How do we get real about housing in Ireland?

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Housing has become a political football over the last 5 years and last night nearly brought down the government.

It is becoming a real problem and a massively divisive. It's a problem for our citizens in terms of affordability and a problem for continued growth also as Dublin now ranked 72 our of 82 in terms of a destination for employees.

Over a decade now our FG government have gone from owning the biggest property portfolio outside China to paying €1bn a year in rent for social housing and the minister responsible has had two near misses in votes of confidence, but our laissez faire Taoiseach appears happy to leave him in place.

We're building only 20% of the homes we need to sustain the population growth, so there's massive pressure on people to share, commute excessive distances, etc. and now the ideology (a polite way of saying incompetence/corruption) is beginning to cost us over €1bn a year in rent for social homes while the list grows continuously.

The problem is that there's no transparent plan, nor has there been one since NAMA started to sell off the family jewels. There's no point in time that the today's growing pains will have been worth it because the only plan seems to be to chase the market upwards, following the upwards only trajectory of the rigged market.

I'd have far more confidence in a government that was able to say "here's the plan, look - this shit-storm is part of the plan, but here's how it will pay off", but instead we have soundbites of how it's "working" as homelessness increases, the rent paid for the "working poor" by the tax payer increases and rent increases.

Last nights pantomime in the Dail was depressing - there would be more logic in the Gaiety - no-one seems to want to fix the problem. We hear it's a;; about supply, but continue to build homes we can't afford in locations that aren't connected and the ONLY common thread seems to be that the private sector developers are making more money out of the sector that is necessary.

We're all talk about climate change, but if anyone does the maths, with the current rate of population growth, immigration and vs home building we will face a situation in 2025 where effectively 70% of the population will need HAP, RA or a social house and/or be forced to commute 2 hours both ways to work. Those lucky enough to be able to afford a home will effectively spend 75% of their disposable income on rent or mortgage.
 


Buchaill Dana

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
12,752
Vote FFG out. They have made it clear the vulture funds take priority over the people.

If tweedledum get a smack on it, tweedledee will take note.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Vote FFG out. They have made it clear the vulture funds take priority over the people.

If tweedledum get a smack on it, tweedledee will take note.
The last 5 years has been a wet dream for FF - they got to continue 90% of their own policies, but FG have taken the flak (and rightly so). If FF get another 5 years the damage will be irreparable for 25 years (the length of the lease we're now paying for luxury apartments in a prime residential area for social homes).

The solution is massively controversial - built units we can afford on a massive scale - but there's no money in that for developers, vulture funds, etc., so FG have made Eoghan Murphy, the most arrogant and seemingly incompetent of the crop, responsible so he can pretend not to see that option.
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
19,404
The problem is that there's no transparent plan, nor has there been one since NAMA started to sell off the family jewels. There's no point in time that the today's growing pains will have been worth it because the only plan seems to be to chase the market upwards, following the upwards only trajectory of the rigged market.

The solution to housing is best seen in the apartments that are built in vinnea which are rented to all strata in society and are of an extreamly high standard. We should take this model and replace in Ireland.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,672
The solution is massively controversial - built units we can afford on a massive scale - but there's no money in that for developers, vulture funds, etc., so FG have made Eoghan Murphy, the most arrogant and seemingly incompetent of the crop, responsible so he can pretend not to see that option.
Sorry, what's your solution?
 

Baron von Biffo

Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
18,175
[...]

The solution is massively controversial - built units we can afford on a massive scale - but there's no money in that for developers, vulture funds, etc., so FG have made Eoghan Murphy, the most arrogant and seemingly incompetent of the crop, responsible so he can pretend not to see that option.
Two questions.

Where will you get the money?

Where will you get the builders?
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Sorry, what's your solution?
Since this first became a slomo car crash in 2014 I've suggestions that the government should be building 10s of 1000s of units on state owned land (O'Devaney Gardens would have been ideal) based on a 4x4 build model around a courtyard, built to a cookie-cutter model by any number of international contractors at about €150k a unit fully fitted. Basically the model many aparthotels use across the US for interstate workers.

Purpose build social homes on publically owned land, start small - 1000 units, then repeat as necessary. Each home developed means one less rented from vultures.

Also, actively move people already in social homes that they have no need for - we have 10k units in or around Dublin and over half are under occupied, but downsizing is optional and many believe (based on a degree of precedent) that if they hold on to the property that they will be able to pass it on to their kids (the precedent being where kids that have moved back to "care" for their parent(s) have often just continued to occupy the home after the parents have passed away).
 

Ruff says Flaherty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 18, 2011
Messages
1,508
Our social welfare bill is over €20 billion. That's an obscene amount. The tax payer is being screwed by the elites, but also footing the bill for those that won't work and want hand outs. In another country there would be riots.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Two questions.

Where will you get the money?

Where will you get the builders?
Where are we going to get the money when the 10k homeless are finally housed in luxury rented accommodation? That's Plan A and B right now, so like it or not we're going to have to find the money.

Builders are easy - international contractors like Hyundai, Gama, etc., could have 5000 workers in Ireland in a month and churn out 1000 units of a cookie cutter model in less than a month. Modern building technology has moved on without our lads paying any attention.
 

Baron von Biffo

Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
18,175
Where are we going to get the money when the 10k homeless are finally housed in luxury rented accommodation? That's Plan A and B right now, so like it or not we're going to have to find the money.
Governments don't have the luxury of saying 'we're going to have to find it'. They have to say we'll provide funds for A by cancelling B, C and D.

What would you cancel to fund your proposal?

Builders are easy - international contractors like Hyundai, Gama, etc., could have 5000 workers in Ireland in a month and churn out 1000 units of a cookie cutter model in less than a month. Modern building technology has moved on without our lads paying any attention.
Well I can't see any potential for problems if we hire hit and run companies to build houses here and bugger off again.

