Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Next governments affect on housing market

2456789

Comments

  • #32
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    The Student wrote: »
    I expect the housing situation to get worse rather than any better. We don't have the funds to take debt on the States books.

    Unless we get a change in our bail out terms how will we pay for these properties.

    I fear that we have not learned the lessons of the past and if we build vast amounts of social housing we will end up the same issues we had in Tallaght, Ballymun, Limerick from the 1980's onwards those that became no go area's where people did not want to live.

    the gurriers are already all in their free accomodation for the most part. Its affordable housing for the working masses that I care about!


  • #33
    Assetbacked
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,969 ✭✭✭Assetbacked


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    They have not stated where they will get their money to fund their ideas. Explain how they expect money to be privately invested in the rental market when they are going to punish those that have? Do you think landlords are going to just accept it? I already sold one property and had plans to sell one more now I think I will sell them all. That is the reality they will create. Explain how that increases rental properties. They can't build property quickly enough to replace just what I am taking of the market in a few months let alone in a year

    They have claimed it has been through the relevant government departments and has been costed. Rather than relying on noble landlords like yourself, the State will start building properties again so that is where the supply will come from. There is no evidence that SF can't do it at this stage whereas we see that FG have minimal appetite to dramatically reduce rents and make house prices climb down from their crazy heights. FF maybe have experience of encouraging mass building so maybe they can deliver. I just can't rule out SF to not deliver a better-functioning housing market than leaving it solely to the realm of investors to deliver housing. I voted FG 1 and 2 but I don't have any problem with SF.


  • #34
    l5auim2pjnt8qx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭l5auim2pjnt8qx


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    Build quality is bad enough as it is without putting up chinese Tofu Dregs buildings.

    No more like this http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-04/23/c_137131533.htm

    or this :https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/23/a-skyscraper-in-two-weeks-does-chinas-building-boom-hide-bigger-problems.html


  • #35
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    handlemaster wrote: »
    You could be right. .. so a roll back on SF promises... surely not ..
    No, FG's fault obviously!


  • #36
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    Claw Hammer wrote: »
    The housing situation has turned around. Rents are now falling, the homeless numbers are dropping and house prices are leveling off. The next government will claim credit for the work done by the last one. The banks are still on life support and no government will be allowed to crash the housing market.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rents-fall-for-first-time-in-8-years-daft-ie-national-survey-finds-1.4161541


    "Headline national rents have fallen for the first time since the middle of 2012, according to a new report released on Tuesday by property website Daft.ie.

    According to the research, rents in December reduced incrementally, by just 0.1 per cent, compared to the previous three months. The decrease was driven by falling rents outside the five main cities.

    Inside the main urban centres, rents continued to rise by 0.7 per cent across the three months, although they increased by a lower rate in Dublin than the city average for the rest of the State. Rents in the capital increased by 0.4 per cent."

    so rip off rents in dublin are still increasing! I suppose there is a limit to what people can afford to pay, without starting to sell off organs :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,781 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Everyone needs to relax here, sf aren't in government yet, and if they do go into government, they ll be lucky to implement half of their manifesto, our housing issues are extremely complex, it certainly won't be solved by the incoming government


  • #38
    l5auim2pjnt8qx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭l5auim2pjnt8qx


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    Doesn't matter if the construction companies are irish or chinese or from the moon. It is the locally hired irish managers that will be the ones pulling the strokes and fast ones.

    Anyway, with EU procurement rules can you cannnot narrow it down to companies from a certain country, let alone specify chinese only. You are talking out of your arse.

    No need to be a Dick ,it would be more beneficial to the post it you could give more than one line digs.


  • #39
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,346 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Assetbacked wrote: »
    They have claimed it has been through the relevant government departments and has been costed. Rather than relying on noble landlords like yourself, the State will start building properties again so that is where the supply will come from. There is no evidence that SF can't do it at this stage whereas we see that FG have minimal appetite to dramatically reduce rents and make house prices climb down from their crazy heights. FF maybe have experience of encouraging mass building so maybe they can deliver. I just can't rule out SF to not deliver a better-functioning housing market than leaving it solely to the realm of investors to deliver housing. I voted FG 1 and 2 but I don't have any problem with SF.

