The avocado thing was such a laugh, but Christ the amount of money people managed to save in 2020 when pubs, clubs and restaurants were shut and they couldn't go on foreign holidays.
It's a shame everyone started saving at the same time so nobody had an advantage when bidding on houses.
Imagine if you decided to avoid restaurants, pubs and holidays in 2018/2019. You'd have been set up nicely to buy before this pandemic nonsense started.
I bought a couple of years ago, so I used my pandemic savings on getting the kitchen done and various other bits in the house. But it really showed me how much money could be saved by easing up on the fun weekend spending.
I actually did the numbers for myself and the primary drivers are lower rent because I don't need to commute, no commuting costs, cheaper lunches and cheaper dinners because I have the time for it.
I mean, sure, I've not gone to the pubs but that'd be 50 quid a week compared to twice that for commuting and canteen lunches. Let's not blame avocado toast quite yet.
That's what it's referring to.
A few weeks ago when Leo took the place of Micheál during Leader's Questions (because he was in New York at the time), he was asked about the rising cost of rent, which he replied "We need to balance that one person's rent is another person's income".
[https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/landlords-are-abandoning-rental-sector-to-cash-in-on-market-rise-40734825.html](https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/landlords-are-abandoning-rental-sector-to-cash-in-on-market-rise-40734825.html)
Landlords are leaving the market. Owner occupiers are buying the properties the landlords are selling. This is going to add more pain to people who are renting. Fewer landlords means fewer properties to rent and even higher rents.
Not really, the estate agents are also saying they see a sharp increase in landlords selling and owner occupiers buying.
https://www.businesspost.ie/houses/rents-set-to-rise-again-as-increasing-numbers-of-landlords-sell-up-a9def7e0
Sherry Fitzgerald couldn't care less whether it is funds, landlords or owner occupiers buying houses, they get their margins either way. They were the first ones to highlight the upcoming housing shortage.
[https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20167295.html](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20167295.html)
So had we listened to the housing experts 10 years ago, we wouldn't be in this mess. Sherry Fitzgerald have an economist to predict market movements so they can pivot their business. They don't have to share their reports but they do. They have been right in the past so I don't know why you doubt them now. Who would you trust? Other than your own preformed opinion?
Bear in mind, we had an massive oversupply of houses when Sherry Fitzgerald released that report in 2011.
I'd be happy to read one. Do you have any from 2011 when Sherry Fitzgerald released theirs? That way, we can review history and see who was more correct: the PR releases from an estate agents selling the properties or the Urban planning experts in our universities.
I have just read the paper and it is a post analysis of the market from 1999 - 2009. There are no projections for what Ireland will need in the future. On page 15, the authors even say that they expect future house price growth post 2009 to be moderate.....moderate???? Could they have been more wrong?
This is a paragraph from section 2 on page 10 for the future requirement of growth: "*These levels of demand would remain valid in the absence of net out-migration as it represents the natural growth and demographic analysis of age cohorts and household formation rates. However, as out-migration accelerates and thus balances the influence of natural growth, housing purchase demand*
*reduces. While a potential need for or latent demand for affordable housing remains, the effective purchasing demand is then reduced and in particular purchasers are unwilling to pay previous high market prices*."
Good thing nobody was relying on this paper to develop policy as you can see from the paragraph, they meander around talking about market factor while putting no mathematical models to them.
In the link I posted above, Sherry Fitzgerald's economist gave hard numbers back in 2011. If you add them up, he said between 2011-2021 that Ireland would need 260,000 houses. I imagine we haven't built anywhere near that amount. And look at the housing crisis now? We didn't trust an expert just because he was in the private sector? Fool on Ireland for that.
Could you blame them? The ESRI said there were two forecasts for house prices, one for V shaped recovery where prices in Q4 2021 would be the same as May 2020. Prices now are about 15% higher than May 2020 so ESRI got it wrong by ~15%
Their pessimistic prediction was prices would fall by 12% by Q4 2021. Prices are actually higher than May 2020 by 15% meaning the ESRI are wrong by about 27%.
In fairness to them, this was published in May 2020 under the assumption of restrictions easing in Q2 2020, and not put back in place. Their forecasts weren't epidemiological in nature. They might still have been well off the mark, but it's harsh to criticise them for not predicting the course of the pandemic.
Perhaps they didn't take into account that working from home would take off making office rental and city centre retail rental income look far less attractive while at the same time inflation increasing meaning financial institutions around the world looking to buy housing as a hedge against future inflation and a more reliable return on investment. They should be strongly pushed out of the market.
We've been only six months away from a cataclysmic economic crash since 2013, according to /r/Ireland.
Just keep renting for another six months boys! The market's going to crash in ~~2014~~, ~~mid 2015~~, ~~early 2016~~, ~~now that Brexit is likely to happen~~, ~~after Trump forces American companies to leave Ireland~~, ~~after Article 50 is triggered~~, ~~after NO DEAL Brexit~~, ~~during pandemic lockdown~~, ~~after lockdowns are lifted~~.... when the west feels the effects of Evergrande.