I'm sure that all such units would be built to the best possible standards even though the builders would be out or reach of our courts by the time any problems manifested themselves.

And of course the 5,000 builders would live in tents on the Curragh while the project was ongoing.[/QUOTE]
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Governments don't have the luxury of saying 'we're going to have to find it'. They have to say we'll provide funds for A by cancelling B, C and D.

What would you cancel to fund your proposal?



Well I can't see any potential for problems if we hire hit and run companies to build houses here and bugger off again.

I'm sure that all such units would be built to the best possible standards even though the builders would be out or reach of our courts by the time any problems manifested themselves.

And of course the 5,000 builders would live in tents on the Curragh while the project was ongoing.

I genuinely despair when I read posts like this, but at least it explains why we continue to elect politicians who can't/won't solve real problems.

The government knows that under its plan it will need to fund more and more rented accommodation, but no one is wondering where that money will come from, because it'll be a crisis, who could have ever imagined??? Well many have been watching this happen in slomo since Michael D Higgins signed the REITs legislation in 2014, a cynical and low key move to set the scene for this carnage.

Now, all we need to do is defer some of the capital spending plans for 12 - 18 months (roads, the Childrens' Hospital, broadband, etc.) to get on top of this, build the first 6000 units and then use the rent from these, plus the cost avoided on renting from VFs to fund another 2000 each year - but of course that's too radical because, well, there's no margin or rent for the lads at the club.

Hyundai and Gama are not "hit and run" companies - and there are many more - they are trusted contractors used by private companies and governments across the globe to build airports, ports, massive road projects, army bases, etc. - again, the problem is that they don't work on the sleeveen model. Their employees will live in portakabins for the duration, like they do across the world over.
 

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,727
Nationalise the entire housing stock. Nationalise the entire building construction sector. Roll out full land value tax. Adopt efficient building technologies.

 

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,727
Take now... some hard-headed business man, who has no theories, but knows how to make money. Say to him: "Here is a little village; in ten years it will be a great city—in ten years the railroad will have taken the place of the stage coach, the electric light of the candle; it will abound with all the machinery and improvements that so enormously multiply the effective power of labor. Will in ten years, interest be any higher?" He will tell you, "No!" "Will the wages of the common labor be any higher...?" He will tell you, "No the wages of common labor will not be any higher..." "What, then, will be higher?" "Rent, the value of land. Go, get yourself a piece of ground, and hold possession." And if, under such circumstances, you take his advice, you need do nothing more. You may sit down and smoke your pipe; you may lie around like the lazzaroni of Naples or the leperos of Mexico; you may go up in a balloon or down a hole in the ground; and without doing one stroke of work, without adding one iota of wealth to the community, in ten years you will be rich! In the new city you may have a luxurious mansion, but among its public buildings will be an almshouse.
 

Buchaill Dana

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
12,752
Governments don't have the luxury of saying 'we're going to have to find it'. They have to say we'll provide funds for A by cancelling B, C and D.

What would you cancel to fund your proposal?
They aren't not building affordable housing because of cost. They are doing so because of ideology.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
They aren't not building affordable housing because of cost. They are doing so because of ideology.
No, ideology is the mask they're using to hide the greed and corruption.

The country is funding vulture funds and REITs like no other country in Europe....over €1bn being siphoned off the tax take into private landlords pockets, but the system rigged for specific landlords that NAMA sold to at fire sale process.

The media call it ideology, but it's either massive incompetence or it's corrupt, and I think Murphy left there only to make us believe it's incompetence.
 

Buchaill Dana

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
12,752
No, ideology is the mask they're using to hide the greed and corruption.

The country is funding vulture funds and REITs like no other country in Europe....over €1bn being siphoned off the tax take into private landlords pockets, but the system rigged for specific landlords that NAMA sold to at fire sale process.

The media call it ideology, but it's either massive incompetence or it's corrupt, and I think Murphy left there only to make us believe it's incompetence.
Its ideology insofar as the Government were given an option between a housing market for the people, a housing market for the vultures or a mix. They 100% sided with the vultures.

Corruption is a different conversation, but the housing market is operating exactly as designed
 

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,727
All of that is a natural consequence of some 60 years of speculation. It will continue as long as the paradigm is unchanged.
 

Baron von Biffo

Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
18,175
I genuinely despair when I read posts like this, but at least it explains why we continue to elect politicians who can't/won't solve real problems.

The government knows that under its plan it will need to fund more and more rented accommodation, but no one is wondering where that money will come from, because it'll be a crisis, who could have ever imagined??? Well many have been watching this happen in slomo since Michael D Higgins signed the REITs legislation in 2014, a cynical and low key move to set the scene for this carnage.

Now, all we need to do is defer some of the capital spending plans for 12 - 18 months (roads, the Childrens' Hospital, broadband, etc.) to get on top of this, build the first 6000 units and then use the rent from these, plus the cost avoided on renting from VFs to fund another 2000 each year - but of course that's too radical because, well, there's no margin or rent for the lads at the club.

Hyundai and Gama are not "hit and run" companies - and there are many more - they are trusted contractors used by private companies and governments across the globe to build airports, ports, massive road projects, army bases, etc. - again, the problem is that they don't work on the sleeveen model. Their employees will live in portakabins for the duration, like they do across the world over.
The difference between being a politician and talking about politics on the internet is that there are consequences for the former.

You can glibly say let's not build roads or the NCH or provide rural broadband until my pet project is completed and the worst that will happen is people will disagree with you. The government that tries to do though, that will have to face the voters.

Then the people who've had to do without roads, the NCH and rural broadband will have their say and the government will be turfed out.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom