society have been completely wreck, so......

[Deleted User]

How can we out of EU spec borrow to provide housing to people who cannot afford a mortgage though?
Tax rises squeeze the ability to repay

Dempo1

It just astonishes me that collectively three Political parties in government could get a solution to Investment Funds bulk purchasing so dreadfully wrong. Do they seriously think 10% stamp duty will make the slightest difference, or perhaps that's the Cunning plan in limiting what's going on.

The Maynooth houses sold for €400k each, the 10% would bring that to €440k, an interesting report tonight on what these funds would need to do is increase rental yield by €170 pm, equally €1800 approx to make up the 10%, Not only are many renters actually paying this anyway but in some cases more. The net affect = higher rents in some cases subsidised by the state (HAP) , which I suppose the government not terribly concerned about given the extra 10% stamp duty they'll get, it's just bizzare and of course the Funds will find ways of avoiding the stamp duty.

Mind Boggling stuff and some say the opposition loosing the plot? This government, digging the plot and flipping it to their friends.

Cluedo Monopoly

Dempo1 wrote: »

It just astonishes me that collectively three Political parties in government could get a solution to Investment Funds bulk purchasing so dreadfully wrong. Do they seriously think 10% stamp duty will make the slightest difference, or perhaps that's the Cunning plan in limiting what's going on.

The Maynooth houses sold for €400k each, the 10% would bring that to €440k, an interesting report tonight on what these funds would need to do is increase rental yield by €170 pm, equally €1800 approx to make up the 10%, Not only are many renters actually paying this anyway but in some cases more. The net affect = higher rents in some cases subsidised by the state (HAP) , which I suppose the government not terribly concerned about given the extra 10% stamp duty they'll get, it's just bizzare and of course the Funds will find ways of avoiding the stamp duty.

Mind Boggling stuff and some say the opposition loosing the plot? This government, digging the plot and flipping it to their friends.

It is a dumb blunt solution that will not work. The coalition of chaos tend to react rashly rather than proactively plan/analyse. It's their MO. They only care about votes in GE.Next. They just want to be seen to be doing 'something'. People see through it now. Not one coalition TD explained why they ignored the investment funds problem until the backlash. Not one. Cowards.

Wanderer78

Marine Layer wrote: »

How can we out of EU spec borrow to provide housing to people who cannot afford a mortgage though?
Tax rises squeeze the ability to repay

we need to step out of these ideas regarding public debt, private debt has in fact been causing the bulk of our issues, the debts going forward, must primarily sit on public balance sheets, until we get a handle on private debts and ultimately the banks that create them.

the eu currently cannot afford for a single country to default, as it may bring down the whole union, and no one can truly afford that. public debts are fine, as long as theyre serviced and serviceable, throughout their lives, which can be rolled over almost indefinitely, this is common practice globally, and doesnt cause too many problems, provided payments occur. by not doing so, and defaulting to the norm, i.e. the fire sectors approach, we re just going around in circles, creating credit fueled booms and busts....

Shebean

I don't see how helping private institutions build or buy to rent or sell on to us at a profit is saving the tax payer money.

Wanderer78

Shebean wrote: »

I don't see how helping private institutions build or buy to rent or sell on to us at a profit is saving the tax payer money.

its not, hence why we need to take the step towards doing it ourselves, wont be easy though, or problem free either

Murph85

Another farce here... all of these unused properties, including fair deal scheme ones, need to be used...

Much of dublin after two booms is still a kip...

Vacant property tax targeted at institutional landlords who leave apartments lying empty under 'serious consideration' https://jrnl.ie/5441551

I also think the cost of apartment development needs to further examined, it's the only option for huge amounts of people affected by the crisis. If they could knock off a good chunk, through single aspect etc, less lifts etc, it would help...

Dempo1

God Bless the Greens,, you'd think they would have learned from the last "Blind leading the Blind" government they propped up. When this new housing initiative (if one could call it an initiative) is passed shortly their TD"s can say Au revoir to any notion of re election.

RandomViewer

Dempo1 wrote: »

God Bless the Greens,, you'd think they would have learned from the last "Blind leading the Blind" government they propped up. When this new housing initiative (if one could call it an initiative) is passed shortly their TD"s can say Au revoir to any notion of re election.

I don't think they look that far forward,

RandomViewer

Why can't the government create a social housing quango that directly employs its own tradespeople? They own the sites , they can , time to directly employ the ,architects ,electricians and builders, get the materials at trade prices, build A or B rated homes , nothing fancy terraced if necessary,

Wanderer78

RandomViewer wrote:

Why can't the government create a social housing quango that directly employs its own tradespeople? They own the sites , they can , time to directly employ the ,architects ,electricians and builders, get the materials at trade prices, build A or B rated homes , nothing fancy terraced if necessary,

Effectively expanding the public sector, best of luck with that one, it makes sense in ways, but there probably would be up roar. You d probably have to deal with unionisation, pensions, etc etc etc. Public funding isn't even much of an issue, and we can't even get over this hurdle, so.......

Bishop of hope

I wonder what this will throw up?

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/all-political-parties-in-state-to-face-probe-over-use-of-voter-data-40447408.html
Lots of scurrying going on to see if systems and data are compliant and secure I imagine.

costacorta

Dempo1 wrote: »

God Bless the Greens,, you'd think they would have learned from the last "Blind leading the Blind" government they propped up. When this new housing initiative (if one could call it an initiative) is passed shortly their TD"s can say Au revoir to any notion of re election.

At least they have the balls to go into government and not just sit on opposition benches moaning day in day out and never doing sweet FA .

Remember hearing the same story last time greens were in government that they would never again be heard of ? .

costacorta

Dempo1 wrote: »

God Bless the Greens,, you'd think they would have learned from the last "Blind leading the Blind" government they propped up. When this new housing initiative (if one could call it an initiative) is passed shortly their TD"s can say Au revoir to any notion of re election.

Floppybits

costacorta wrote: »

At least they have the balls to go into government and not just sit on opposition benches moaning day in day out and never doing sweet FA .

Remember hearing the same story last time greens were in government that they would never again be heard of ? .

Ah you are not still spinning that yarn are you?

costacorta

Floppybits wrote: »

Ah you are not still spinning that yarn are you?

But it’s true , I know the shinners don’t like to admit it . We see what kind of job SF do when trying to govern in NI they just run away every time they have a problem and wait for the UK and Irish governments to come and sort it out .. Sad but true