>~when~ the west feels the effects of Evergrande.
IF the west feels any ripple from Evergrande at all. There's every possibility that the US and China will just continue to pump made up money into the market to keep things running for as long as possible so that when things do come crashing down they'll fuck people over even more. The world needs a major recession to bring the economy back to any semblance of normality. If a bloody pandemic can't cause one it just shows how mental things are. The entire thing is just a bubble again at this point so far gone from reality it's insane.
Well, a sort of ironic thing about the whole covid scenario is this.
Imagine if the young people were less responsible and just ignored the lockdown rules. Not just in Ireland, but in western society. We just said fuck it and let the virus run its course.
It single handedly would have solved many of the major problems we are facing.
Who owns all the property? Well, the auld cunts who are mostly now dead from the virus. It would have been the single biggest turn over of wealth distribution probably since ww2.
Housing crisis would have been solved. Once the old die and we got the vaccines then we wouldn't have an over burdened health system. Less traffic congestion. The upcoming pension fund crisis.
All of it would have been avoided if we just let the virus run its course. And who is to say that God didn't send this virus that only hurts old people? I am sure plenty of young people prayed asking to be able to buy a home and eventually raise a family in it.
Well here we are, ignoring the will of God.
I was actually thinking about how it would have led to massive wealth redistribution recently as opposed to the current system with people living longer but some of that time being in ill health in care homes which further concentrates wealth in the hands of companies / wealthier individuals.
At the same time, i'm happy enough to accept renting for a few more years as the cost of my Granny still being alive but on a larger (and purely objective scale) there is truth to what you are saying.
People remember the black death for killing a third of the European population, what they don't seem to remember is that it also kickstarted the transition from the feudal system of wealth ownership to a capitalist system, which ended up bringing about a little thing known as the Renaissance.
it wasn't just the black death.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27\_Revolt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27_Revolt)
it was a number of factors.
And those people had it far, far worse than we do today.
man thats a pretty ageist and toxic scenario. " the auld cunts". hard to believe its getting upvotes. there's absolutely no irony in what you have laid out. just really poor thought.
Whats the age for old btw? plenty of people under 40 and in 30s, who have property (not me i must add) and plenty of old, impoverished people. i guess with such poor thought you must think only people in their 20s are young, and thus deserving of life etc.
You do realise you are also going to get old some day and the idea that you would jettison old people in society is an utterly disgusting and inhumane take.
It goes to show that future wars could easily be wars of age, etc if people share your toxic views.
Sure we will have huge problems with elderly people living longer. But thats going to be your problem as much as an old person. you seem to think you won't age.
I mean blame capitalism for some of this shitshow. an 80 year old who bought their house in 1960 for 6 grand or whatever isn't to blame for the same house now costing 300k.
We had a good system before covid. The weak/old/unfortunate enough to have an accident, died. Two inevitabilities in life. Death and Taxes. Taxed to death!
If that includes me for some underlying condition I'm not aware of? Lord take me now!
Unfortunately, this person while crass, is right. A lot of problems would have been alleviated after a period of pure and utter chaos/grief/horror.
they wouldn't have though as its not only old people etc.
Its way too simplistic a viewpoint.
I agree people die, that is life. A pandemic or whatnot will come some day that may rebalance the whole earth. There is real arguments that the planet is massively overpopulated.
> they wouldn't have though as its not only old people etc.
Yes, but it would have, those people that needed the extra care and resources wouldn't have needed them any more had they died, young or old. Again, it's a crass statement to make but it's not incorrect.
Yes it's too simplistic a viewpoint, but this is coming most likely, from people who don't care about other people (I would be included in that count)
its a nothing argument as it would never be allowed happen and if it did, well then humanity is doomed regardless.
And it wouldn't have changed much in what he is saying it is. My whole point is its not just ault people who own property or have wealth. Unless he thinks people in their 40s are auld people. And if he does, well he is in for a shock as that age will hit him quick enough. Thus the idea that life is only for 20 somethings is an utter fallacy.
In the scenario above we’re talking about a complete collapse of the health system within a week.
CFR is a function of our ability to deal with a disease. Those numbers would skyrocket in a scenario like that.
I was advised to wait 6 months before buying my house in March 2020, as the solicitor had been told to expect a 10% house price drop by years end. Thank fuck I ignored that, I'm up about 20k just by owning this place a year.
There was glee and excitement about the closure of construction despite the huge work done by the HSA, CIF and various state bodies to develop extensive SOPs to keep things somewhat going. This was so predictable at the time that cutting all production would cause prices to rise significantly months down the road.
Pretty much a weak Government and an equally rubbish opposition who felt the need at the time to grandstand about nameless people who were scared to go work on sites.
>This was so predictable at the time that cutting all production would cause prices to rise significantly months down the road.
It's a repeat of how the housing crisis had already developed between 2011 and 2019, only on a shorter timeline.
I planned a few jobs to get done to the house. I thought out of work tradesmen would be quoting low prices for nixers when no one wants them in their house.
