We only have ourselves to blame...

TempestSabre wrote:

So basically you believe nothing unless you personally or the people around you have experienced it. Theres no point in debating anything then. I've never been to the North Pole or know anyone whos been there so I guess it doesn't exist. I've only seen it in the media.

No I don't believe stories about how hard life is for everybody when everybody I know is not having a hard time. I believe human nature more than I believe sources that have a different agenda, politicians do it to get votes and papers do it to sell papers.

TempestSabre wrote:

I have contact with a lot of very different people. People struggling and in those situations you don't believe exist, and also people who are doing so well they are practically in a different world.

So you do know people with 40 year mortgages, working overtime to pay it, 100% mortgage and 4 hour commutes? Are there many people you know like this? Do you think any of them have made particularly unwise choices to get into this situation. I know one guy who lost his house and car but he spent his money unwisely I hold him responsible for that. I am sure some are struggling but is 5% or 80% population? The media coverage would suggest it is a huge amount of people which is the bit I am trying to figure out. I also don't understand why people use the worst imaginable case to prove Ireland has major problems I am expect to see if a building fell down expecting to kill all inside and only 10% died the headiline here would read "1 in 10 killed in Horror building" It is not like a half empty half full arguement it is more like the glass is not completely full this is an outrage and the government are to blame for everything there doesn't seem to be balance. I would think most of the road deaths are the individuals fault not the roads or the government yet how is it general talked about?

J.R.HARTLEY wrote:

if all the minimum wage workers never had it so good, why are poeple like hobbs and lee from Rte and even the politicians worried about the amount of debt people are in these days, also people can't afford pension plans either, people who think ireland is perfectly affordable should come out and work with the VdeP for a few weeks, might just open your eyes, there are bigger spheres of existance other than yours. and as for traffic being a worse problem than the Health System :rolleyes:

Hobbs wants to be on TV and sell books so like with papers bad news sells(apply to all media). It has been proved that examples and stories in his shows were incorrect and bordering on lies.That is his vested interest and he has profited along with his company. You can sell water to a person if they think they will be thursty it does matter if they are or not.

When did it turn to minimum wage jobs? There has been no refernce to that here.

http://www.phespirit.info/montypython/four_yorkshiremen.htm

I've never met you, and neither has anyone I know. So I don't reckon you exist. Your posts are justs a conspiracy by employers to drive down wages. Nothing you say is true. Everyone getting paid too much. Everyone should live in a box in the middle of the road and be glad of it.

TempestSabre wrote:

I've never met you, and neither has anyone I know. So I don't reckon you exist. ]

Well thanks for clearing up my understanding. You are riddiculing me because I am trying to understand the "reality" thanks for being so helpful.:mad:

The fact when asked direct questions about people having hard times you avoided suggest to me that you don't actually know anybody in these situations either. So your style seems to be riddicule me for asking a question and never answer them becasue I might understand?

I never suggest anything about how people should live just that what is in the paper doesn't match anybodies experience I know. Considering I come from a wroking class area on the Northside you think I might notice and so would people I know. The property section in the IrishTimes doesn't show houses on the Northside so according you that might mean I don't exist or that side of the city so maybe you are right after all:rolleyes:

Dragan

Its the fact that we are all willing to pay a premium for **** all, thats the problem. Everyone who ever sets up there own business is looking to get as rich as possible as fast as possible, and rather than this being a case of providing a quality service at a competitive price, it's a case of providing **** for loads of cash before anyone can find out.

BELIEVE!!!!

In seriousness guys, come on, do you think that everyone driving a Beamer or Merc and living in a big house paid cash for that ****? A bigger wage merely entitles you to bigger loans, thats about it.

The problem fueling the whole thing is ego, people trying to convery the perception of success, like the young guys driving 5series BMW's while they need to live at home with Mum and Dad to afford the repayments!!!! When the interest rates for the wrong way the whole country is ****ed.

FillSpectre - I did reply. Read post #29
FillSpectre - Thats simply your own logic. I agree its ridiculous.

TempestSabre wrote:

FillSpectre - I did reply. Read post #29
FillSpectre - Thats simply your own logic. I agree its ridiculous.

