How can someone in their 30s afford a house - PLEASE READ MOD WARNING IN OP

Brian201888 · 05-07-2020 10:32pm

joeharte123 wrote: »

As far as I’m aware, you have to pay some sort of rent while living in social housing, and it depends on what you’re able to pay!
Yes, ghettoising people into housing estates has its own problems. Open to correction but 15 - 20% of new developments must be social housing I believe? In most cases, this can’t be a bad thing?

Most people looking for a social house today are actually young couples who are working ordinary jobs but cannot afford to buy private houses. Just like many peoples parents and grandparents lived in a social house for many years while saving up to buy a home later in life, I believe these young people should be given a break. It’s easy to visualise the thugz in your head that will be “getting a free gaff” but this is far less common than you think. Most people just want to get their life started.

Forcing a percentage of new builds to be social housing just drives the price up for everyone that can afford a house. If you build 100 homes and hand 10% over to the state you have to charge the other 90 purchasers more to cover your costs which is bollocks really. I've no issue with social housing but that punishes people buying a new home instead of it being something funded through general taxation as it should be.

Springy Turf · 06-07-2020 2:17pm

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

It’s written in the very article you linked, you obviously didn’t read it. Hint: ignore headline figures and keep in my the system is different in the Uk it’s 325k per person not 325k in total and there are top ups.

Fair enough. I missed that part - although there are ways you can characterise Irish inheritance tax as also being over 1million in certain circumstances also (3 children for example).

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Because they are begrudgers as the only reason anyone could have for wanting to take large amounts of a families money rather than the next generation of that family benefitting is pure and utter bugrudgery.

You are claiming the only people who agree with inheritance tax are those who won't ever have to pay inheritance tax. A pretty ridiculous claim to make.

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

No we shouldn’t aim for equality if it means taking money from people who earned it (and paid massive amounts of tax on it) rather than letting their children have the full benefit and use it to make their life easier and get ahead of others. Helping “society” translates to handing money to people who do nothing - their parents had the same opportunities and accesss to education as anyone else if they want to leave money they should have gone out and earned it rather than expecting those who did to hand it over.

In one paragraph you accept that inheritance is used by children to "get ahead", and then later claim that everyone has the same opportunities and access to education as anyone else. Simply not true. Some people have access to expensive grinds, private schools. Some people can go through years of university with no income, without ever having to worry about money. Others are born into poverty and relatively slim odds of becoming financially comfortable.

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Socially progressive = legalised theft. Taking from those who have done well, paid vast amounts of tax to hand to those with the paw out, disgusting.

In the 60s, it was a socially progressive move to make schools free. Would you have disagreed with that move? Unfortunately University here is not free - just not full cost.

Cyrus · 06-07-2020 2:22pm

Springy Turf wrote: »

Some people can go through years of university with no income, without ever having to worry about money. Others are born into poverty and relatively slim odds of becoming financially comfortable.

some peoples parents can subsidise them through college, some people need to get a part time job, i'm ok with that, most university courses leave ample time for a part time job, and there are grants for people who need them. The fact is anyone who wants to goto university can.

If they have useless parents who dont encourage and dont care then thats a parents problem.

Cyrus · 06-07-2020 2:24pm

Springy Turf wrote: »

Unfortunately University here is not free - just not full cost.

if you get a grant its covered isnt it?

Springy Turf · 06-07-2020 2:24pm

Brian201888 wrote: »

Forcing a percentage of new builds to be social housing just drives the price up for everyone that can afford a house. If you build 100 homes and hand 10% over to the state you have to charge the other 90 purchasers more to cover your costs which is bollocks really. I've no issue with social housing but that punishes people buying a new home instead of it being something funded through general taxation as it should be.

Not true - the social houses are paid for by the state.

LeineGlas · 06-07-2020 2:25pm

Cyrus wrote: »

If they have useless parents who dont encourage and dont care then thats a parents problem.