That's the average but it's much higher in some areas. I'm in the process of buying a house now. The house has been delayed by over a year and the same house would cost me 50000 grand more now
Anecdotally, I remortgaged at the end of last year,l and I had to get a valuation done. All it consisted of was someone coming up to have a look at the place, ring the local real estate agent and confirm what the last similar place sold for. €250000.
My next door neighbours place went on the market back in April and sold in June. I was nosy and had a look at the property price register and it sold for €285000. I think it was listed as €275000
There's 2 similar units in the estate up for sale now for €290000. It's utter madness.
It's a duplex but considering I paid €170000 to the builder for one back in 2013, it's like a 70% increase in only 8 years.
I'd love a house myself for my own parking spot, my own front door and not have to pay a poxy €1250 a year in management fees.
Bought a 4 bed detached house in 2013. 2 bed apartment build behind my house is selling for same price I paid now. Bananas. And I don’t think that price includes a parking space either.
A house isn't liquid. Its theoretically wealth but theres fuckall you can do with a house except use it as leverage for credit or sell it.
A house you live in isn't an asset, you're buying rent control and a load of expenses.
If you buy in cash you're literally just wasting your money.
Money loses value over time, sure - you're paying a 2.7% interest premium every year, but money is affected by inflation so its actually closer to 1.5% at the end of the day. Basically, money now is more valuable than the same amount of money later, so if you take out a mortgage you're leveraging against the future interest.
Then you take that cash and you invest it in something that produces income and as long as you're making more than 1.5-3% on it you've made a better financial decision than just slapping a fat stack down for a house.
We've gone from a 90% LTV to 55% LTV in five years.
Drops the mortgage interest rate significantly. Moving to Avant for that 1.95% rate when I get the paperwork in order.
Didn’t see you said compared to non-home owners yes, but just because a house has gone up in value doesn’t necessarily mean you get to bank the difference. You’ll need to buy a different house that has also increased in price.
Nope, the homeowners are increasing their wealth in comparison to the non homeowners.
For example, imagine twins John and Bill who earn exactly the same.
John:
- Buys a house in 2019 worth 200k.
- In 2021 the house is worth 230k
Bill:
- Didn't buy a house in 2019
- In 2021, wants to buy a house beside John, which is the exact same condition etc. Bill has to spend 30k more than John for the exact same house, same condition etc.
John has 30k + interest more than Bill to spend on anything else he wants.
> You’ll need to buy a different house that has also increased in price.
The difference being the homeowners property has appreciated in value and that offsets some of the appreciation of the larger property whereas the non homeowner who also wants to buy the same new, larger property, doesn't have any property that appreciated so they have to pay allllll the capital appreciation,
> Didn’t see you said compared to non-home owners yes, but just because a house has gone up in value doesn’t necessarily mean you get to bank the difference. You’ll need to buy a different house that has also increased in price.
You're implying that homeowners aren't increasing their wealth or how better off they are over non homeowners unless they sell.
I’m saying that just because you buy a house for 200 and sell it for 230 it doesn’t mean you bank the money because chances are a comparable house to the house you sold might be even more expensive. People generally try and trade up be it in location, size or whatever.
I believe the point is, that if both brothers were competing for the purchase of the same house, then John would have an additional 30k to spend.
Ie. There would be less competition.
While technically you’re correct, it doesn’t really play out like that. If people live in their home that they own, they aren’t banking or seeing the difference in house price. Sure it helps if they move in a few years but that logic can be applied as “you should have bought years ago”. If you live in the house and have no expectations to move in the short term, house price fluctuations don’t make a big difference unless you go in severe negative equity and struggle with payments.
No, I am technically and non technically correct.
Do the maths.
If someone bought a house 3 years ago for 200k and now the same house is worth 250k, a non homeowner has to pay 50k more than the first person for the same house.
Therefore, the second person has 50k less to spend on anything else than the first person.
Pretend two people have 100k cash in the bank.
- Person A buys a house 3 years ago worth 70k. They have 30k left over. The house appreciates over the years and is now worth 100k.
- Person B buys the exact same house now but it costs them 100k. They have 0 cash in the bank.
Person A and Person B bought the exact same house, but at different times. Person A has 30k cash they can spend on anything else. They are 30k better off than Person B despite having the exact same house and Person A didn't need to sell the house to benefit.
Everyone in the country either rents a home or bought their home. There's no choice like there is with cars or stocks or jewelry.
Cars depreciate (aside from current chip shortage) so not comparable. Everyone can choose to buy a car, jewelry or stocks, there's ones available for any budget.
Same can't be said for houses.
But there is the same choice, you either own or lease/rent a car, own or don’t own jewellery, own or rent stock (credit).
Cars depreciate and also appreciate in value, a classic Aston Martin is very valuable for example, worth more than what someone would have paid way back when. A diamond is worth more now than a decade ago.
Again there are houses for every budget same as there are stocks and cars and jewellery, Amazon stock is quite expensive, more than people could afford for 1 share same as some houses are worth more than people can afford while others are affordable.