Hysterical.

If you don't want to actually talk about the subject why bother. You just made any points you have made nonsence. You are morelikey to be a person that believes media blindly to the extent that you would make up stories of hardship to be part of the group.

Fact no.1

Fact no.2, extracted from linkie:

The February credit growth rate equalled the October 2005 peak, which was the highest rate recorded since March 2000. PSC expanded by €5.6 billion, bringing total PSC to €268 billion; households account for nearly 46 per cent of this total.

Point no.3, extrapolated from the above:

at 4 million residents in IE, that's €33,500 per head.

In other words, for your average married couple with two kids, €33,500 x 4 = €134,000.

Ambro what is your point?

FillSpectre wrote:

Ambro what is your point?

Don't mind him. More nonsence from the media.

€7.2 billion in SSIA, wait till that hits.

FillSpectre wrote:

Ambro what is your point?

I thought it was rather self-explanatory :rolleyes: -

Do you find it funny that people who complain about the price of living
in Ireland are the exact same people who will demand a wage increase?

indeed, "we only have ourselves to blame" for taking on so much personal debt -which includes mortgage lending- and maintaining the upward, interdependent pressure on wage increase and price of living, QED by numbers.

(not that I include myself in that lot, I don't have any loans of any sort and am rather cash-positive these days

)

LOL @ TempestSabre - however, figures complied by the CSO, so not quite 'the media'

ambro25 wrote:

(not that I include myself in that lot, I don't have any loans of any sort and am rather cash-positive these days )

What is your biggest asset then and what security do you have? I also have no loans but I do have a mortgage. Rent would have to drop considerably (50%) before I would be in a better situation by renting. It sounds like you are taking a big risk but saying everybody else is taking the risk am I wrong? I get you don't think it is a risk but you do accept that it could be seen that way by some.

ambro25 wrote:

LOL @ TempestSabre - however, figures complied by the CSO, so not quite 'the media'

He seems to have trouble understanding some basic concempts I wouldn't care if didn't agree but he doesn't express understanding and riddicules those asking for explanantions.

FillSpectre wrote:

What is your biggest asset then and what security do you have?

Figuratively, my biggest asset is my family.

Realistically, my biggest asset is my professional know-how and the security that I have is how I look after it (and myself, consequentially).

Factually, I do not own anything - which makes life oh-so-much simpler in terms of liability and how I can maintain a standard of life for my family irrespective of any hypothetical 'life knocks'.

To my mind, an asset is property and possessions that can be used to secure a debt - well your house, if mortgaged still, is not an asset because it isn't your property, it's the bank's (until your mortgage is paid up). In terms of securing a debt on it, you can't do that without the mortgaging bank's say-so (read any mortgage fine print - most people don't and merrily secure personal loans on their house, which isn't theirs to beging with and... it gets messy).

In the same logic, your mortgage is an asset to the banker (no risk to him - if you can't repay he gets the bricks and eventually a margin, if you can repay he gets the calculated margin at term).

FillSpectre wrote:

It sounds like you are taking a big risk but saying everybody else is taking the risk am I wrong? I get you don't think it is a risk but you do accept that it could be seen that way by some.

For all monetary things, I consider two factors: (1) value-for-money and (2) logical end-game.

Let's agree that in terms of real estate, there is none of (1) in Dublin at the moment. That leaves (2), the logical end-game.

My logical end-game is retiring before a certain age *wherever*, with a garanteed *very* comfortable income, which is (a) independent of governements' fiffing-and-faffing with public and private pension schemes and regulations and whatnot, and (b) tracks inflation comfortably, (c) all the while enjoying finer things in life with an enjoyable quality of life (we are here but once, after all).

So, so long as my capital appreciation is on time and target to meet (a) and (b), inclusive of rent during the 'build-up' phase (and it actually appreciates faster than even Dublin's real estate anyway), I'd be stark bonkers to sink a goodly portion of it in vastly-overvalued, quite mundane piles of bricks.

I therefore don't quite see it as "risk", somehow - people who are desperate to jump on the property ladder and will go to any length to secure deposit and 100% mortgages, on the other hand, should.

For if and when (I'll concede that there's still an 'if'

) it all goes to the wall and the bank repo's your house, if they're left out of pocket after disposing of the repo'd property, they will still come after your ass for the balance, btw.

Likewise, if it does not go to the wall, good for you but you have to consider the situation in which you want to trade up (kids, etc.), and understand that while your property has appreciated, so has that of anyone else, so you're more or less back to square one at trade time (the slight difference, with a market as dynamic as Dublin, being how good with money and your job you've been in the intervening time that gives you that extra bit €s more to tack on the end).

But if you're renting, that's transparent because rents in Dublin have quit tracking actual purchase price a long time ago already - just so you can live in places for half the price that a mortgage would cost to actually buy it. In terms of buying to invest therefore, it currently makes no sense to buy in Dublin at the moment, because (1) the yield is way out of whack and (2) unless you're an institutional investor with deep pockets, you just cannot afford to have a mortgaged empty place to lease/rent for long at all - so the rent price stabilises, if it doesn't actually fall. That works for me as the renter, not for you as the landlord.

FillSpectre - How am I riddicules by using your own logic? Which is if I have no personal experience, 1st or 2nd hand of something, it doesn't exist (or isn't true). Or that all other sources have vested interests therefore their data is not credible. Of course theres no possibility the people I/you know also are not being totally honest is there.

Looking at the CSO figures (I'll have to believe them I know people working there) I'm reminded how banks are fueling the fire in the first place by offering such huge credit, of course they stand to reap a bounty havest in interest. If you couldn't get the credit, as a developer or as a property buyer you wouldn't have the choice.

As for renting, thats been an established lifestyle choice (according to people I know) in many other countries for decades. For people starting out, the disparity between renting and mortgages is huge.

ambro25 wrote:

To my mind, an asset is property and possessions that can be used to secure a debt - well your house, if mortgaged still, is not an asset because it isn't your property, it's the bank's (until your mortgage is paid up). In terms of securing a debt on it, you can't do that without the mortgaging bank's say-so (read any mortgage fine print).

I would consider that a very narrow inaccurate view of what an asset is. As you don't have a mortgage maybe you are not aware that the bank can't really tell you what to do with your property it is that their interset is acknowledge. If I buy a house for 100k with 80k mortgage I own 20% of the property (in fact I own the entire thing i just have a loan). As time goes on my percentage of ownship increses so I am accumilating while living. It is an asset to own a house with a mortgage. I understand what you are saying but no form of accountancy or economics would agree IMHO.

ambro25 wrote:

For all monetary things, I consider two factors: (1) value-for-money and (2) logical end-game.

Let's agree that in terms of real estate, there is none of (1) in Dublin at the moment. That leaves (2), the logical end-game.

LOL. YOu don't get to make a wild statement like 1 and skip over it. You must live somewhere. How are you calculating this into your expenses? Is your Rent cheaper than at the point you may have been able to buy at. Say you could have bought two years ago would your mortgage for that property now compared with your rent now? I genuienly believe renting is fine and not dead money. The arguement against it is however that your mortgage remain relatively stable while rent rises faster. 1/3 of your income when buying become less as you earn more while renting rent keeps in-line with inflation more so hence could constantly remain a 1/3

ambro25 wrote:

My logical end-game is retiring before a certain age *wherever*, with a garanteed *very* comfortable income, which is (a) independent of governements' fiffing-and-faffing with public and private pension schemes and regulations and whatnot, and (b) tracks inflation comfortably, (c) all the while enjoying finer things in life with an enjoyable quality of life (we are here but once, after all).

Independent of government gaurentees is another term for unsecured;). AS you won't own property as such you will be renting at full market values right? That would need to be some large nest egg to cover rent as you head for 90 some 25 years after 40 year working life (estimate using 20 and 65 ages). THe ability to find an investment that returns a lot to track inflation is great you should let me know what it is. If it is any stock than you are gambling and it is a risk greater than owning a house. Your choice but

So, so long as my capital appreciation is on time and target to meet (a) and (b), inclusive of rent during the 'build-up' phase (and it actually appreciates faster than even Dublin's real estate anyway), I'd be stark bonkers to sink a goodly portion of it in vastly-overvalued, quite mundane piles of bricks.

ambro25 wrote:

For if and when (I'll concede that there's still an 'if' ) it all goes to the wall and the bank repo's your house, if they're left out of pocket after disposing of the repo'd property, they will still come after your ass for the balance, btw.