"I'm alright, Jack"

Springy Turf · 06-07-2020 2:27pm

Cyrus wrote: »

if you get a grant its covered isnt it?

In limited circumstances

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/third_level_education/fees_and_supports_for_third_level_education/maintenance_grant_schemes_for_students_on_third_level_courses.html#l9807f

Cyrus · 06-07-2020 2:59pm

LeineGlas wrote: »

"I'm alright, Jack"

you want me to be responsible for someone elses parents ?

Cyrus · 06-07-2020 2:59pm

Springy Turf wrote: »

In limited circumstances

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/third_level_education/fees_and_supports_for_third_level_education/maintenance_grant_schemes_for_students_on_third_level_courses.html#l9807f

yes but in the main its aimed at those who need it, if you dont need it you cant get it.

summary

3rd level is accessible in ireland.

06-07-2020 3:14pm

Springy Turf wrote: »

In limited circumstances

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/third_level_education/fees_and_supports_for_third_level_education/maintenance_grant_schemes_for_students_on_third_level_courses.html#l9807f

Not that limited, I knew lots of people ranging from having all reg fees covered right up to getting the full grant and none were badly off at all (parents all private home owners, some quite well off but self employed so able to work the system etc).

The fact is in Ireland everyone has the same chance to do well from themselves and good a good college education, if from a poor background there are grants and other incentives and school is free. As another poster said if the issue is parental encouragement etc then no amount of redistributed money through "social equality" is going to get them into college etc.

Parents who are able to help out their children with money though gifts and inheritances are also the type who heavily encourage them to do well, get good educations and good jobs so its not a surpsie that you see the next generation doing well also.

Springy Turf · 06-07-2020 3:28pm

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Parents who are able to help out their children with money though gifts and inheritances are also the type who heavily encourage them to do well, get good educations and good jobs so its not a surpsie that you see the next generation doing well also.

This is exactly why I think taxing inheritance is a good idea. And I am glad to see you appreciate some of the ways your tax money is being used.

guyfawkes5 · 06-07-2020 3:35pm

Springy Turf wrote: »

This is exactly why I think taxing inheritance is a good idea. And I am glad to see you appreciate some of the ways your tax money is being used.

Inheritance tax is generally seen by economists as one of the most positive and unobjectionable taxes you can have, as it relies on an event that can't realistically be gamed or planned for at any meaningful scale (outside of Cluedo), doesn't disincentivise good economic behaviours, and the transfer of property or assets is a process that involves the government anyway, so very little resources are needed for enforcement.

Just set the upper threshold above what 90% of households hold in assets, and it also has a redistributive affect without making anyone poorer. Magic!

elefant · 06-07-2020 3:38pm

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

The fact is in Ireland everyone has the same chance to do well from themselves and good a good college education, if from a poor background there are grants and other incentives and school is free. As another poster said if the issue is parental encouragement etc then no amount of redistributed money through "social equality" is going to get them into college etc.

Everyone has the same chance in theory but in practice it, as you say, doesn't work like that. It doesn't just go without saying that no amount of public investment can change this, even if only to a small extent.

There's a fascinating OECD brief on sticky floors and sticky ceilings here if anyone is interested:
https://www.oecd.org/els/soc/Social-Mobility-2018-PolicyBrief.pdf
In short, 'it could take on average four to five generations for the offspring of a low-income family to reach the average income'

Personally, I'm happy to have higher taxes, including inheritance taxes, going towards improvements in society at large. Others might have different feelings on that. Having faith in these taxes being used efficiently is another topic, but in general I'd prefer not to leave children from lower-income families with the status quo, and see if they can beat the odds by themselves.

listermint · 06-07-2020 3:40pm

Cyrus wrote: »

some peoples parents can subsidise them through college, some people need to get a part time job, i'm ok with that, most university courses leave ample time for a part time job, and there are grants for people who need them. The fact is anyone who wants to goto university can.

If they have useless parents who dont encourage and dont care then thats a parents problem.

I doubt you've ever wanted for anything.

Literally.

listermint · 06-07-2020 3:41pm

Cyrus wrote: »

you want me to be responsible for someone elses parents ?

No. I'd like you to understand the subject matter you are talking about.

It's evident you don't and more equally are not bothered by the ignorance of it.

Cyrus · 06-07-2020 3:53pm

listermint wrote: »

No. I'd like you to understand the subject matter you are talking about.

It's evident you don't and more equally are not bothered by the ignorance of it.

You disagree that 3rd level education is accessible in ireland?

You disagree that its a parents job to encourage and guide their children in life?

Explain where i'm wrong here.

Cyrus · 06-07-2020 3:56pm

listermint wrote: »

I doubt you've ever wanted for anything.

Literally.

what have you ever wanted for?

Eric Cartman · 06-07-2020 3:59pm

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Not that limited, I knew lots of people ranging from having all reg fees covered right up to getting the full grant and none were badly off at all (parents all private home owners, some quite well off but self employed so able to work the system etc).

The fact is in Ireland everyone has the same chance to do well from themselves and good a good college education, if from a poor background there are grants and other incentives and school is free. As another poster said if the issue is parental encouragement etc then no amount of redistributed money through "social equality" is going to get them into college etc.

Parents who are able to help out their children with money though gifts and inheritances are also the type who heavily encourage them to do well, get good educations and good jobs so its not a surpsie that you see the next generation doing well also.

I would agree that access to college has been mostly resolved in the last 30 years. However I do think theres another problem and its where good parents and good guidance is key.

colleges and universities are so hungry for cash they keep adding useless courses that won't possibly result in the grant money etc.. ever making it back into the economy when that student enters the world of work.

I think we need to lock down grants and scholarships to key areas like STEM. We're facing into a future where more people have degrees than not, but students from poorer and less educated families are picking courses like 'social justice' 'anthropology and English' etc... which is going to leave them still working in Tesco but with a fancy certificate to frame and hang. More educated families are steering their kids away from these courses because they can size the future from it, many poor families are just happy little Johnny and Mary went to college.

RedXIV · 06-07-2020 4:09pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think we need to lock down grants and scholarships to key areas like STEM. We're facing into a future where more people have degrees than not, but students from poorer and less educated families are picking courses like 'social justice' 'anthropology and English' etc... which is going to leave them still working in Tesco but with a fancy certificate to frame and hang. More educated families are steering their kids away from these courses because they can size the future from it, many poor families are just happy little Johnny and Mary went to college.

I think this is one of the key issues with a lot of the upset millennials out there. I was in school when we were all told "You can be ANYTHING YOU WANT!" and "Do what you love and you'll never work a day in your life" and as a result, there was a huge number of people who did courses without thinking of long term job prospects as they were told by people who they trusted that job prospects didn't matter any more.

I'm just lucky I liked computers and went into IT, but I know a few friends who went for niche degrees and now have no idea what to do with them?

(my favourite was Computer science and Theology, I'd love to know the overlaps there)

listermint · 06-07-2020 4:09pm

Cyrus wrote: »

You disagree that 3rd level education is accessible in ireland?

You disagree that its a parents job to encourage and guide their children in life?

Explain where i'm wrong here.

I disagree with your nonsense about blaming parents for the ills of society.

Should I blame your parents for having you so ill informed on the absolutely wide arrange of social issues that can impede even the smartest individual fulfilling their potential.

You are coming across typically ignorant.

listermint · 06-07-2020 4:10pm

Cyrus wrote: »

what have you ever wanted for?

Point proven.

All the best in life I'm sure.

listermint · 06-07-2020 4:12pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I would agree that access to college has been mostly resolved in the last 30 years. However I do think theres another problem and its where good parents and good guidance is key.

colleges and universities are so hungry for cash they keep adding useless courses that won't possibly result in the grant money etc.. ever making it back into the economy when that student enters the world of work.

