Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

1459460462464465507

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭The Student




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,764 ✭✭✭Villa05


    While I have concerns about the most popular party in the country, very few could go through a forest of money trees faster than FFG.

    When it's pointed out to ye that the state is paying double the price for "affordable homes" when compared to investment fund who will put back in the market for the highest rents in the city. What hope is there for new entrants?

    Are ye that much scared that ye will sacrafice the children of the country again

    What part of the calculation do ye not understand, plus continuation of such policies will guarantee what ye appear to most fear will occur. Why don't ye put pressure on them to fix it properly



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,764 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Reverse evolution results:

    But this is not an option for everybody, and the ERSI has also found that high rents are pushing increasing numbers of working people into poverty - one-third of people on the poverty line are working full-time and have third-level degrees

    Almost two thirds of Dublin companies have lost staff or potential recruits because of the housing situation in the city, according to a new poll

    Remember the 80s when you might have 1000 applications for 1 job, well look at us niw

    ‘Huge’ housing queue: 15,000 bids for 75 council homes

    Post edited by Villa05 on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,279 ✭✭✭The Student


    Build council estates deal with anti social behaviour deal with non payment of rent problem decreased significantly.

    We are always been told of mixed tenure developments in Europe and how they work so well. Why not in Ireland? See the above paragraph.

    Where exactly do you think a vast majority of our tax take comes from? Corporation tax and income tax from those employed therein and the support businesses of all the above ie the multipler effect.

    We are a small open economy who need direct investment to fund day to day running of the country. We need to import building materials and we are not big enough of a customer to bulk buy building materials from above so we must take the market price.

    It is all well and good wanting to give everyone what they want but funding it is a different story. It is always easy in opposition saying what should be done it's different when you have to deliver it.

    Mods I am not political and if you deem the above too political please feel free to amend or delete as you see fit.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    David Mc Williams writing how in today's Ireland rich people out bidding each other on ex council houses and living in houses originally built for poor people. Isn't that the truth!

    I spot houses which are ex council for the tune of 750k, absolutely insane.

    Remember the shills only get paid when you react to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,211 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    You wouldn't pay that for one in the Island Field.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,415 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    Location location I suppose.

    The population of Dublin and most other cities has at least doubled in the past 50 years when these houses were build.

    Shame the transportation systems haven't advanced at all, bar the Luas.

    I can understand people wanting to avoid rush hour commutes from dormitory towns



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,374 ✭✭✭combat14


    why dont the central bank raise the lending to 6 or even 10 times salary and problem solved .. nearly all houses be affordable then



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    Remember the shills only get paid when you react to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    "Take-up of office space in Dublin dropped to a three-year low between January and March, new data shows.

    The latest report from BNP Paribas Real Estate Ireland reveals that just 16,310 sqm of space was leased during the three-month period.

    It follows a surge in the number of offices completed during the quarter, with 84,000 sqm of space added to the market.

    This is more than the amount of office space completed in the whole of 2023.

    This combination of strong supply and weak demand caused the vacancy rate to jump from 13.1% in December to 14.5% in March."

    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2024/0507/1447239-dublin-office-space-take-up-hits-three-year-low/

    You'd think/hope this soft crash would result in a re-allocation of construction resources (and developable land) from offices to housing. But that should also have been incentivized to happen years ago if our government had any clue what it was doing so who knows I guess.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,180 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Indeed.

    The renting for social housing of high end apartment schemes in the best & most expensive parts of Dublin and therefore the country, is mad stuff.

    And its not always just part 5, 10% or 20% going to social housing.

    There are new schemes in DLR where the apartments are 100% social, even though 90% of earners couldnt afford to live there themselves!

    Councils only having a duty of care, via the reduction of social housing lists, in order to accomodate social tenants & whilst ignoring the rest of society, is a big problem.

    Its as if the only metric that counts for the council is, "have we reduced the social housing list?"

    Anyone that doesnt qualify for that list is in direct competition with the local council that they directly fund, as far as accomodation is concerned.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    Yes good few companies are changing their office location in Dublin . That is only due to the fact they are getting new leases at good discounted rate.