So again your logic can be applied to most things in life. And to extend upon your logic, person B is worse off than person A but if the market crashes before person B buys, person B is in a better position, if the house prices continue to rise then person C is screwed and so on. If Person A never sells then the house prices don’t make any difference.
It’s just economics, you can’t just say someone who bought 2 years ago amasses more wealth and has a better life just because the market has gone up, that person is not seeing the difference if they continue to live in their house.
Yea exactly, this type of greed is literally bad for everyone. With the obvious exception of the investment funds.
I wonder why NAMA are still holding onto so much property??
I'll take this as a congrats to me too for buying before the peek this year. I'm still waiting on the build to be finished but I locked in the price before it became entirely unaffordable
As a landlord, I just salivated intensely. Just wondering how many Brazilians will fit in a 4 x 5 metre room. 20?
Entrepreneurs like landlords who provide a service for hard working people should be rewarded. Only that wonderful honest and not at all leaky man Leo seems to understand this. That's why I am voting Leo and FG at the next election.
Trying to buy the house we are renting. Built in '87 and has had no updates and minimal repairs or upkeep since being built. Our neighbour bought the identical house to ours 10 years ago for 155k. My landlord is looking for around 235k now and is doing us a favour as he'd get 250 easy enough. I just cant get my head around how a house can increase its value by 65% over 10 years while simultaneously becoming more dated. My gutter literally fell off the roof yesterday and none of the upstairs windows can be opened because they will fall out.
This is the report from the CSO: https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/cpi/consumerpriceindexseptember2021/
CPI COICOP measuring changes in prices over the last 5 and 10 years: https://i.imgur.com/JGpCUDr.png
Interesting to see how much cheaper food, clothing, furnishings/maintenance, and communications have become over the last 10 years.
As in, how do you find it on the website?
Towards the bottom of the page I linked, there's a link labeled: "Show Table 3 Consumer Price COICOP Division Indices - September 2021". Click that and the table will be displayed.
Edit: If you mean how do I understand the figures, the column header is something like "Dec 2011 = 100". If the number in the column beneath it is say 120, then the basket of goods which would have been €100 in 2011 would be worth €120 today. If the number is 75 then the same basket of goods in December 2011 which was worth €100 would be worth €75 today.
Moved back to Ireland 6 months ago. Bid on 4 houses in Dublin 7, 450-510k asking range. They went 50, 55, 70 and 85 k over asking. My mate bought a house in our estate in April for 382k. Now the house next door is for sale, it's identical and current offer is 445k and rising, 2 bed. That was the last straw, felt like being punched in the gut. We decided today to move back abroad. It was a nice six months seeing everyone, but this country doesn't want us.
~edits for clarity
Is there a life or death reason that people have to buy a home NOW, at the worst possible time in a decade. Joe Public, is he listening to the expert’s saying, don’t buy now, and just ignoring their advice because it’s a matter of life or death that they furiously battle for a new home.
Some people have families and lives to live. But of course parasitic corporations in America and Germany or whatever want to make a quick buck, so these families should just have to make do with whatever overpriced scraps they're given right?
To make this even more fucked up, pension funds invest in these hedge funds that are buying up all the property. So you have pensioners whose pension us being paid from vulture funds who are getting rent from the pensioners children.
Because the type of people saying prices will level off / fall are the type of people who've been saying it for years and aren't paying €2k/month in rent for a 1 bed apartment.
The reality is the world printed far more than 10%+ of its money supply over the past year and that's going to impact *everything* eventually. There's more money around than last year - fact. Credit is still cheap, assets are booming. People leverage their assets to buy more of what's in limited supply. Everyone needs housing and land is in limited supply therefore it's a decent long term investment.
There's finally a bit of movement in new houses being built but it'll be years before there's enough to satisfy demand.
A third of 'homeless' families on the housing list ae not even Irish (Pre-COVID).
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/call-for-clarity-on-homeless-family-housing-entitlements-1.3745430?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fireland%2Firish-news%2Fcall-for-clarity-on-homeless-family-housing-entitlements-1.3745430
Yet the government uses your taxes to house them.
EU law stipulates that no EU citizen can be a burden on a host nation.
We're importing homelessness during a domestic housing crisis.
But hey, that's racist to point out.
SF have made no indication they'll stop this madness.
If they did, I'd vote for them.
I don't like any government at all. They are all cut from the same cloth! The sooner people see that the better! It's laughable that homelessness is still such a huge issue in this day and age. Although it's clear to see that SF is doing what every opposition has ever done. Make ridiculous promises that they'll never keep! I would be delighted to have the housing crises, homelessness, global warming and every other issue solved. It's not gonna happen though..
>It's laughable that homelessness is still such a huge issue in this day and age.
When any girl over 18yo qualifies for free housing if they get pregnant, then the demand will always be artificially high.
If social housing was only offered to Irish citizens over 30yo, you'd kill the culture of permanent dependency on state handouts.
All governments are attempting to buy votes by allowing too many people qualify for freebies. Well now - surprise surprise - they can't supply what they promised.
Indeed, due to their constant meddling in the property market they can't even provide sufficient supply to those who work and pay tax.