I see all these ifs but looking at long term rental I don't see ifs I see what has happened and seems to be constant.
1)Rent rises more than mortgages
2)After years of renting you don't accumilate an asset
3) A landlord will kick you out before a bank ever will
4) In the event of death an asset is left by a homeowner.

Overall you don't need to keep using derogatory remarks about houses you have chossen to go another route becasue you think it is better. I still don't know what it is and you haven't really explained how it is better.

AS far as I can gather you are saying you are investing in something that you believe will increase enough to sustatin your life and stay in-line with inflation while paying rent and this will all be worth more than property appreciation in the long term. Is that right?

Now as far as I can work out for that to work your rent would need to be a lot less than any mortgage past or present forever. Unless of course you are getting free accomdation. Because you need to have spare cash to invest over your living expenses.

Your choice one way or the other but it doesn't sound viable for most. Additions like kids, sickness and parents tend to change things. I think housing makes more sense and is generally more versatile than investments. I wouldn't invest money in Irish property but I would rather pay off a mortgage than rent. Not purely as a money thing but a privacy and control of where I live thing. I get to buy a furniture (another asset) paint as I like etc... Renting does not have that freedom. I can increse the value of my property I can generally make it my home. Renting has good points but long term you have less freedom and choices.

Are you really suggeting it is better for a 20 year old to rent for say 50 years then retire and live of their investments is a viable option for most as opposed to buying a house and paying a mortgage?

Dragan

FillSpectre wrote:

(in fact I own the entire thing i just have a loan). As time goes on my percentage of ownship increses

How does you percent of ownership increase over time if you already "own the entire thing"?

Sorry but this makes no sense. At all.

FillSpectre wrote:

....If I buy a house for 100k with 80k mortgage I own 20% of the property (in fact I own the entire thing i just have a loan).....

Who has the deeds.

FillSpectre wrote:

...Are you really suggeting it is better for a 20 year old to rent for say 50 years then retire and live of their investments is a viable option for most as opposed to buying a house and paying a mortgage?...

Whats the difference if the 20yr old has to pay considerably more in repayments than in rent, and you end up with repayments for 40 or even 50yrs. Your kids might be better off, when you die. But they'd be 60 by the time that happens, so in fact its your grandchildren who would be better off.

FillSpectre wrote:

I would consider that a very narrow inaccurate view of what an asset is.

No. I'd consider that an accurate view.

I have had several mortgages to date (in several countries) and am well appraised of the fact that until the bank gives you the deeds to the house (at the successful conclusion of the mortgage), it is theirs. No ifs, no buts and whether you like it or not, that's just God's honest truth.

FillSpectre wrote:

If I buy a house for 100k with 80k mortgage I own 20% of the property (in fact I own the entire thing i just have a loan). As time goes on my percentage of ownship increses so I am accumilating while living. It is an asset to own a house with a mortgage. I understand what you are saying but no form of accountancy or economics would agree IMHO.

No. Gross (but common) misconception. The bank owns 80% of it, is the way you have to look at it. Even by the time you've paid 99% of it, it's still the bank, by contract.

FillSpectre wrote:

LOL. YOu don't get to make a wild statement like 1 and skip over it.

In what sense have I skipped over it?

Of course I can. I may not subscribe to the real estate rat race prevalent in Dublin, doesn't mean I don't keep my finger on the pulse of the market (I wouldn't want to miss out a juicy deal, if I ever came across it - only imbeciles never change their minds)

FillSpectre wrote:

How are you calculating this into your expenses? Is your Rent cheaper than at the point you may have been able to buy at.

Yes. And I do pay rent, btw.

FillSpectre wrote:

Say you could have bought two years ago would your mortgage for that property now compared with your rent now?

It would still be way above the rent.