I think we need to lock down grants and scholarships to key areas like STEM. We're facing into a future where more people have degrees than not, but students from poorer and less educated families are picking courses like 'social justice' 'anthropology and English' etc... which is going to leave them still working in Tesco but with a fancy certificate to frame and hang. More educated families are steering their kids away from these courses because they can size the future from it, many poor families are just happy little Johnny and Mary went to college.

What a ridiculous over simplification.

Most of the successful music or artists in the country came from families with money to indulge their passions..

Including arts degrees.

06-07-2020 4:18pm

Springy Turf wrote: »

This is exactly why I think taxing inheritance is a good idea. And I am glad to see you appreciate some of the ways your tax money is being used.

No it isn't a good idea at all. In fact its totally unfair.

The people who do well are already funding the lives and educations of those on lower incomes paying 50% tax on large amounts of their income, paying more VAT, paying more VRT. Basically funding large numbers of the population. In the mean time they also have to cover the costs of their own children's educations, pay for their homes in full etc etc

After all this they save money or likely invest it either in assets or in other investment products which again they will be taxed on any gains. Then then they want to gift money to their children to give them the best life they can by having smaller/no mortgages, enable them to not have to worry as much about money etc but after a very small threshold they are faced with more tax. And yes people see it as tax on their money and more of their hard earned money going to the government rather than benefitting their own family.

My opinion is that certainly within the family unit (parents to their children and children to parents) there should be no CAT (on inheritances or gifts) whatsoever the same as spouses are exempt. I can't see any rational argument for why children do not have the same tax treatment as a spouse. The next level out grand parents to grand children I would also totally exempt from CAT and I would also extend this aunts/uncles to nieces/nephews though I could be persuaded on having a very high threshold here and tax at a certain point lets say above 3 million or someting like that and a tax rate of 5 or 10%.

Total non relations lets say a million threshold and a tax rate of 5 or 10% above this just to keep the leftys happy. That being said I would have no issue with a total abolition of CAT regardless of the relationship between people but I could come to some compromises on this as outlined above.

06-07-2020 4:34pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

its clearly obvious that the construct of 'the market' is capable of providing us with all our needs, is in fact false!

What need of yours is not being met?

If you are unable to afford a 5-bed house in Dublin, you could buy a 1 bed flat in a small regional town for a fraction of the price.

The market offers you a wide range of affordability options. What's the problem?

Brian201888 · 06-07-2020 4:35pm

Springy Turf wrote: »

Not true - the social houses are paid for by the state.

Well that'll teach me to parrot things I'm told without actually checking the facts.

GreeBo · 06-07-2020 4:39pm

Springy Turf wrote: »

So we shouldn't try to make it more fair?

If the system is fair will everyone suddenly start to act fairly?

06-07-2020 4:41pm

elefant wrote: »

There's a fascinating OECD brief on sticky floors and sticky ceilings here if anyone is interested:
https://www.oecd.org/els/soc/Social-Mobility-2018-PolicyBrief.pdf
In short, 'it could take on average four to five generations for the offspring of a low-income family to reach the average income'

Both my parents left school at 12 and were dirt poor. My brother and I both have STEM degrees and earn substantially more than the average wage thanks to the grants system in Ireland. Most of our peers preferred drinking, chasing their preferred sex and the path of least resistance to studying and working hard. This is not true in the US but it's true here.

Were we disadvantaged? Sure. But there are ways around that too - emigrate and get experience where no one knows your background. Plus the MNC sector don't care in Ireland if you have the qualifications and experience.

Doing Arts or Social Science? That's for kids with rich parents.

Yellow_Fern · 06-07-2020 4:47pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I would agree that access to college has been mostly resolved in the last 30 years. However I do think theres another problem and its where good parents and good guidance is key.

colleges and universities are so hungry for cash they keep adding useless courses that won't possibly result in the grant money etc.. ever making it back into the economy when that student enters the world of work.