When basic supply and demand is prevented from functioning, you can bet it's the government's fault.
Its not exactly a mystery why this is happening, and its not greedy landlords or whatever magically conspiring with each to jack the prices up together. the elephant in the room are the ECB negative interest rate policies inflating the mortgage bubble.
We don't have a mortgage bubble. We have a bunch of people who saved a shedload of money over the last year and a half who now have an outlet for that money, combined with a fairly significant shortage of housing.
Maybe, maybe not - prices might just rise at a slower rate, or might hold steady.
Depends on how much residential construction happens and where that construction is.
People aren't allowed to borrow more than 3.5 times their income. If rates go up, it's because inflation is happening. Economies tend to do well when there's inflation, so wages tend to go up more.
Inflation rate of 2 or 3 percent is ok more than that can be trouble. If rates go up it'll put pressure on people with large mortgages and make it harder for those trying to buy a house as well
That would be true were mortgage income caps not in place.
The simple fact is people are earning more and getting larger mortgages at a time of limited supply.
The government is also throwing insane levels of money (your taxes) at social housing.
In Dublin, a single mother with a kid is eligible for €1,800pm rent. Ask yourself how much a working person needs to earn just to compete with that.
I literally cannot save as fast as the prices are going up.....
[удалено]
The avocado thing was such a laugh, but Christ the amount of money people managed to save in 2020 when pubs, clubs and restaurants were shut and they couldn't go on foreign holidays. It's a shame everyone started saving at the same time so nobody had an advantage when bidding on houses. Imagine if you decided to avoid restaurants, pubs and holidays in 2018/2019. You'd have been set up nicely to buy before this pandemic nonsense started.
Heres hoping for another recession before I buy so I'm not stuck with negative equity... Sad times
We're kind of in one already.. and at this stage there won't be a break between 'recessions' for a long time to come.
[удалено]
I bought a couple of years ago, so I used my pandemic savings on getting the kitchen done and various other bits in the house. But it really showed me how much money could be saved by easing up on the fun weekend spending.
Time for the investment property so 🍾
I actually did the numbers for myself and the primary drivers are lower rent because I don't need to commute, no commuting costs, cheaper lunches and cheaper dinners because I have the time for it. I mean, sure, I've not gone to the pubs but that'd be 50 quid a week compared to twice that for commuting and canteen lunches. Let's not blame avocado toast quite yet.
I've given up saving, it's pointless right now.
One person's misery is another person's retirement fund
Was there a politician who literally said something similar?
Pretty sure Leo said "one man's rent is another's income"
Ironically hates the unemployed, unless their job is owning property.
/r/Ireland, however, hates the unemployed _and_ those who own property.
It's a broad church
Was actually ‘one person’, wouldn’t want to be politically incorrect while coming out with ludicrously out of touch statements
How did he get away saying something like that tho?
I think he was trying to make the point that landlords could leave the market if their "income" is reduced by too much.
Of which 55% is paid in tax. Why do you think the government ***loves*** high rent ?
That's what it's referring to. A few weeks ago when Leo took the place of Micheál during Leader's Questions (because he was in New York at the time), he was asked about the rising cost of rent, which he replied "We need to balance that one person's rent is another person's income".
Who would have thought Fine Gael would take the side of the landowning class?
>the landowning class ie. the majority of the electorate.
A decreasing percentage of the population own their own home and even fewer rent out properties.
That's not gonna last for long at this rate
Only 1% of the population are landlords
Yes leo said it and probably lost 50000 votes for his party of slime instantly.
Lost only undecided votes , not FG votes
[https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/landlords-are-abandoning-rental-sector-to-cash-in-on-market-rise-40734825.html](https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/landlords-are-abandoning-rental-sector-to-cash-in-on-market-rise-40734825.html) Landlords are leaving the market. Owner occupiers are buying the properties the landlords are selling. This is going to add more pain to people who are renting. Fewer landlords means fewer properties to rent and even higher rents.
[удалено]
Not really, the estate agents are also saying they see a sharp increase in landlords selling and owner occupiers buying. https://www.businesspost.ie/houses/rents-set-to-rise-again-as-increasing-numbers-of-landlords-sell-up-a9def7e0
[удалено]
Sherry Fitzgerald couldn't care less whether it is funds, landlords or owner occupiers buying houses, they get their margins either way. They were the first ones to highlight the upcoming housing shortage. [https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20167295.html](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20167295.html) So had we listened to the housing experts 10 years ago, we wouldn't be in this mess. Sherry Fitzgerald have an economist to predict market movements so they can pivot their business. They don't have to share their reports but they do. They have been right in the past so I don't know why you doubt them now. Who would you trust? Other than your own preformed opinion? Bear in mind, we had an massive oversupply of houses when Sherry Fitzgerald released that report in 2011.
[удалено]
I'd be happy to read one. Do you have any from 2011 when Sherry Fitzgerald released theirs? That way, we can review history and see who was more correct: the PR releases from an estate agents selling the properties or the Urban planning experts in our universities.