    Remember the shills only get paid when you react to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,838 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    It was abundantly clear by mid-2020 that the whole Spencer Dock developments alone were a bubble in the making. Owners of older office stock will be in serious trouble, assuming they have not already called insolvency.

    Long stopped believing the goverment is clueless. The shortage is intentional.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭Del Griffith


    "strategy of the government attempting to inspire the private sector to build in large numbers" - what? What incentivises did the government put out to encourage building in large numbers?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Any large efforts this government has made have almost exclusively been on the demand side - FTB schemes, increasing the income:mortgage ratio etc - with the logic that by increasing prices that would increase supply. FG's core laissez faire policy has been since 2011 to let the private sector take care of the housing market, that the state should stay out of it.

    With obvious to everyone by now catastrophic results, unfortunately.



  • Registered Users Posts: 537 ✭✭✭Ozvaldo


    Deplorable market conditions made by the Irish government everyday gets worse and now they want to buy all the do uppers.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,216 ✭✭✭Del Griffith


    I agree with all of that apart from that the intent was to incentivise the private sector to build in large numbers.

    They could easily incentivise developers directly with tax breaks and many other things, conditional on delivery of X units in Y timeframe, etc.

    They don't.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    "The state has agreed thousands of expensive long-term social housing leases at a cost of up to €3,200, the Business Post can reveal.

    The almost 9,000 deals come at with combined price tag of more than €3.24 billion over their 25-year lifetime, with scores of rental agreements costing the government €2,500 or more a month."

    https://www.businesspost.ie/news/exclusive-state-leasing-social-homes-from-private-sector-for-up-to-e3200-a-month/

    What a complete and utter waste of tax payer money. Leasing 9000 properties at massive cost, with nothing to show for it after 25 years. And taking those thousands of properties off the private rental market, driving up rental costs for tax payers, while they're at it. A double whammy for all the renters out there paying large amounts of tax.

    Its such a daming result of our current government's policy of refusing to just build state housing.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Isn’t providing accomadation for 9000 families during that 25 period something to show? Effectively what you are saying is, those 9000 should be homeless, so that those who can afford more, can rent.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    No, effectively what I'm saying is the state should have built 9000 social houses to house those families, instead of very expensively leasing housing from the private sector. As was social housing policy at every time in the history of the state until the failures of the 2010s and 2020s.

    Do you think the state spending billions of euro to lease social housing at €3200(!) a month is good value for tax payers? Do you think its good for the tax payers in the private sector rental market having those 9000 homes taken out of it, that they now have to compete with the state for the very limited number of properties available?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I don’t think current spending is value for money, I also think that people saying the Government should have built all these houses is pie in the sky crap.

    There are so very many reasons for the housing problem that saying the government should have invested billions (which we didn’t have) to build houses (which we neither had the workforce nor the oversight necessary to do) to get the planning (which would have taken years and you can be sure not everyone wants a council estate next door), and at the same time, depress private development due to unavailability of a skilled workforce and falling prices as a result of State building. I’m sure there would be many other important reasons why State building on the scale some here believe should have been done, simply wasn’t possible.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,209 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    The lack of workforce argument has been debunked recently by construction industry reps themselves - it's a question of viability mostly and lack of finance that holds back construction.

    For state built social housing the viability risk is gone - they put it out to tender and contractors can build houses with a guaranteed buyer and guaranteed price. The state could even forward fund and take the financing costs out of the equation.

    Instead they agree leases that over 25 years term will more than cover the build costs of the property. The most egregious example of short term only thinking



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It would be naive to think it is as simple as putting it out to tender, agree a price and hey presto, the houses are built. If the children’s hospital has shown us anything, it is that developers are far more skilled at playing the game than civil/public servants.

    The risks for the State, and any Government who undertook such a folly would be enormous, both financial and reputational.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,209 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    The NCH is as much due to scope creep as it is due to BAM gaming the tender system.

    NCH spec from initial tender to current hospital is (literally) millions in the difference. Those failings lie with the department.