    They can claim away but they literally can't get the information before they are in government. They did their own costings not the civil servants

    The EU regulation and planning laws don't disappear because SF says so. They can't just build social housing and be done. They know thus and they rely on the public not knowing.

    How long will it take? While landlords leave the market and rental stock disappears there will be less to rent. This known consequences. It will take them at least a year to build even one extra property and where do the people live then? No place to rent and no place to live. That is SF plan.

    After they build these mass housing what are the areas going to be like? The worst neighbourhoods are still former council housing estates. That is the problem with all social house around the world, they become slums and take decades to gentrify if you are lucky. Want to make another larger Fingas or Ballymun? That is what we will end up with.

    They also have to go against our constitution about ownership of property to stop the state from seizing it. Put there due to how English rule worked. The irony the SF would break this right is lost on most. They want to dictate what the irish people do with their own property.


  • #40
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    the morons plan loads of 4-5 floor development down on the irigh glass bottle site. Its the vision like this, that has people commuting 4-5 hours a day , instead of 4-5 minutes on a bike or public transport from ther IGBS to the mass employment in the docklands!

    Massively curtailing development and then wondering why there is a homes and funding shortage! LOL!

    they can also house tens of thousands in dublin port, if they move it, as has been discussed before...


  • #41
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,179 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    beggars_bush wrote: »
    Well, there isn't going to be any large amount of houses built for 3+ years - planning, land issues, financing

    we don't have the manpower to build loads of new houses

    SF would say that there’s plenty of construction capacity but that it’s misdirected towards building offices, hotels, student accommodation and build for rent housing.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,153 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rents-fall-for-first-time-in-8-years-daft-ie-national-survey-finds-1.4161541


    "Headline national rents have fallen for the first time since the middle of 2012, according to a new report released on Tuesday by property website Daft.ie.

    According to the research, rents in December reduced incrementally, by just 0.1 per cent, compared to the previous three months. The decrease was driven by falling rents outside the five main cities.

    Inside the main urban centres, rents continued to rise by 0.7 per cent across the three months, although they increased by a lower rate in Dublin than the city average for the rest of the State. Rents in the capital increased by 0.4 per cent."

    so rip off rents in dublin are still increasing! I suppose there is a limit to what people can afford to pay, without starting to sell off organs :rolleyes:
    Rents are dropping in Dublin. Those statistics are skewed by new releases. When existing properties are turned around the new rent is often lower than the old. There are properties let under market value which had 4% increase applied and that shows up as rising rent but it is nothing of the sort. It takes up to two years for changes in the rental market to show in published statistics. The reality is that rents have stooped rising since early last year ad are now falling back.


  • #43
    BluePlanet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,342 ✭✭✭BluePlanet


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    They also have to go against our constitution about ownership of property to stop the state from seizing it. Put there due to how English rule worked. The irony the SF would break this right is lost on most. They want to dictate what the irish people do with their own property.
    Rubbish.
    Private property is in the constitution but is balanced with the "public good".
    High rent represents a transfer of wealth from working people to owners.

    It's gotten so unbalanced now that high rent is contrary to the public good.
    https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/rent-freeze-4929058-Dec2019/


  • #44
    l5auim2pjnt8qx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭l5auim2pjnt8qx


    TheBoyConor wrote: »
    Doesn't matter if the construction companies are irish or chinese or from the moon. It is the locally hired irish managers that will be the ones pulling the strokes and fast ones.

    Anyway, with EU procurement rules can you cannnot narrow it down to companies from a certain country, let alone specify chinese only. You are talking out of your arse.

    To answer you arseways Eu procurement line, it states The EU law on procurement requires public bodies to open up higher-value contract opportunities to bids across European Union. ........Meaning it requires EU countries to open up contracts to more European countries it doesn't state that we have to pick a European country just consider them in the running for Builder/developer Contracts if that's what you are trying to say?.......No doubt another FG supporter licking there wounds from the beating of the electorate..


  • #45
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,346 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    BluePlanet wrote: »
    Rubbish.
    Private property is in the constitution but is balanced with the "public good".
    High rent represents a transfer of wealth from working people to owners.