FillSpectre wrote:

The arguement against it is however that your mortgage remain relatively stable while rent rises faster.

Not for the last 7 years or so, based on my research of the rent market in Dublin before moving over.

FillSpectre wrote:

1/3 of your income when buying become less as you earn more while renting rent keeps in-line with inflation more so hence could constantly remain a 1/3

Again, rent has not kept track of inflation (and property price rises) any time over the past 7 years or so in Dublin. Don't go asking me for quotes, I did the research and maths in August'04, suffice to say I know how to count, factor in inflation and interest rates generally, and I'm increasingly winning on that front.

FillSpectre wrote:

Independent of government gaurentees is another term for unsecured;).

Correct. Win more, lose less.

FillSpectre wrote:

AS you won't own property as such you will be renting at full market values right?

Correct. The upside is I choose where I pay rent, and relocate as and when time and/or local market conditions require. And of course, who says market, says choice and barter.

FillSpectre wrote:

That would need to be some large nest egg (etc.)

Need-to-know basis, m8, need-to-know

FillSpectre wrote:

I see all these ifs but looking at long term rental I don't see ifs I see what has happened and seems to be constant.

1)Rent rises more than mortgages

Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Historically, maybe, probably, but as with all such matters, too many variable to draw cast-iron conclusions, so it depends where, when, etc.

2)After years of renting you don't accumilate an asset

True. And so what if I do not subscribe to the conventional wisdom (?) of what an asset is and/or I should be striving to buy?

3) A landlord will kick you out before a bank ever will

Not if you don't give him any reason to - especially in these times, wherein one in the hand is better than two in the bush

[in all sincerity and for that matter, I am the model tenant, so that helps - by way of analogy, think of it as buying a 2nd hand car: from the dealer with all the gubbins, low mileage and FMDSH, or from an auction with no paperwork?

]

4) In the event of death an asset is left by a homeowner.

And a goodly sum recovered by the governement in the process. Thanks but no thanks

FillSpectre wrote:

Overall you don't need to keep using derogatory remarks about houses you have chossen to go another route becasue you think it is better. I still don't know what it is and you haven't really explained how it is better.

I don't understand your point in this bit. (Erm... as for "derogatory remarks", what is it to you btw? Did you design them or something

)

FillSpectre wrote:

AS far as I can gather you are saying you are investing in something that you believe will increase enough to sustatin your life and stay in-line with inflation while paying rent and this will all be worth more than property appreciation in the long term. Is that right?

I don't believe anything until I see it (strangely enough, my patron is not St Thomas, though...!). It's simple maths: lowest achievable interest rate for this financial vector or that placement is X % over period Y, value at maturity will be Z, so I need €-so-much-by-age A to achieve garanteed return of B monthly /quarterly /annually for ever more thereafter...

FillSpectre wrote:

Now as far as I can work out for that to work your rent would need to be a lot less than any mortgage past or present forever.

Rent in Dublin is way less than mortgages. Check daft, myhome or wherever and work it out. It's usually half of the mortgage monthly repayment (and don't forget all these other things that tag along mortgage: insurance, maintenance, etc. - these that are not offset by the lease)

FillSpectre wrote:

Unless of course you are getting free accomdation.

I'm not.

FillSpectre wrote:

Because you need to have spare cash to invest over your living expenses.

That's where it pays to pay attention in maths 101 and economics 101

Mortage @ €2k pm vs Rent @ €1k pm = €1k pm to invest = €12k py to invest. Over 20 years(when you're just about starting to make a dent in the capital portion of your 40 year mortgage), do the maths.

FillSpectre wrote:

Your choice one way or the other but it doesn't sound viable for most. Additions like kids, sickness and parents tend to change things.

Know about those well. Already in hand and what do you know? The formula still works!

FillSpectre wrote:

I think housing makes more sense and is generally more versatile than investments. (...). Not purely as a money thing but a privacy and control of where I live thing.

And that's exactly why most people in Ireland can't relate to a 'continental' view of the matter. Property is still a Holy Grail here (and the UK) and there's still, socially and culturally, too many emotional strings attached to the whole thing.

