Who are buying all the new houses?

Ozymandius2011 · 27-10-2025 08:02AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123940934#Comment_123940934

What about the tax breaks for developers in the budget? Lessons are being forgotten.

Also the respected, Establishment economist David McWilliams has even questioned the wisdom of the current policy. He says "our economy can't accommodate an infinite number".

https://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/post/ireland-needs-immigrants-but-our-economy-can-t-accommodate-an-infinite-number

Peregrinus · 27-10-2025 08:28AM

May be a bit of a side issue, but I wouldn't call McWilliams an "establishment economist". He operates outside academia, government, and the traditional Irish policy elite, and presents himself as more of an independent, critical voice.

None of which is to criticise him, or to undermine the validity of anything he says. But his whole schtick is criticising the received wisdom; that's pretty much the opposite of being an establishment voice.

And, if what he actually says is "our economy can't accommodate an infinite number" of immigrants, that's not a very trenchant criticism, since nobody in the establishment is arguing that it can.

The paper that you link to flatly refutes your suggestion that we are stoking immigration in order to drive up house prices; on the contrary, his very first point is that Ireland needs immigrants. He points out that pressure on housing and other services is a by-product of immigration, but he doesn't argue from that that therefore we are accepting more immigrants than we need. He suggests, in fact, that we can't say that ("If this country were well run, this question might be reasonably easy to answer") and as far as he is concerned the answer is not so much reducing immigration as improving our capacity to capitalise on the immigrants we are taking, and so to deliver housing, infrastructure and other services.

Tl;dr: nothing he says back up the suggestion that immigrants are being accepted in order to inflate house prices.

Ozymandius2011 · 27-10-2025 08:30AM

Well housing supply is about demand and supply. If the supply is static and demand rises, supply will decrease.

We also have a cumbersome planning system, and even in the Ahern government, people were saying so.

And neither side of the government/opposition benches is doing/interested in doing anything about it from what I can see. Connolly, SF, Labour have all objected to developments.

Peregrinus · 27-10-2025 09:00AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123940957#Comment_123940957

OK, but that's very different from a claim that the government in stoking immigration in order to inflate the prices of properties owned by minister and their friends.

I think McWilliams' point is that housing supply doesn't have to be static, and shouldn't be. His principal point, I think, is that immigration would be less problematic if we could improve infrastructure; yours is essentially that we'd have less need to improve infrastructure if we reduced immigration. But McWilliam, I hypothesise, would reply to that by saying yeah, but we do actually need immigration, so reducing immigration is not a cost-free option. (It won't even necessarily improve the supply of housing or other infrastructure if reducing immigration creates labour shortages that make construction work slower, or more expensive.)

Ozymandius2011 · 27-10-2025 09:03AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123940977#Comment_123940977

I mean, I was hearing the same arguments from politicians during the first boom. They said we needed to build more houses, and needed immigration for that. We ended up with a bubble that burst because supply was not sufficient. Then demand collapsed and supply became too much and the inflow from Eastern Europe stopped. Then the government actually bulldozed ghost-estates to bring supply into line with demand to revive house prices.

History is repeating to some extent though its only recently that the two breaks for developers has been revived.

The reason I am bringing up the issues like planning and tax breaks for developers, is that I see it as part of the one scheme to keep prices high.

littlefeet · 27-10-2025 11:22AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123940980#Comment_123940980

Developers keepeing prices high?, but it's not as simple as that. I am not saying there are no shenanigans going on, look at what happened with home builders getting their way over apartments and vat, no home builder or developer is going to build without making a profit, why would they? A much bigger issue is the cost of land, the cost of building, development levies and similar

Mellor · 28-10-2025 08:02AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123940935#Comment_123940935

Tax breaks associated with providing housing would be more conducive to decreasing prices than increasing. It lowers the cost of deliver for developers and allows the same profit on lower prices.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123940980#Comment_123940980

Bubble burst because "supply was not sufficient", or "supply became too much"? Polar opposites there. Though neither is correct, you're largely ignoring the fact then was a global recession and financial crisis.

Ozymandius2011 · 28-10-2025 08:22AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123942917#Comment_123942917

The bubble emerged because demand was too high relative to supply. When the bubble burst, it meant demand collapsed, and with it, demand for construction workers.

I acknowledge the global financial crisis, but Ireland was hit harder than the US and the UK.

Peregrinus · 28-10-2025 08:34AM

Yes, but the whole thing was credit-driven. Demand was high because the banks were basically throwing money at people to buy. People paid absurd prices and didn't think about how they could service the debt if interest rates rose because (a) they didn't expect interest rates to rise, plus (b) they did expect property prices to rise to even more absurd heights, so that if interest rates did go up they could if necessary sell the property, clear the loan and trouser the profit.

When the GFC came along, interests rates did go up — no surprise there. But, also, the banks stopped throwing money at people. Which meant that people were no longer prepared to pay absurd prices for properties, which meant that the properties that had been bought at absurd prices were now in serious negative equity, which meant that people who couldn't service their loans were now shanghaied. So, tears all round.

The GFC hit Ireland hard because we had a property bubble. But the property bubble collapsed because of the credit squeeze. People weren't prepared to pay the prices they had previously paid, not because there was an oversupply of property forcing prices down, but because the banks wouldn't lend them the money.

Mellor · 28-10-2025 08:35AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123942928#Comment_123942928

A bubble is, by definition, a scenario where price (ie demand) exceed the actual value.

You are basically that the bubble cause the bubble to burst, which is overly simplistic. There were a huge number of factors.
Ireland was hit harder than the the US and the UK because we have been through a very different build up in the decade prior.
The bubble burst. But the fact it happened doesn't back the claim that the government are allowing immigration in order to inflate the prices. That's a conspiracy theory.

It has about as much logic as the claim that Tax breaks = High prices.

Ozymandius2011 · 28-10-2025 09:07AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123942934#Comment_123942934

Its important not to equate blame of a process/policy, with blaming individual migrants. I don't blame migrants. I do blame the government for managing it badly, and repeating historical mistakes.

When you look at the press stories, like the Daily Mail story naming "Asylumillionaires" providing accommodation, and other stories about the involvement of offshore companies, it is a fact that politically-connected businesspeople are benefitting from the system. That is not the fault of the migrants, but they are being used by the politicians.

Even SF, the largest leftwing party, has criticised malpractice in private asylum accommodation, such as collecting VAT for properties not covered for VAT.

Our desire not to cause offence to migrants, which is legitimate, should not dissuade us from questioning government policy, or from investigating wrongdoing in the accommodation sector.

Peregrinus · 28-10-2025 09:35AM

As a general rule of thumb, never rest your argument of Daily Mail stories. Look for credible evidence and, if you can't find it, don't run the argument. Reliance on the Daily Mail suggests that there is no respectable evidence to support your argument, which is probably not the impression you want to create.

Also, think carefully through the argument and its implications. If the fact that those who provide accommodation to asylum seekers profit from doing so means that migrants (I presume by "migrants" here you mean "asylum seekers", but would it not be better to say so?) "are being used by the politicians", wouldn't it follow that, if builders, property developers, landlords, etc profit from providing accommodiation to migrants and citizens alike, the migrants and the citizens are also being used by the politicians?

In fact, if we accept this argument, is there any category of expenditure for which we couldn't say that the people who benefit from the expenditure "are being used by the politicians"?

Mellor · 28-10-2025 10:21AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123942972#Comment_123942972

By all means question policy, but those questions have to make sense, or related to your claims. And I'm not seeing that.

You claim that the politicians are inflating the house prices. But you logic to back that up is the previous bubble, and now apparently the asylum seekers. None on disconnected thoughts follow on from each other.

I don't blame migrants. I do blame the government for managing it badly, and repeating historical mistakes.

You start off talking about immigrants, now you appear to actually be talking about asylum seekers.
The GFC bubble had nothing to do with asylum seekers. Where is history repeating itself?

Ozymandius2011 · 28-10-2025 10:30AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123943083#Comment_123943083

2023 Blogpost by economist Cormac Lucey where he argues " Government immigration policy aggravates hopeless housing crisis".

https://cormaclucey.blogspot.com/2023/08/government-immigration-policy.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com&m=1

The government is subsidising the owners of these buildings with taxpayers money.

I hope we dont split hairs over what is asylum and what is migration. In practice, they end up getting leave to remain eventually because they put down roots here, and the free legal aid prolongs their appeals for years if not decades.

Its like saying that criticising slavery is blaming the slaves. No. I am blaming the politicians.

There are some differences, but both Left and Right are in the habit of conflating asylum with migration generally. On the Left an example would be saying asylum is needed because we need "workers". That's not the purpose of asylum.

BlueSkyDreams · 28-10-2025 10:56AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123943104#Comment_123943104

The govt doesnt have public accommodation available to house asylum seekers.

The govt have no choice other than to pay private landlords, the same way they pay private landlords for social housing in general.

Mellor · 28-10-2025 12:23PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123943104#Comment_123943104

2023 Blogpost by economist Cormac Lucey where he argues " Government immigration policy aggravates hopeless housing crisis".

That (opinion piece) is claiming that immigration is putting stress on housing. But that's a long way from your claims about the government intentionally inflating prices.
His numbers are also nonsense, not just apples and oranges, just plain wrong. Which makes it a bit pointless.

Also, that's immigrant workers, not asylum seekers FYI.

The government is subsidising the owners of these buildings with taxpayers money.

How do you suggest the government house them for free? (or are you really suggesting something else?).

I hope we dont split hairs over what is asylum and what is migration. In practice, they end up getting leave to remain eventually because they put down roots here, and the free legal aid prolongs their appeals for years if not decades.
Its like saying that criticising slavery is blaming the slaves. No. I am blaming the politicians.

You just referenced migrant work stats, in a post about asylum seekers. It's not splitting hairs to highlight that they are different things.

The slavery comment doesn't make a lot of sense. Do you really thinking that governments providing asylum is morally wrong in a similar vein to slavery?

There are some differences, but both Left and Right are in the habit of conflating asylum with migration generally. On the Left an example would be saying asylum is needed because we need "workers". That's not the purpose of asylum.

That's quite an ironic statement given you are actively conflating the two.
Can you provide an example of the "Left" saying we need asylum because we need "workers"? Because it sounds like complete nonsense.

Peregrinus · 29-10-2025 04:41AM

2023 Blogpost by economist Cormac Lucey where he argues " Government immigration policy aggravates hopeless housing crisis" . . .
https://cormaclucey.blogspot.com/2023/08/government-immigration-policy.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com&m=1
The government is subsidising the owners of these buildings with taxpayers money.
I hope we dont split hairs over what is asylum and what is migration.

We're not splitting hairs, Ozymandius. We're calling attention to your persistent, and I'm beginning to think deliberate, confusion between immigrants and asylum seekers. In this very post you quote Cormac Lucey's article mentioning 87,593 immigration permits to non-EU citizens, and then you say "The government is subsidising the owners of these buildings with taxpayers money." That's false, and I struggle to believe that you don't know that it's false; non-EU citizens who get immigration permits do not get accommodation paid for by the taxpayer.

You do this persisently, and then you say that you don't want to demonise migrants; you blame the government. But if you don't want to demonise migrants, it's hard to understand why you drag all conversations about migrants around to asylum seekers, and why you speak about migrants as though they were all asylum seekers. Maybe if you don't want to demonise migrants, stop demonising them?

almostover · 01-11-2025 12:16PM

Different country but same problems as here. This is satire but it hits the nail on the head. Things like raising the central bank borrowing rules to 4x combined salary, first time buyers grant etc. have only served to fuel demand further.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DQawkngkryF/?igsh=ajZnaTFnOGIzbm8z

donaghs · 01-11-2025 12:28PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123940955#Comment_123940955

By not having an alternative plan, or even discussing one, the politicians are effectively accepting unlimited immigration.

BlueSkyDreams · 01-11-2025 03:27PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123953239#Comment_123953239

The number of asylum seekers arriving in Ireland has dropped by 40% this year vs 2024.

Terrier2023 · 01-11-2025 03:35PM

Our standard of living has always been high a nice house 3/4 bedrooms loads of space for 1/2 of us but the houses are now being bought by our Indian friends who are coming together and buying a house between 3/4 of them they have no issue having 20 people in a house we are spoiled and they are buying the houses out from under us. A few lads on big tech wages buy house rent out rooms to other indians i see it in my town,

Terrier2023 · 01-11-2025 03:36PM

50 Ukranians a day are arriving it was on the news yesterday !

BlueSkyDreams · 01-11-2025 03:39PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123953634#Comment_123953634

Overall asylum applicant numbers are down 40%.

Peregrinus · 02-11-2025 11:00AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123953239#Comment_123953239

That would only be true if the current plan was unlimited immigration. Which, of course, it isn't.

Immigration may not be as limited as donaghs would like it to be, but that's a very different thing from "unlimited immigration".

Stephen_Maturin · 12-11-2025 09:26AM

https://www.thejournal.ie/daft-ie-renting-report-6870778-Nov2025/

God if only those foolish youths hadn’t eaten those cursed avocados…there’d be so many more properties available to buy and rent

Soc_Alt · 12-11-2025 09:34AM

The Governmant should focus on building their social housing which the tax payers will own and leave there rest of the housing to developers to sell.

The Government should seek their own planning permission and land and hire developers to build the social housing.

straight · 12-11-2025 10:27AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123981823#Comment_123981823

Sure the lads in the social housing now don't even want to pay the minimal rent not to mind building more. There's talk of increasing the rent by a tiny amount but sure they're all up in arms about being asked to contribute something.

Soc_Alt · 12-11-2025 11:14AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123981943#Comment_123981943

The government should simply be building their own houses, getting their own planning permission, buying their own land and hiring their own developers.

They should not be competing with the public.

CCurrently They are doing exactly what the investment companies were doing.