    It's gotten so unbalanced now that high rent is contrary to the public good.
    https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/rent-freeze-4929058-Dec2019/

    That is on an individual level on a particular piece of property. A case has to be made on an individual property. You are suggesting that the government can deem all privately owned rented property can be compulsory purchased. That is against our consititusion and EU law. That is why they can't. The article is an opinion and would be challenged and have to have a ruling in a court. You have to realise many people rent out property they inherited which would be family homes and some plan to live in them in the future too. That is severely a step to curtail individuals rights that won't get the support you think. It is the act of a totatarism government.

    Simply even if they win their case it will take years to get a judgment. During that time it will stop investment, not freeze rents or change rights. You can have your social ideals all you like about wealth transfer but reality will remain.

    According to you the time and effort my family spent saving buildings and putting them to use again os wealth transfer! We wouldn't do it if we weren't going to be paid and there would be no service to use if we didn't. Somebody has to get paid to do the work so you propose the government pay people to do this and self finance.


  • #46
    CrabRevolution
    Registered Users Posts: 2,796 ✭✭✭CrabRevolution


    Marcusm wrote: »
    SF would say that there’s plenty of construction capacity but that it’s misdirected towards building offices, hotels, student accommodation and build for rent housing.


    So is their plan to present a blank cheque to the developers in order to outbid those who want hotels, offices etc. built?


  • #47
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Marcusm wrote: »
    SF would say that there’s plenty of construction capacity but that it’s misdirected towards building offices, hotels, student accommodation and build for rent housing.
    And does that mean all of that has to stop so they can fulfil their promises?


  • #48
    Saudades
    Registered Users Posts: 378 ✭✭Saudades


    Kamari Inexpensive Theory wrote: »
    Moving on with a New government, a hugh import of foreign builders/developers are needed preferably Chinese obviously with a good track record in building with a contract to take on 50% young or Irish citizens as senior or as apprenticeships which will hopefully keep building and jobs going for the next 10 years and house our homeless.

    Where are all these "hugh import of foreign builders/developers are needed preferably Chinese" going to live though?
    And once they taste the quality of Irish life compared to Chinese life, how many of them will return to China after their contracts are finished?
    They would have to be building a significant number of extra properties just to house themselves first.


  • #49
    Saudades
    Registered Users Posts: 378 ✭✭Saudades


    Marcusm wrote: »
    SF would say that there’s plenty of construction capacity but that it’s misdirected towards building offices, hotels, student accommodation and build for rent housing.

    I do agree that we should be looking at the existing construction capacity rather than a mass import, however, the student accommodation is needed though because without it the students would just be competing with regular renters for regular private property.


  • #50
    enricoh
    Registered Users Posts: 4,808 ✭✭✭enricoh


    CrabRevolution wrote: »
    So is their plan to present a blank cheque to the developers in order to outbid those who want hotels, offices etc. built?

    Double digit construction inflation in the pipeline!


  • #51
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Short term : house buying stops dead while people sit back and wait to see

    sf government :
    lower incomes stop buying houses alltogether at the prospect of a free house
    medium incomes stuck with property values flatlining or contracting slightly.
    Upper incomes look into selling up before any kind of crash, taxation, seizure or wealth levy rolls round.

    non sf government :
    lower incomes buying increased due to lack of free housing on the horizon,
    medium incomes buying, those who own already not selling as they cant compete with new properties and HTB schemes
    upper incomes continue as before.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    l5auim2pjnt8qx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭l5auim2pjnt8qx


    Saudades wrote: »
    Where are all these "hugh import of foreign builders/developers are needed preferably Chinese" going to live though?
    And once they taste the quality of Irish life compared to Chinese life, how many of them will return to China after their contracts are finished?
    They would have to be building a significant number of extra properties just to house themselves first.

    If they are build a hospital in 10 days for 1,000 people and build a skyscraper in 2 weeks I don't envisage building temporary housing if materials and some land are provided by the state would take very long .Plenty of land sitting empty waiting on fast tracked developments that have never materialized in Dublin.
    The temporary housing may well last longer than some of the crap that was thrown up in the Celtic Tiger Years...LOL


    And will they stay here who knows? does anyone who comes to our country to work settle here full time?.