FillSpectre wrote:

I get to buy a furniture (another asset) paint as I like etc... Renting does not have that freedom.

I have my own furniture. I make it a point to have the landlord remove his (most often sub-standard) furniture, or I find unfurnished (way cheaper still). I paint the property with the landlord's consent to our tastes.

FillSpectre wrote:

I can increse the value of my property I can generally make it my home.

I get to maintain the value of the landlord's home abit better than your average tenant, and I reap benefits in a stable rent.

FillSpectre wrote:

Renting has good points but long term you have less freedom and choices.

Disagree very much on this point. You have much, much less freedom once you own the bricks as opposed to just live in them, because by the time you own the bricks, your spending power has gone poof (you're retired!) - what is your choice then? trade down and free up some cash? You might as well have invested the mortgage repayments over the period and not given €000s of hard-earned taxed cash in interests to the bank, because you with the house paid up and me with the big nest egg are probably worth just as much by then: the difference is, I can live comfortably on the interests, you can't unless you dispose of your asset!

FillSpectre wrote:

Are you really suggeting it is better for a 20 year old to rent for say 50 years then retire and live of their investments is a viable option for most as opposed to buying a house and paying a mortgage?

Yes - but you've got to be a bit good to do it, of course. And it would apparently require a lot of people in this country, as in many others, to undergo a rather radical change of mindset. But hey - I'm not criticising as such, just pointing viable alternatives.

Think of it this way: your house won't put food on your table and pay your bills when you retire, and neither will the governement through state pensions. But a 40 years mortgage, even accounting for gradual pay increase ove the period, hardly leaves much room to stash those funds away for comfortable older days until the last few years of employment - so you finally finished paying your mortgage? Great! Guess what, you still can't go on holidays or treat yourself to this or that week-end toy, 'cause now you've got to pay in your pension else you're going to starve to death in your paid-up palace for the next 20 years

ambro25 wrote:

Yes - but you've got to be a bit good to do it, of course. And it would apparently require a lot of people in this country, as in many others, to undergo a rather radical change of mindset. But hey - I'm not criticising as such, just pointing viable alternatives.

Actually here is what I now understand about what you are saying. You made money on property and elsewher and now don't think it is worth while buying in dublin. I am guessing mostly becusae you invested the money you have made on your property(?) into something like gold or oil recently (so you feel real good right now). The fact you are now old enough and financially secure enough you appaer at least to be gloating and laughing at the people still in the property game. Rents in Dublin certainly have gone up in the last 7 years but the detail of your arguement doesn't really matter. What ever you make your money on means you have a considerably large income that most people don't. You may think you did it all yourself but luck starting at birth tends to have a big impact. The mind set change accross europe is the fact they have socilist policies protecting those who rent unlike here and the UK hence a different mind set.

I must say your tone is quite arrogant. Rather than explain anything you have just nitpicked. You could have just explained the sitution without every second line quoted.

Your math doesn't work out for people as it require enough money to pay rent and also invest. You must have a huge asset or save huge percentage of your income for it to pay the divident you are suggesting. Your claim to have no assets is incorrect as is your definition.

Look up the definition

http://www.economist.com/research/Economics/alphabetic.cfm?LETTER=A#ASSETS

ambro25 wrote:

Think of it this way: your house won't put food on your table and pay your bills when you retire, and neither will the governement through state pensions. But a 40 years mortgage, even accounting for gradual pay increase ove the period, hardly leaves much room to stash those funds away for comfortable older days until the last few years of employment - so you finally finished paying your mortgage? Great! Guess what, you still can't go on holidays or treat yourself to this or that week-end toy, 'cause now you've got to pay in your pension!

If you stay renting in Ireland you don't have security so you would have even less money than a mortgage. It really sounds like you have no concept of what the situation is here. Rent is in some cases cheaper than a mortgage here which is a relatively recent change. the difference is till quite small so rather than rent and pay extra for the future spending more on your house actually does make more sense. Most rental property in this country comes furnished so you can't get your own. I think you are trying to applied european living here without the backup they have there

FillSpectre wrote:

Actually here is what I now understand about what you are saying. You made money on property and elsewher and now don't think it is worth while buying in dublin.

Quite correct. Bravo Sherlock

FillSpectre wrote:

I am guessing mostly becusae you invested the money you have made on your property(?) into something like gold or oil recently (so you feel real good right now).

Good lord no, not commodities - that's too long term and a difficult-enough trend to spot, as a non-trader/non-professional stock market person. I'm more the hit-&-run type (20% here 40% there

). It soon adds up, even if you only start with €100.

FillSpectre wrote:

The fact you are now old enough and financially secure enough you appaer at least to be gloating and laughing at the people still in the property game.

Not so. And I am genuinely sorry that you would feel this way.

OK, perhaps my 'you've got to be a bit good' comment was (i) mis-phrased and (ii) not needed - what I meant to say is that you'd have to learn the lessons along the way and make sure you don't repeat the mistakes which taught them (which after a fashion, makes you 'good' at anything, really).

All I'm trying to say is that there are alternatives to the prevalent social and cultural model that in this country (and many others in EU) drives the average household to record levels of debt, as well as the ages-old social and cultural model that drives the average household into property no-matter-what-the-price. The message here is simple: don't spend money you don't have, get it first then spend it.

FillSpectre wrote:

What ever you make your money on means you have a considerably large income that most people don't.

No so (again!). Considering current average income across Dublin, I'd say average - strangely enough

FillSpectre wrote:

You may think you did it all yourself but luck starting at birth tends to have a big impact.I must say your tone is quite arrogant. Rather than explain anything you have just nitpicked. You could have just explained the sitution without every second line quoted.

Is that an inferiority complex I can spot, or do you carry that aircraft carrier on your shoulder all day long?

FillSpectre wrote:

The mind set change accross europe is the fact they have socilist policies protecting those who rent unlike here and the UK hence a different mind set.

Seems to me the "socilist policies protecting those who rent" are alive and well in the Republic also, latest I heard

So what's your point?

FillSpectre wrote:

Your math doesn't work out for people as it require enough money to pay rent and also invest. You must have a huge asset or save huge percentage of your income for it to pay the divident you are suggesting. Your claim to have no assets is incorrect as is your definition.

Of course it does... well, could: it's a long-haul process, so you gotta have some staying power, and you gotta keep at it 'til it starts to pay. Noone said it was easy, and I've yet to know of any kind of revenue-earning activity that doesn't require hard graft of some form or another.

FillSpectre wrote:

If you stay renting in Ireland you don't have security so you would have even less money than a mortgage.

Not sure I'm getting your logic here. What's the link between 'staying renting in Ireland' and 'security'? Define 'secuity', please. [not that I intend to retire in Ireland, mind]

FillSpectre wrote:

It really sounds like (etc.) I think you are trying to applied european living here without the backup they have there

What 'back up'? What are you on about?

Ambro,

You really need to understand that responding somebody in this way is very hard to read and quite petty.

The reson you are able to do what you want is because of you bought a house and now you are suggesting others shouldn't do it. Now that is a hypocritical view.

"Not so. And I am genuinely sorry that you would feel this way. All I'm trying to say is that there are alternatives to the prevalent social and cultural model that in this country (and many others in EU) drives the average household to record levels of debt, as well as the ages-old social and cultural model that drives the average household into property no-matter-what-the-price. The message here is simple: don't spend money you don't have, get it first then spend it."
You are gloating and you are suggesting something you didn't do and couldn't be in if it wasn't for the fact you did enter the property market.

You suggest you are only on an average wage so €35k? What portion of you money is rent? Cheap rent is €1200 (my mortgage is a lot less)for a 3 bed house that 40%+ of your salary is that about right.

Security and back-up is the laws and rent controls. We have nothing close to them and there is little protection for people in real terms. Many small landlords and little are no big businesses involved.

I agree some people buy baddly but I would really group the people who speculate about crashes and avoid things are just as silly. Renting is viable lifestyle.

Your need to know invest me must be in one of the following

1)Stocks
2)Property
3)Bonds
4)A Business
5) Other asset like art etc..
6) X unknown

All of which have risks some less than others but long term property evens out like the low risk items.