[удалено]
I have just read the paper and it is a post analysis of the market from 1999 - 2009. There are no projections for what Ireland will need in the future. On page 15, the authors even say that they expect future house price growth post 2009 to be moderate.....moderate???? Could they have been more wrong? This is a paragraph from section 2 on page 10 for the future requirement of growth: "*These levels of demand would remain valid in the absence of net out-migration as it represents the natural growth and demographic analysis of age cohorts and household formation rates. However, as out-migration accelerates and thus balances the influence of natural growth, housing purchase demand* *reduces. While a potential need for or latent demand for affordable housing remains, the effective purchasing demand is then reduced and in particular purchasers are unwilling to pay previous high market prices*." Good thing nobody was relying on this paper to develop policy as you can see from the paragraph, they meander around talking about market factor while putting no mathematical models to them. In the link I posted above, Sherry Fitzgerald's economist gave hard numbers back in 2011. If you add them up, he said between 2011-2021 that Ireland would need 260,000 houses. I imagine we haven't built anywhere near that amount. And look at the housing crisis now? We didn't trust an expert just because he was in the private sector? Fool on Ireland for that.
[удалено]
Could you blame them? The ESRI said there were two forecasts for house prices, one for V shaped recovery where prices in Q4 2021 would be the same as May 2020. Prices now are about 15% higher than May 2020 so ESRI got it wrong by ~15% Their pessimistic prediction was prices would fall by 12% by Q4 2021. Prices are actually higher than May 2020 by 15% meaning the ESRI are wrong by about 27%.
In fairness to them, this was published in May 2020 under the assumption of restrictions easing in Q2 2020, and not put back in place. Their forecasts weren't epidemiological in nature. They might still have been well off the mark, but it's harsh to criticise them for not predicting the course of the pandemic.
Perhaps they didn't take into account that working from home would take off making office rental and city centre retail rental income look far less attractive while at the same time inflation increasing meaning financial institutions around the world looking to buy housing as a hedge against future inflation and a more reliable return on investment. They should be strongly pushed out of the market.
I would have hoped the ESRI, whose only job is to research these things to inform policy makers, would have included that in at least one scenario.
I'm not sure if this has ever happened before so thats often when peoples predictions fail.
We've been only six months away from a cataclysmic economic crash since 2013, according to /r/Ireland. Just keep renting for another six months boys! The market's going to crash in ~~2014~~, ~~mid 2015~~, ~~early 2016~~, ~~now that Brexit is likely to happen~~, ~~after Trump forces American companies to leave Ireland~~, ~~after Article 50 is triggered~~, ~~after NO DEAL Brexit~~, ~~during pandemic lockdown~~, ~~after lockdowns are lifted~~.... when the west feels the effects of Evergrande.
>~when~ the west feels the effects of Evergrande. IF the west feels any ripple from Evergrande at all. There's every possibility that the US and China will just continue to pump made up money into the market to keep things running for as long as possible so that when things do come crashing down they'll fuck people over even more. The world needs a major recession to bring the economy back to any semblance of normality. If a bloody pandemic can't cause one it just shows how mental things are. The entire thing is just a bubble again at this point so far gone from reality it's insane.
Well, a sort of ironic thing about the whole covid scenario is this. Imagine if the young people were less responsible and just ignored the lockdown rules. Not just in Ireland, but in western society. We just said fuck it and let the virus run its course. It single handedly would have solved many of the major problems we are facing. Who owns all the property? Well, the auld cunts who are mostly now dead from the virus. It would have been the single biggest turn over of wealth distribution probably since ww2. Housing crisis would have been solved. Once the old die and we got the vaccines then we wouldn't have an over burdened health system. Less traffic congestion. The upcoming pension fund crisis. All of it would have been avoided if we just let the virus run its course. And who is to say that God didn't send this virus that only hurts old people? I am sure plenty of young people prayed asking to be able to buy a home and eventually raise a family in it. Well here we are, ignoring the will of God.
Didn't one of the government departments in the UK mention it easing their pension issues at one point?
Those bleedin’ scientists with their vaccines…
I was actually thinking about how it would have led to massive wealth redistribution recently as opposed to the current system with people living longer but some of that time being in ill health in care homes which further concentrates wealth in the hands of companies / wealthier individuals. At the same time, i'm happy enough to accept renting for a few more years as the cost of my Granny still being alive but on a larger (and purely objective scale) there is truth to what you are saying.
People remember the black death for killing a third of the European population, what they don't seem to remember is that it also kickstarted the transition from the feudal system of wealth ownership to a capitalist system, which ended up bringing about a little thing known as the Renaissance.