  • #53
    enricoh
    Registered Users Posts: 4,808 ✭✭✭enricoh


    Will funding for developers building estates dry up if Sinn Fein get in?
    Any jitters about it n the purse strings tighten I reckon.


  • #54
    thomasdylan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 514 ✭✭✭thomasdylan


    Are people so reactionary that after seeing a field hospital being constructed quickly in China they think the solution to Irelands housing problems are getting a load of Chinese construction companies in to build.

    You can ignore human rights for workers and throw up a load of tofu dregs. Standards of building in China can be really poor and there have been loads of scandals about it.


  • #55
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    thomasdylan wrote: »
    Are people so reactionary that after seeing a field hospital being constructed quickly in China they think the solution to Irelands housing problems are getting a load of Chinese construction companies in to build.

    You can ignore human rights for workers and throw up a load of tofu dregs. Standards of building in China can be really poor and there have been loads of scandals about it.
    I think it's more a case of where these foreign workers will come from!


  • #56
    J_1980
    Registered Users Posts: 614 ✭✭✭J_1980


    Nothing will happen. 20k, 25k home pa. max output.
    Ireland is just uncompetitive in attracting key resources (nurses, doctors, construction). Only the MNC can pay but they’re not Irish (American largely).

    Anyone mentioning Chinese construction here is totally clueless. You’ve seen pics of the “hospital”? Looks more like containers. Poles and Romanians coming here? Their economies are booming, you can earn more on on German construction sites on top of that.


  • #57
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    The only experience of SF planning I've seen directly is Clonburris, where they massively jacked up the % of social housing and basically voted to create a huge public housing estate with little in the way of transport planning or opportunities.


  • #58
    l5auim2pjnt8qx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭l5auim2pjnt8qx


    thomasdylan wrote: »
    Are people so reactionary that after seeing a field hospital being constructed quickly in China they think the solution to Irelands housing problems are getting a load of Chinese construction companies in to build.

    You can ignore human rights for workers and throw up a load of tofu dregs. Standards of building in China can be really poor and there have been loads of scandals about it.

    Is it always an Irish reaction to look at the negatives and condemn the positives, to rely on Irish Developers of the past of the most dodgy building years to build solid safe homes.

    We should be looking to China to see they built and city of the future in a 20 year timeframe and housed 22 million citizens,a cashless city and built an airport on the sea, China is just one example I'm sure other advancing countries could also be thrown into the debate.if we could also get young Irish builders working along side them as mentioned Apprenticeships , we could learn alot from them.


  • #59
    l5auim2pjnt8qx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭l5auim2pjnt8qx


    hmmm wrote: »
    The only experience of SF planning I've seen directly is Clonburris, where they massively jacked up the % of social housing and basically voted to create a huge public housing estate with little in the way of transport planning or opportunities.

    Most Dublin people lived and came from Public housing in the 70's,80's ,most people had good neighbours and lived relatively safe until the boom years hit.

    Government support dropped off hughly ,gardai numbers dwindled ,lack of access to many sporting facilities , councils rehousing bad tenants in a rotation chain lead to the Crime ridding estates we are seeing now.

    If Councils had a zero tolerance in re housing bad tenants and injected large funding to those/these estates we may of had a different outcome.


  • #60
    Saudades
    Registered Users Posts: 378 ✭✭Saudades


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    sf government :
    lower incomes stop buying houses alltogether at the prospect of a free house

    Upper incomes look into selling up before any kind of crash, taxation, seizure or wealth levy rolls round.

    Lower incomes won't buy houses because they can't afford to buy houses and they are prevented due to the Central banks 3.5 income to loan ratio - that's going to be the case with any government.

    And if the upper incomes sell their houses, where are they going to live?


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    mrslancaster
    Registered Users Posts: 1,754 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    .... How they propose to pay for new housing without private investment has never been answered. They effectively never had a plan and just told the people what they wanted..

    What about the 1% wealth tax on assets over one million? Lots of businesses & farmers would be in that category. There could be lots of properties in parts of the bigger cities there too.


Advertisement