Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Am I the only one ?

2

Comments

  • #32
    tempura
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 604 ✭✭✭tempura


    smcgiff wrote: »
    I don't know what's more annoying - those that flew around in helicopters a few years ago or the plethora of people now saying they didn't go mad and saw it all coming.

    You know, people make millions on correctly predicting the downturn in economies. So, I presume ye are the new millionaires.

    Know what you mean, not exactly a millionaire myself, but making things work in relation to income and expenditure, have always kind of kept that kind of thinking to the forefront of my mind.

    Its seems though, that some people who never let that kind of thinking cross their mind are now the ones in dire straits, and looking elsewhere for the tab to be picked up !

    It doesn't sit well with me to be honest, I think its time people started taking a bit of responsibility for their spending.


  • #33
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    smcgiff wrote: »
    Builders couldn't have made the mistakes they made without the moronic bankers.

    Estate agents were just being estate agents.

    Solicitors?

    Houses for cash (off books)
    Price fixing
    Cash for work
    Planning scams

    All documented - more than a few in the housing scam.


  • #34
    WhatNowForUs?
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭WhatNowForUs?


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Builders ?
    Estate Agents ?
    solicitors ?

    Economists
    Pension Providers
    Polititions


  • #35
    smcgiff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,943 ✭✭✭smcgiff


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Houses for cash (off books)
    Price fixing
    Cash for work
    Planning scams

    All documented - more than a few in the housing scam.

    Cash for work - Has been going on since time began - wasn't a particular CT thing.

    Planning Scam - Back to politicians again.

    Houses for Cash - Still going on.


  • #36
    WhatNowForUs?
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭WhatNowForUs?


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Absolutely not. I mean I don't want to sound like I have some kind of sneering attitude to folks that were less fortunate than me in latter years, but by Jebus did I see the whole house of cards coming down in spectacular style years before it happened. Made some hay while the sun was shining and all that and got no bones about admitting I'm substantially better off today than at any point in my life, boom, pre-boom, or whatever.

    Like I say, not to sneer but WTF ever put the idea into people's heads that it was somehow a good idea to shackle themselves to 30 or 40 year mortgages, paying twelve years salary for a badly constructed glorified shed somewhere on a flood plain in County Longford or whatever. And this isn't just hindsight either, I said it to anyone who wanted to listen at the time, which was nobody, so to be blunt I couldn't give a flying one for all these hard luck stories from people who squandered what they had.

    So you didn't say it to anyone


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    smcgiff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,943 ✭✭✭smcgiff


    WhatNowForUs? wrote: »
    Economists
    Pension Providers

    You'll need to develop your argument - pension providers caused the Celtic Tiger to overheat?


  • #38
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    WhatNowForUs? wrote: »
    Economists
    Pension Providers
    Polititions


    There is a whole raft of professions who can't come out of it with their hands clean.

    The stuff that went on in the housing scam would make you sick at the time.

    You can then go into other areas, where prices were fixed for professional fees.

    Anyway - the biggest scam of all was the cash deals going on , in all apsects of life. Why was it cash - leave that up to you.


  • #39
    darlett
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,316 ✭✭✭darlett


    tempura wrote: »
    Your not far off the mark there, but I do cut my cloth so to speak.

    Seriously though, why did people not put some of their earnings away, just in case, what was going on in peoples minds ?

    How did people not notice that they were paying over the odds for cardboard houses and a lifestyle that they could not maintain for the rest of their lives ?

    Its still prevalent at this time. I work in finance ( lending to be precise ) and people are still trying to fund absolute unnecessary ****e.


    Do people ever stop to think, " In the long run, I can't actually afford this " ?

    I ve got to say hang on a moment. I wasnt caught, whoopee for me Im in the process of buying now. But there's a lot of people who put a lot of thought into buying a house and just got caught by unlucky timing. Not all over-priced houses were brought by greedy people. Working in the finance and lending Id hope you can recognise that people trying to improve their lives cant always be written off as greedy. The houses prices were been driven up for 10-15 years by easy lending. Did people wonder if they could afford things? Take a moment. Of course they did. The people did the maths and said yes, we can afford this foothold on this ladder if we work our current jobs really hard for 30 years. It ll be worth it, its a family home, and if we dont buy it next year it ll be even more expensive our choices will be further reduced. They didn't think in two years time I'll lose my job and she' have to take a wage cut.

    Cardboard houses? What? So not everyone is a structural architect and that makes them at fault for shortcuts taken?

    Hindsight is amazing but can you say you saw THIS coming? Did you know houses were twice the price they should be? Bully for you then.


  • #40
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    smcgiff wrote: »
    Cash for work - Has been going on since time began - wasn't a particular CT thing.
    You think it goes on as much in other countries ?
    But, the volumes , even when companies were very profitable was the problem.


    Planning Scam - Back to politicians again.
    Builders were up to their necks in this.

    Houses for Cash - Still going on.
    Is this right ? Also builders were selling off plans and not declaring. Also were not paying fees to council etc.

    I don't think we should forget the builders/developers in all this. They owe the most in all this.


    Anyway - I just don't agree it was a few bankers and polticians. Other played a part and earned outragous undeclared money. trying to hide it now too.


  • #41
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    darlett wrote: »
    I ve got to say hang on a moment. I wasnt caught, whoopee for me Im in the process of buying now. But there's a lot of people who put a lot of thought into buying a house and just got caught by unlucky timing. Not all over-priced houses were brought by greedy people. Working in the finance and lending Id hope you can recognise that people trying to improve their lives cant always be written off as greedy. The houses prices were been driven up for 10-15 years by easy lending. Did people wonder if they could afford things? Take a moment. Of course they did. The people did the maths and said yes, we can afford this foothold on this ladder if we work our current jobs really hard for 30 years. It ll be worth it, its a family home, and if we dont buy it next year it ll be even more expensive our choices will be further reduced. They didn't think in two years time I'll lose my job and she' have to take a wage cut.

    Cardboard houses? What? So not everyone is a structural architect and that makes them at fault for shortcuts taken?

    Hindsight is amazing but can you say you saw THIS coming? Did you know houses were twice the price they should be? Bully for you then.

    But was that a realisitic idea ?
    Would they have children ?
    Why 30 years ? Seems longer than my Mum and Dad's
    Would they both work for 30 years ?
    Really Hard ?

    That is what I was thinking. I think a child would think the bold bit was a bit daft.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    WhatNowForUs?
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭WhatNowForUs?


    smcgiff wrote: »
    You'll need to develop your argument - pension providers caused the Celtic Tiger to overheat?

    Pushed the investment of property at home and abroad as a pension investment. As was said, there are not many professions that come out of this smelling like roses, most were sucked in in some way or other.
    Maybe we can ask which one were the least seduced. 'Religious Profession'!!!


  • #43
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    WhatNowForUs? wrote: »
    Pushed the investment of property at home and abroad as a pension investment. As was said, there are not many professions that come out of this smelling like roses, most were sucked in in some way or other.
    Maybe we can ask which one were the least seduced. 'Religious Profession'!!!

    Very few. Sure the Religious Profession did their own seduction.

    They made millions on land.


  • #44
    smcgiff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,943 ✭✭✭smcgiff


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »

    I don't think we should forget the builders/developers in all this. They owe the most in all this.

    I think my anger at builders/developers is tempered by most of them taking a bigger hit than almost anybody. They made fortunes, but ploughed most of it back into inflated property that then collapsed in value. Quite a lot of them are bankrupt, in insane asylums. Some are dead.

    The same cannot, as yet, be said of politicians and the leading bankers.


  • #45
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    I seem to recall Bertie knocking journalists for predicting the end was nigh, that the bubble couldn't last and so forth.

    Interesting times. There was an incredible confidence about, which isn't a bad thing and a vibe. The negative stuff was people thinking that money gives you the right to behave badly. Oh and the casual racism against immigrants - why should they come here and try and take our wealth. At least that was knocked on the head. Now it's - why should they be here scamming/scrounging etc :rolleyes::rolleyes:

    I'd left by the turn of the century but it was always fascinating to come home. Most of my pals were and are level headed but there were a few who had become all about the money. That's what it does to you, I guess.


  • #46
    smcgiff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,943 ✭✭✭smcgiff


    WhatNowForUs? wrote: »
    Pushed the investment of property at home and abroad as a pension investment.

    Very few thought it was a bad idea - safe as houses comes to mind. I think we need to separate those that made bad investment decisions and those that were corrupt.


  • #47
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    smcgiff wrote: »
    I think my anger at builders/bankers is tempered by most of them taking a bigger hit than almost anybody. They made fortunes, but ploughed most of it back into inflated property that then collapsed in value. Quite a lot of them are bankrupt, in insane asylums. Some are dead.

    The same cannot, as yet, be said of politicians and the leading bankers.

    Fair enough - maybe a few are broken men - but most have harder necks , live as they lived avoiding their responsibility to the last , hiding earnings and looking for more scams.

    No even insulation in some walls - ****ers.

    There is a flaw in Irish society and we will do all this again unless we get rid of the scam idea - sure look at Lowry still in there. Voted by the people. Example from the top.


  • #48
    smcgiff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,943 ✭✭✭smcgiff


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    - sure look at Lowry still in there. Voted by the people. Example from the top.

    Very true - it doesn't say a lot about us as a people. The recent polls showing support for FF as high as it is. It's like a battered spouse returning to their abuser. Very depressing.


  • #49
    Humans eh!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 403 ✭✭Humans eh!


    tempura wrote: »

    Its still prevalent at this time. I work in finance ( lending to be precise ) and people are still trying to fund absolute unnecessary ..............

    :rolleyes:

    Of course the financial sector (lenders to be precise) didn't f**k up at all and needed no bailout.

    Your entire industry are only standing because they were bailed out by the very people you are slagging off.
    Condescending prick.


  • #50
    tempura
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 604 ✭✭✭tempura


    Bottom line, if anyone had taken a bit of time to forecast the economic future ( only 3 to five years down the line ), they would have had an inkling that things were going to waver a little.

    If you were in a financial position to purchase a property or some other high expenditure item at the time, you should have educated yourself for the what if's, and as far as I can see to date, people still do not seem to be capable of informing themselves about making a contingency to their plans. I see it every day of the week, people find it a hell of a lot easier to blame some one else for their decisions.


    I am blue in the face from politely telling people that applying for x amount may not be in their best interests, but they don't want to listen.

    I honestly think that people believe that there is some magic fund that will take up the slack if they go into arrears.

    Not so, make you decisions and educate yourself, its not rocket science, just simple maths.


  • #51
    darlett
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,316 ✭✭✭darlett


    darlett wrote: »
    our current jobs really hard for 30 years.

    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    But was that a realisitic idea ?
    Would they have children ?
    Why 30 years ? Seems longer than my Mum and Dad's
    Would they both work for 30 years ?
    Really Hard ?

    That is what I was thinking. I think a child would think the bold bit was a bit daft.


    I'm sure a child might find it daft but arent they gone to bed now? Whats not realistic about working for 30 years? :confused:

    If you're picking up on my use of the phrase of working for 30 years as being "really hard" well then you've clearly won.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    smcgiff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,943 ✭✭✭smcgiff


    tempura wrote: »

    Not so, make you decisions and educate yourself, its not rocket science, just simple maths.

    To be fair, the banks are the ones that got these simple maths spectacularly wrong.


  • #53
    tempura
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 604 ✭✭✭tempura


    Humans eh! wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    Of course the financial sector (lenders to be precise) didn't f**k up at all and needed no bailout.

    Your entire industry are only standing because they were bailed out by the very people you are slagging off.
    Condescending prick.


    Absolute bollix to be honest, when people were borrowing, they were fully informed as to what was expected of them in relation to repayment.

    They were also informed as to what would happen if they couldn't meet those repayments.

    They were advised to make contingency in the event of their income was to be effected.

    People were advised and were fully aware of the responsibility they were taking on.

    I can only speak for the financial institution that I work for.


    Again, people didn't seem to take any responsibility for their spending and want to blame someone else.


  • #54
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    darlett wrote: »
    I'm sure a child might find it daft but arent they gone to bed now? Whats not realistic about working for 30 years? :confused:

    If you're picking up on my use of the phrase of working for 30 years as being "really hard" well then you've clearly won.

    But you said Jobs - That means a couple staying together for 30 years working till into their 60s (Most were in 30s buying)

    They were using a multiple of 4 to 7 times gross , with Ot, allowances, shift allowances - parents figure 2.5.

    Taking no break for kids
    No loss of job
    No loss of allowance
    No coming off shift
    No career break
    No travel
    No extra study
    Extra for car

    Stamp duty


    And do it all for 5 extra years (V 25) to give money to a bank. It was mad stuff then and now,


  • #55
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    tempura wrote: »
    Absolute bollix to be honest, when people were borrowing, they were fully informed as to what was expected of them in relation to repayment.

    They were also informed as to what would happen if they couldn't meet those repayments.

    They were advised to make contingency in the event of their income was to be effected.

    People were advised and were fully aware of the responsibility they were taking on.

    I can only speak for the financial institution that I work for.


    Again, people didn't seem to take any responsibility for their spending and want to blame someone else.

    I don't think anybody who worked in this area can come out of this clean.

    What multiple of combined income was used in your time there ?
    What was the max time in years a mortgage was issued at your place ?


  • #56
    darlett
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,316 ✭✭✭darlett


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    But you said Jobs - That means a couple staying together for 30 years working till into their 60s (Most were in 30s buying)

    They were using a multiple of 4 to 7 times gross , with Ot, allowances, shift allowances - parents figure 2.5.

    Taking no break for kids
    No loss of job
    No loss of allowance
    No coming off shift
    No career break
    No travel
    No extra study
    Extra for car

    Stamp duty


    And do it all for 5 extra years (V 25) to give money to a bank. It was mad stuff then and now,

    But! That's a joint mortgage for you. Even a 20 year one, is going to rule out plenty of those options on your list. Any one who is getting a loan makes some basic assumptions, like not losing their jobs. And yes they would likely of hoped to eventually getting their wages increase-that wouldnt have been crazy thinking just normal thinking.

    Time with kids, weekends, after work and work holidays. Scrimp and save that extra for the car. It all seems so normal, just they were unlucky to buy then when many were in a panic if they didnt buy soon they'd have to live 2 hours from work-that sort of thing.


  • #57
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    darlett wrote: »
    But! That's a joint mortgage for you. Even a 20 year one, is going to rule out plenty of those options on your list. Any one who is getting a loan makes some basic assumptions, like not losing their jobs. And yes they would likely of hoped to eventually getting their wages increase-that wouldnt have been crazy thinking just normal thinking.

    Time with kids, weekends, after work and work holidays. Scrimp and save that extra for the car. It all seems so normal, just they were unlucky to buy then when many were in a panic if they didnt buy soon they'd have to live 2 hours from work-that sort of thing.

    But simple maths - how do you explain 4 to 7 times combined income , when it was 2.5.


  • #58
    darlett
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,316 ✭✭✭darlett


    Hindsight lets me know they over-paid. Massively. But I just don't think its fair to say that people who bought house 5/6 years ago were driven by greed or that they didn't ask themselves long and hard if they could genuinely make these repayments.

    And look, even though things have gone awful most of them still can, they are just under serious pressure.

    That's my point of view anyhow, I'll leave it there.


  • #59
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,206 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    darlett wrote: »
    But! That's a joint mortgage for you. Even a 20 year one, is going to rule out plenty of those options on your list. Any one who is getting a loan makes some basic assumptions, like not losing their jobs. And yes they would likely of hoped to eventually getting their wages increase-that wouldnt have been crazy thinking just normal thinking.

    Time with kids, weekends, after work and work holidays. Scrimp and save that extra for the car. It all seems so normal, just they were unlucky to buy then when many were in a panic if they didnt buy soon they'd have to live 2 hours from work-that sort of thing.

    I think you can see the flaw in the assumption that 2 people will work for 30 years - the idea is flawed .

    It was a mechanism to derisk the statisitics and lend more money - evil and dreamt up in wall street.
    The cause of all this ****.


  • #60
    darlett
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,316 ✭✭✭darlett


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    But simple maths - how do you explain 4 to 7 times combined income , when it was 2.5.


    Well people who chose to overshoot by so much, were involved in bad maths and did go beyond the pale! I'm not saying no one was stupid either ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    darlett
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,316 ✭✭✭darlett


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    I think you can see the flaw in the assumption that 2 people will work for 30 years - the idea is flawed .

    It was a mechanism to derisk the statisitics and lend more money - evil and dreamt up in wall street.
    The cause of all this ****.

    I would not like to get a loan for over 10 years. And would be somewhat reluctant to get one for over 5. But also I dont want to pay rent til I die as Im in my late 20s now and assume I ll live for 40 years plus so that would represent bad value. Timing wise, I'm a very lucky boy to be scanning the market at this time as I feel I could have been caught in negative equity by now if I was 3-4 years older than I am. Bullet dodged

    Sorry, Ive over posted in this now, and am playing a broken and possibly incorrect record...Good night and Happy Paddies all


Advertisement
Advertisement