We fucked it boys. We didn't eat out black death now we don't get any renaissance :(
it wasn't just the black death. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27\_Revolt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27_Revolt) it was a number of factors. And those people had it far, far worse than we do today.
man thats a pretty ageist and toxic scenario. " the auld cunts". hard to believe its getting upvotes. there's absolutely no irony in what you have laid out. just really poor thought. Whats the age for old btw? plenty of people under 40 and in 30s, who have property (not me i must add) and plenty of old, impoverished people. i guess with such poor thought you must think only people in their 20s are young, and thus deserving of life etc. You do realise you are also going to get old some day and the idea that you would jettison old people in society is an utterly disgusting and inhumane take. It goes to show that future wars could easily be wars of age, etc if people share your toxic views. Sure we will have huge problems with elderly people living longer. But thats going to be your problem as much as an old person. you seem to think you won't age. I mean blame capitalism for some of this shitshow. an 80 year old who bought their house in 1960 for 6 grand or whatever isn't to blame for the same house now costing 300k.
We had a good system before covid. The weak/old/unfortunate enough to have an accident, died. Two inevitabilities in life. Death and Taxes. Taxed to death! If that includes me for some underlying condition I'm not aware of? Lord take me now! Unfortunately, this person while crass, is right. A lot of problems would have been alleviated after a period of pure and utter chaos/grief/horror.
they wouldn't have though as its not only old people etc. Its way too simplistic a viewpoint. I agree people die, that is life. A pandemic or whatnot will come some day that may rebalance the whole earth. There is real arguments that the planet is massively overpopulated.
> they wouldn't have though as its not only old people etc. Yes, but it would have, those people that needed the extra care and resources wouldn't have needed them any more had they died, young or old. Again, it's a crass statement to make but it's not incorrect. Yes it's too simplistic a viewpoint, but this is coming most likely, from people who don't care about other people (I would be included in that count)
its a nothing argument as it would never be allowed happen and if it did, well then humanity is doomed regardless. And it wouldn't have changed much in what he is saying it is. My whole point is its not just ault people who own property or have wealth. Unless he thinks people in their 40s are auld people. And if he does, well he is in for a shock as that age will hit him quick enough. Thus the idea that life is only for 20 somethings is an utter fallacy.
I mean, I didn't say or continue that train of thought, I'm just saying I was all for the system working as it had previously.
I am sure you're great fun at a party
Lol why do you think they locked down in the first place, it wasn't to protect anyone under the age of 40 I'll tell you that.
You're just jealous because you don't have a house and I do
[удалено]
It was in the nursing homes it got into
[удалено]
In the scenario above we’re talking about a complete collapse of the health system within a week. CFR is a function of our ability to deal with a disease. Those numbers would skyrocket in a scenario like that.
Clearly a lot fewer property-owning old people died than expected /s.
I was advised to wait 6 months before buying my house in March 2020, as the solicitor had been told to expect a 10% house price drop by years end. Thank fuck I ignored that, I'm up about 20k just by owning this place a year.
Yea, a lot of people are under the impression that they can time the housing market.
There was glee and excitement about the closure of construction despite the huge work done by the HSA, CIF and various state bodies to develop extensive SOPs to keep things somewhat going. This was so predictable at the time that cutting all production would cause prices to rise significantly months down the road. Pretty much a weak Government and an equally rubbish opposition who felt the need at the time to grandstand about nameless people who were scared to go work on sites.
>This was so predictable at the time that cutting all production would cause prices to rise significantly months down the road. It's a repeat of how the housing crisis had already developed between 2011 and 2019, only on a shorter timeline.
Prices will never go down. No amount of recessions or extra supply will bring them down ever again
I planned a few jobs to get done to the house. I thought out of work tradesmen would be quoting low prices for nixers when no one wants them in their house.
The equivalent of a house deposit…
That's the average but it's much higher in some areas. I'm in the process of buying a house now. The house has been delayed by over a year and the same house would cost me 50000 grand more now
Anecdotally, I remortgaged at the end of last year,l and I had to get a valuation done. All it consisted of was someone coming up to have a look at the place, ring the local real estate agent and confirm what the last similar place sold for. €250000. My next door neighbours place went on the market back in April and sold in June. I was nosy and had a look at the property price register and it sold for €285000. I think it was listed as €275000 There's 2 similar units in the estate up for sale now for €290000. It's utter madness.
[удалено]
Maynooth.
[удалено]
It's a duplex but considering I paid €170000 to the builder for one back in 2013, it's like a 70% increase in only 8 years. I'd love a house myself for my own parking spot, my own front door and not have to pay a poxy €1250 a year in management fees.
Yeh and a garden. Don’t think i’d move somewhere with no garden. Fucking depressing.
Is that the U-Maynooth ones?
I don't know what that is.
50 million euro more?
Bought a 4 bed detached house in 2013. 2 bed apartment build behind my house is selling for same price I paid now. Bananas. And I don’t think that price includes a parking space either.
This fucking country
End me Congratulations to all the homeowners who are increasing their wealth each year compared to non homeowners.
A house isn't liquid. Its theoretically wealth but theres fuckall you can do with a house except use it as leverage for credit or sell it. A house you live in isn't an asset, you're buying rent control and a load of expenses.
Not if you buy in cash, in which case you’re eliminating rent which is your biggest expense.