I think we need to lock down grants and scholarships to key areas like STEM. We're facing into a future where more people have degrees than not, but students from poorer and less educated families are picking courses like 'social justice' 'anthropology and English' etc... which is going to leave them still working in Tesco but with a fancy certificate to frame and hang. More educated families are steering their kids away from these courses because they can size the future from it, many poor families are just happy little Johnny and Mary went to college.

Wasnt the maintenance grant (SUSI) available for PhD studies? I think it still is, which is mad because if you cant get a PhD scholarship and you are not a rich heir, you probably shouldn't be doing a PhD.

elefant · 06-07-2020 4:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Both my parents left school at 12 and were dirt poor. My brother and I both have STEM degrees and earn substantially more than the average wage thanks to the grants system in Ireland. Most of our peers preferred drinking, chasing their preferred sex and the path of least resistance to studying and working hard. This is not true in the US but it's true here.

I'm sure you understand that nobody is saying it's impossible, but it's statistically unlikely.

Even in a country where there are few logistical barriers to education, people born into less advantageous positions have much poorer social and financial prospects. There are issues at play far beyond who can afford to stay in school (you are proof of that), and efficient spending of tax money can make the playing field a little bit more even for those born into those positions through no fault of their own.

guyfawkes5 · 06-07-2020 4:56pm

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

No it isn't a good idea at all. In fact its totally unfair.

The people who do well are already funding the lives and educations of those on lower incomes paying 50% tax on large amounts of their income, paying more VAT, paying more VRT. Basically funding large numbers of the population. In the mean time they also have to cover the costs of their own children's educations, pay for their homes in full etc etc

After all this they save money or likely invest it either in assets or in other investment products which again they will be taxed on any gains. Then then they want to gift money to their children to give them the best life they can by having smaller/no mortgages, enable them to not have to worry as much about money etc but after a very small threshold they are faced with more tax. And yes people see it as tax on their money and more of their hard earned money going to the government rather than benefitting their own family.

My opinion is that certainly within the family unit (parents to their children and children to parents) there should be no CAT (on inheritances or gifts) whatsoever the same as spouses are exempt. I can't see any rational argument for why children do not have the same tax treatment as a spouse. The next level out grand parents to grand children I would also totally exempt from CAT and I would also extend this aunts/uncles to nieces/nephews though I could be persuaded on having a very high threshold here and tax at a certain point lets say above 3 million or someting like that and a tax rate of 5 or 10%.

Total non relations lets say a million threshold and a tax rate of 5 or 10% above this just to keep the leftys happy. That being said I would have no issue with a total abolition of CAT regardless of the relationship between people but I could come to some compromises on this as outlined above.

Consumption taxes like VAT or VRT aren't really a progressive tax that the wealthy pay proportionately more of as you seem to insinuate. Rather the opposite, poorer people tend to pay higher proportions of their income on consumption taxes than more well-off people. The logic behind it is that if you make ten or a hundred times what someone else does, it doesn't follow that you buy ten or a hundred times the amount of food, and so on.

The logic behind exempting spouses from inheritance tax is that it's reasonably logical to assume that in a large amount of cases, that spouse is part of the same household and was dependant on the person that passed away and you don't want to cut off supports there, especially if there are dependant children. That logic strains significantly once you apply it to non-dependant children.

I think posters in the thread understand the urge of wanting to pass wealth onto children to give them the biggest advantage possible, but would raise that this can cause social problems as you can get snowballing advantage for certain sections of society, especially if you attempt to mitigate the tax's effects by lowering it to an insignificant amount.

Would you consider yourself in favour of a progressive tax system or a flat one?

Cyrus · 06-07-2020 4:58pm

listermint wrote: »

I disagree with your nonsense about blaming parents for the ills of society.

Should I blame your parents for having you so ill informed on the absolutely wide arrange of social issues that can impede even the smartest individual fulfilling their potential.

You are coming across typically ignorant.

i disagree with your latent assertion that people arent responsible for themselves and that there is always someone else to blame for their own misfortune.

Cyrus · 06-07-2020 4:59pm

listermint wrote: »

Point proven.

All the best in life I'm sure.

why are you being obtuse, if you want to have a debate, or as you no doubt see it, educate me, why dont you answer the question.

06-07-2020 5:33pm

guyfawkes5 wrote: »

Would you consider yourself in favour of a progressive tax system or a flat one?

Flat tax system without a doubt, you should not be punished by increased taxes just because you do well and earn more.

guyfawkes5 · 06-07-2020 5:38pm

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Flat tax system without a doubt, you should not be punished by increased taxes just because you do well and earn more.

Fair enough.

All I can say is that I would be extremely against it, and it seems definitive that introducing a flat tax in Ireland would make the poor in Ireland worse off again. If you're interested, look at the 'Some Responses from Irish Economists' section here.

Yellow_Fern · 06-07-2020 7:31pm

guyfawkes5 wrote: »

Fair enough.

All I can say is that I would be extremely against it, and it seems definitive that introducing a flat tax in Ireland would make the poor in Ireland worse off again. If you're interested, look at the 'Some Responses from Irish Economists' section here.

Aagain? Ireland is on the of the best places in the world to be poor. Plenty of poor people have hard lives, but it is not for lack of social services. If we had a flat tax, we could potentially shrink the private financial sector and reduce staffing in revenue so companies would have more money to reduce the cost of their products and taxes would go further.

guyfawkes5 · 06-07-2020 7:33pm

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

Aagain?

Again in the sense that the last financial crisis hit the poor hardest.

guyfawkes5 · 06-07-2020 7:39pm

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

If we had a flat tax, we could potentially shrink the private financial sector and reduce staffing in revenue so companies would have more money to reduce the cost of their products and taxes would go further.

Do you think any amount of staffing in Revenue is dedicated to the fact they have to multiply two numbers against your income instead of one?

Lux23 · 07-07-2020 10:01am

I wouldn't mind a flat tax if there were no loopholes for people that earn more to dodge taxes. But in order to police that you would need a Revenue service the size of Luxembourg.

Cyrus · 07-07-2020 10:26am

Lux23 wrote: »

I wouldn't mind a flat tax if there were no loopholes for people that earn more to dodge taxes. But in order to police that you would need a Revenue service the size of Luxembourg.

the whole point of a flat tax is that people who earn more dont use schemes to decrease their tax liability.

there was a report at one stage that the tax take on CAT was higher when the rate was 20% rather than when it increased to 33% because people were more likely to comply and not seek to avoid it.

guyfawkes5 · 07-07-2020 1:04pm

Having a flat tax means the more well off pay far less in tax. Renua are of the few political parties to support introducing it and similarly dress up their claims with terms like 'simplicity' and 'closing loopholes', but the reality is that they don't want high earners to pay as much tax as they do now. Tax loopholes have nothing to do with having one percentage or two percentages of income tax.

07-07-2020 1:41pm

guyfawkes5 wrote: »

Having a flat tax means the more well off pay far less in tax. .

Anyone on any half decent wage in this country is massively over taxed as it is so of course the aim would be for them to pay far less tax. They will still pay far more tax than lower a earner though.

I can’t see how anyone see punishing those who earn more is in anyway fair, they are basically working to earn 50 cent in the euro which is madness and no wonder people do everything they can to minimise tax, why wouldn’t you.

Ray Palmer · 07-07-2020 6:15pm

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Anyone on any half decent wage in this county is massively over taxed as it is so of course the aim would be for them to pay far less tax. They will still pay far more tax than lower a earner though.

I can’t see how anyone see punishing those who earn more is in anyway fair, they are basically working to earn 50 cent in the euro which is madness and no wonder people do everything they can to minimise tax, why wouldn’t you.

That is misleading. You don't really get taxed 50% on what you earn. You need to keep a certain of number of hours to get a wage where you get taxed on the entirety. You can't really cut off the wage and say 50% tax after that as it is a whole wage.

I do work less hours where I can due to tax deduction disincentive me. It also stops me investing in ideas where I would work and get taxed so much. So I do see your point but in normal situations it really isn't very relevant.

Yellow_Fern · 07-07-2020 6:21pm

Ray Palmer wrote: »

That is misleading. You don't really get taxed 50% on what you earn. You need to keep a certain of number of hours to get a wage where you get taxed on the entirety. You can't really cut off the wage and say 50% tax after that as it is a whole wage.

I do work less hours where I can due to tax deduction disincentive me. It also stops me investing in ideas where I would work and get taxed so much. So I do see your point but in normal situations it really isn't very relevant.

yes but you could be if you used up your lower rate of taxation with rental , pension or other investment income.

riclad · 07-07-2020 9:41pm

People in social housing pay rent depending on their income. The council asks for info on any adult who lives in the house, eg the annual wage of each person in the house. We need social housing for people on disability allowance and old age pensioners, not just single mothers.
I read some articles in the UK papers, it says due to the crisis, more people are looking to buy homes in small towns and outside city's since it seems
more company's are now allowing work from home due to the covid crisis.
Maybe property prices might fall in city's and this could make it easier for single people to
buy a home at a reasonable price

Astro127 · 07-07-2020 11:50pm

It's very possible to get a mortgage within year of saving for a couple just need 6 months of saving for the bank to see. Even if you have not much now just start
Would be a lot harder if trying to get one on your own .
You can also get a gift from parents if its possible I know alot are not able to , but alot of parents do help as they know how hard it is .

I'm planning on building on my partners land just outside dublin 250k that would get a good size house with space.

I wouldn't be able to afford dublin even if I could I wouldn't as houses are just crazy prices for nothing special and every house is the same with little to no garden .

Geuze · 08-07-2020 12:23am

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Anyone on any half decent wage in this county is massively over taxed as it is so of course the aim would be for them to pay far less tax.

My parents pay 9% on 50k - is that "over-taxed"???

I'd say it's lower than many countries.

Cyrus · 08-07-2020 7:11am

Geuze wrote: »

My parents pay 9% on 50k - is that "over-taxed"???

I'd say it's lower than many countries.

Low earners aren’t taxed very much here

Presume it’s 25k each ?

08-07-2020 9:08am

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Anyone on any half decent wage in this county is massively over taxed ..................

Geuze wrote: »

My parents pay 9% on 50k - is that "over-taxed"???

..............

If they are both working full time neither are on a half decent wage.

08-07-2020 9:15am

Geuze wrote: »

My parents pay 9% on 50k - is that "over-taxed"???

I'd say it's lower than many countries.

Exactly my point, lower earners pay little tax while higher earners are expected to carrying the majority on lower wages by being fleeced with tax

awec · 08-07-2020 9:21am

Savanna Refined Symbolism wrote: »

Exactly my point, lower earners pay little tax while higher earners are expected to carrying the majority on lower wages by being fleeced with tax

nox, remember that when you build your mcmansion up your boreen that you'll be able to do so is thanks to the taxpayers in Dublin, Cork and other large-tax-take counties paying their high taxes and seeing so much of their money sent west and south to subsidise the lifestyles of people like yourself.

Do you think it's unfair that low earning counties continue to enjoy spending more than they earn while the high earning counties are still expected to carry them while being fleeced with tax?

We have a progressive tax system, it means those who can afford to pay more do so. When we spend the money, we are also nice enough to ensure that rural counties are not expected to be self-sufficient.

How can someone in their 30s afford a house - PLEASE READ MOD WARNING IN OP

Comments