    Social housing is nowhere near as complex as a world class hospital



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It is much more complex for different reasons, multiple locations throughout the country, multiple planning processes, objections and vested interests, multiple developers, contractors etc, multiple LAs overseeing builds on their patches, dealing with unions, pay agreements, strikes, employment rights on state projects etc. The CH is one site and has been a shitshow with the main contractor effectively holding the State to ransom whilst threatening to walk away.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,543 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    The Sunday Business Post are reporting that the Housing Commission has warned the Government that it believes up to 80,000 new homes will be required every year between now and 2050 just to keep up with demand. Government targets are way off it would seem. Hard to see how the undersupply issue will be addressed even in the medium to long term at this stage.

    It does seem the Government targets have been very optimistic and haven't properly grasped the pressures associated with demographic change, especially much stronger inward migration than was initially forecast.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,209 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    In fairness the 80k figure is based on the worst case with a massive rise in population coupled with very low household size (~2.1). It even says in the article the most likely case is close to 50k I think?

    It is a large volume of comparatively simple projects. The same designs can be used again and again, with the big advantage of experience throughout the entire process getting reused, which leads to greater efficiencies.

    Totally different to NCH. In every profession, every body of work, multiple instances of a simpler project is always more efficient than the single super project. Yes there would be big divergence in outcomes with some coming in under budget and some above, but it would always be much much better than the NCH.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    The state built large numbers of social housing for most of its existence. While in a corruption riddled, desperately poor state, for most of that. So its beyond ridiculous to handwave the idea away as something impossible to achieve.

    The workforce claim has been debunked multiple times in this very thread - we had as many construction workers in the state in 2023 as in 2005, but built a fraction of the housing. The difference is far more are building non-housing projects now, which is down to government policy/incentives (or lack thereof).

    Planning is still bad but its less bad than it was at any time in the past, its very incrementally getting better.

    If they state had engaged in a widescale training programs years ago - at any point in time after the housing crisis first began to be identified a decade ago in 2014 - it wouldn't have had any impact depressing private development. That problem is completely possible to mitigate for. In past decades there was no problem with both social and private developments happening at the same time.

    The "many other important reasons why State building on the scale some here believe should have been done" somehow didn't stop the state building tens of thousands of social housing units in other decades. So the lived evidence would very much suggest its far more likely that whats changed here is us having a FG controlled government for most of the last 13 years, that for the first time in the state's history focused on a neo-liberal laissez-faire approach to the housing market as a matter of core principal. Which has now resulted in the terrible housing market situation we find ourselves in.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,180 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Indeed.

    And the frustrating part is the govt doesnt appear to ramp up targets for social homes built, despite a rapidly growing population and therefore, a larger available workforce.

    We will soon be seeing 30k+ asylum seekers per year, on top of the organic population growth. Tap into the latent workforce!

    The govt wont go to building 20k social and affordable in 12 months, but lets see a progression plan with timelines.

    One of the issues is social housing targets. The councils respond to this metric by renting private homes, on top of the part 5 allocation, in order to hit their numbers.

    They should be made to BUILD a percentage of these homes, so they are forced into executing a medium to long term plan for social housing provision and allowing the private sector to grow naturally and in tandem.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I was listening to an economist talking about the building of social housing particularly in the earlier years of the State, he made the point that this coincided with the handing over of responsibility for running the schools and healthcare to the religious orders, allowing the state to focus time and resources to the problem of housing. And the decline in State housing in turn coincided with the State retaking responsibility for eduction and healthcare, and all that involved.

    There is no benefit in looking back on how things were 40 years ago, the world today is very different.

    If we have so many construction workers, why is it so damn hard to get any tradesperson at the moment, and why are contractors struggling to find labour?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    I don't think it is hard to get tradespeople, times have changed.

    Remember the shills only get paid when you react to them.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I suppose it depends on the area. I finished some construction work on a garage earlier in the year, what should have taken two months took nearly 5 due to shortage of labour. I know the contractors, they have done work for me many times over the last 20 years on various projects, all, electrical/plumbing/joinery/plasterers/roofers said the same thing, they were turning down jobs because they couldn’t get labour.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    The vast majority of funding for schools and healthcare in Ireland has always come from the state. I think thats honestly the most nonsensical justification I've heard yet for the state not building social housing the way it used to.

    The things the state needs to do to build social housing now are not very different from 40 years ago. Its still the same process. If we achieved it in the past, repeatedly, while a much poorer, more corrupt, more inefficient, state then all evidence and logic would suggest we can absolutely achieve it now.

    Its hard to get tradespeople because they're employed doing work other than on houses. Its not really a difficult concept, the figures on it are very clear. Have a look at the CSO figures for employment in construction, or even read the articles posted in recent pages here on the massive glut of office space coming to market at the moment due to overconstruction in that area.

    If you don't think the state should be building social housing at scale then what exactly is your proposed alternative? Continue spending literally billions of euros on leasing private sector homes for social housing as our government has been doing?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,209 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    Commercial and hotels have seen huge investment in last 6 years, commercial is dying a death now though with big oversupply. This is where most of trades are coming from.

    Sparks are diversifying into solar panels as commercial work has dried up, but most will happily work on residential when it arises as the pipeline of solar installs isn't continuous



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,572 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    Retrofitting alone would eat up all that labour….lets not forget that majority of housing stock that would need to be retrofitted (if people could afford it) is massive verse the number of new properties.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,838 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    Suspect that a significant portion of the housing stock should be knocked and rebuilt, let alone retrofitted. Ain't gonna happen given how had things have become though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    Love how people sitting at a keyboard think building 10s of thousands of houses is easy :)

    Sure all a man has to do is sit hop in a rocket if he wants to go to space.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,211 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    While the state provided the majority of funding for schools, the religious orders provided a significant amount as well. They also provided the management to these schools and fundraised for extras into these schools. This saved tge state significant funds

    https://www.rte.ie/archives/2017/1018/913201-kenmare-housing-problems/

    This idea that the state was poorer then is a slight misconception. While budgets were smaller demands on the state were less. There was not 20-25%% odd of the population receiving payments of one form or another ( unemployment, disability, OAP carers etc etc) add in health costs and the budget has drastically changed in 50 years.

    Another factor the state could manage projects 50+ years ago. Even after that look at tge comparison between the major telecoms development of the 70/80's compared to the Rural Broadband project at present. Except tgat we are so financially well off there woukd be more questioning of the costs. Add the NCH to that. The state cannot no longer directly manage building projects.

    TBH most of these espousing mass house building by the state could not manage to build a hen house. They have no conception of hiw tge building sector operates

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,374 ✭✭✭combat14


    interesting court ruling in our dutch EU neighbour - apparently the court has found that landlords there have over charged tenants for years with some rent increases deemed to conflict with european consumer protection laws - case now passed to supreme court with serious ramificafions for property values/portfolios if upheld - wonder will it have any impact here for similar property funds......

    Landlords may have to refund tenants billions of euros

    https://www.dutchnews.nl/2024/05/landlords-may-have-to-refund-tenants-billions-of-euros/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,838 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    Least over there it was above inflation. Irish property funds are well ahead of the game by front-loading new-build prices, which is why you see so many central Dublin apartments with rent of €4-5k/month.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Consumer law in Ireland does not cover tenancies, not all EU directives related to consumer issues have been enacted here so I cant see how that would affect disputes here.

    What may be interesting is any appeal that might question the legality of State restrictions on private rental rates though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    What exact percentage of funding did the religious orders provide for our schools and hospitals? "Sigificant funds" is a very dubious claim.

    The state was massively poorer in the 1920s→1980s compared to now, I don't think thats really up for debate. There was no yearly surplus of billions of euros like we have now. We ran budget deficits, and had massive unemployment and emmigration for the vast majority of the first 70 years of independence. We were the poorest country per capita in Western Europe for large parts of that. We were an economic basket case. Yet still built thousands of social housing units regularly.

    The idea that the state now cannot afford to build social housing, because religious orders are paying less towards our schools and hospitals, is just nowhere near factual. Especially given the fact we currently have a yearly surplus of money, a lack of money is empirically not the problem here.

    "The state cannot no longer directly manage building projects." - there is no inherent genetic problem with Irish people in the year 2024 that means our country can't manage building projects. We did it in the past, when corruption and inefficiency ran rife, so theres absoutely no logical reason why we can't do so now. The reason we don't is ideological - because FG have done their best to gut state spending on construction over the last 13 years.

    Just because our current government has proven utterly inable to directly manage building projects does not mean every Irish government ever will be.

    I'll also ask you the same question I asked Dav010, which rather tellingly seems to have prompted him to disappear. If you don't believe the state should be building large numbers of social housing then what exactly is your proposed alternative solution? Do you think the state should continue the FG policy of the last decade, and continue/increase its spending on HAP and leasing social housing instead, from the billions of euros its already spending? Do you think thats working well currently, and providing value for money to the Irish tax payer?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Don’t flatter yourself, you didn’t prompt me to “disappear”.

    If you want to ramp up property development, you offer incentives to the experts in large scale building, private developers, make finance easier to access, and overhaul the planning system.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    Funny how you didn't respond to the post for days, despite being online and posting in-between, but respond to being called out on your ducking the question within 9 minutes though eh?

    How does doing any of that take the circa 65,000 households currently on HAP, at a cost of over €1bn per year to tax payers, off of HAP? Or let the state stop spending billions of euros leasing thousands of private sector housing units for social housing in addition?

    We have tens of thousands of households unable to afford to rent in the private sector market, and unable to rent in it even if prices crashed by 50%. Which "offer incentives to the experts in large scale building, private developers, make finance easier to access, and overhaul the planning system" is highly unlikely to achieve I'm sure you'll readily admit.

    What exactly do you propose is done with these people if not building of social housing?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Most of what you post doesn’t make sense, it’s just raging against the system and saying the same thing over and over again, I just didn’t want you to have an inflated opinion of what affect your posts have on me, so I wanted to let you know that you are flattering yourself, nothing more.

    I thought it would be obvious that ramping up development would increase supply. Instead of the State, with its lumbering inefficiencies and procrastination being relied on to build homes, incentivise private developers who have the expertise to build, is the best way.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭SharkMX


    Your posts dont make any sense tbh. They are not based in reality at all. Ive stopped reading them myself, never mind responding to them. And now you have gone even further off the reservation and seem to be stalking people who are posting elsewhere but not responding to your precious posts.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 740 ✭✭✭lordleitrim




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    Remember the shills only get paid when you react to them.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭Blut2


    My posts have a rather simple argument - the state needs to give up the largely non-interventionist supply side policies pursued in the housing market of the last 13 years, and instead return to building large scale social housing as it did for most of our history. It should be a simple enough concept to grasp.

    You're the one posting that its absolutely not possible to do this, but failing to give any logical justification as to why given we've achieved it many times in the past, or any alternative solution to explain what we should do instead.

    Your citing factors like a lack of construction workers when the CSO statistics on that have been posted multiple times in this thread, and they disprove you completely, would heavily suggest you're arguing out of blind ideology rather than factual knowledge.

    Ramping up private sector development won't remove the 65,000 households currently on HAP, costing tax payers billions, and removing large numbers of houses from the private sector market, from reality. Thats the real world issue that you're apparently unable to provide a solution for.

    My posts are purely evidential based on 1) what our state achieved for many decades (large scale building of social housing) and 2) the very obvious failure of the current housing market, something heavily influenced by the last 13 years of the state not building social housing. They're both very much based in reality.

    I've yet to see a single poster who disagrees with the idea of the building of large scale social housing so vehemently provide an actual, real world alternative. Because what we're doing currently as a country very obviously isn't working.

    I simply suggested that I find it interesting that someone whos highly active on boards.ie, who online enough to post literally thousands of times a year, suddenly disappears without trace when asked a factual question. But reappears within 9 minutes when called out on his disappearance (to still not answer the question). Its a rather interesting debate style, no?



Advertisement