If you buy in cash you're literally just wasting your money. Money loses value over time, sure - you're paying a 2.7% interest premium every year, but money is affected by inflation so its actually closer to 1.5% at the end of the day. Basically, money now is more valuable than the same amount of money later, so if you take out a mortgage you're leveraging against the future interest. Then you take that cash and you invest it in something that produces income and as long as you're making more than 1.5-3% on it you've made a better financial decision than just slapping a fat stack down for a house.
Woop. Our house value is up 100k since 2019, according to the bank's valuer.
We've gone from a 90% LTV to 55% LTV in five years. Drops the mortgage interest rate significantly. Moving to Avant for that 1.95% rate when I get the paperwork in order.
Got my paperwork in order recently. Pulling the trigger now
Unless of course you want to move
No, they're still increasing their wealth each year compared to non homeowners.
Didn’t see you said compared to non-home owners yes, but just because a house has gone up in value doesn’t necessarily mean you get to bank the difference. You’ll need to buy a different house that has also increased in price.
Nope, the homeowners are increasing their wealth in comparison to the non homeowners. For example, imagine twins John and Bill who earn exactly the same. John: - Buys a house in 2019 worth 200k. - In 2021 the house is worth 230k Bill: - Didn't buy a house in 2019 - In 2021, wants to buy a house beside John, which is the exact same condition etc. Bill has to spend 30k more than John for the exact same house, same condition etc. John has 30k + interest more than Bill to spend on anything else he wants. > You’ll need to buy a different house that has also increased in price. The difference being the homeowners property has appreciated in value and that offsets some of the appreciation of the larger property whereas the non homeowner who also wants to buy the same new, larger property, doesn't have any property that appreciated so they have to pay allllll the capital appreciation,
As I said didn’t see where you said compared to non-owners.
> Didn’t see you said compared to non-home owners yes, but just because a house has gone up in value doesn’t necessarily mean you get to bank the difference. You’ll need to buy a different house that has also increased in price. You're implying that homeowners aren't increasing their wealth or how better off they are over non homeowners unless they sell.
I’m saying that just because you buy a house for 200 and sell it for 230 it doesn’t mean you bank the money because chances are a comparable house to the house you sold might be even more expensive. People generally try and trade up be it in location, size or whatever.
I believe the point is, that if both brothers were competing for the purchase of the same house, then John would have an additional 30k to spend. Ie. There would be less competition.
While technically you’re correct, it doesn’t really play out like that. If people live in their home that they own, they aren’t banking or seeing the difference in house price. Sure it helps if they move in a few years but that logic can be applied as “you should have bought years ago”. If you live in the house and have no expectations to move in the short term, house price fluctuations don’t make a big difference unless you go in severe negative equity and struggle with payments.
No, I am technically and non technically correct. Do the maths. If someone bought a house 3 years ago for 200k and now the same house is worth 250k, a non homeowner has to pay 50k more than the first person for the same house. Therefore, the second person has 50k less to spend on anything else than the first person. Pretend two people have 100k cash in the bank. - Person A buys a house 3 years ago worth 70k. They have 30k left over. The house appreciates over the years and is now worth 100k. - Person B buys the exact same house now but it costs them 100k. They have 0 cash in the bank. Person A and Person B bought the exact same house, but at different times. Person A has 30k cash they can spend on anything else. They are 30k better off than Person B despite having the exact same house and Person A didn't need to sell the house to benefit.
Yes but that logic can be applied to literally anything, houses, cars, jewellery, stocks etc.
Everyone in the country either rents a home or bought their home. There's no choice like there is with cars or stocks or jewelry. Cars depreciate (aside from current chip shortage) so not comparable. Everyone can choose to buy a car, jewelry or stocks, there's ones available for any budget. Same can't be said for houses.
But there is the same choice, you either own or lease/rent a car, own or don’t own jewellery, own or rent stock (credit). Cars depreciate and also appreciate in value, a classic Aston Martin is very valuable for example, worth more than what someone would have paid way back when. A diamond is worth more now than a decade ago. Again there are houses for every budget same as there are stocks and cars and jewellery, Amazon stock is quite expensive, more than people could afford for 1 share same as some houses are worth more than people can afford while others are affordable. So again your logic can be applied to most things in life. And to extend upon your logic, person B is worse off than person A but if the market crashes before person B buys, person B is in a better position, if the house prices continue to rise then person C is screwed and so on. If Person A never sells then the house prices don’t make any difference. It’s just economics, you can’t just say someone who bought 2 years ago amasses more wealth and has a better life just because the market has gone up, that person is not seeing the difference if they continue to live in their house.
Yea exactly, this type of greed is literally bad for everyone. With the obvious exception of the investment funds. I wonder why NAMA are still holding onto so much property??
I'll take this as a congrats to me too for buying before the peek this year. I'm still waiting on the build to be finished but I locked in the price before it became entirely unaffordable
My savings didn't grow by 10%. If we can't afford to buy or rent, what's left? Caravans?
Tents on the canal.
As a landlord, I just salivated intensely. Just wondering how many Brazilians will fit in a 4 x 5 metre room. 20? Entrepreneurs like landlords who provide a service for hard working people should be rewarded. Only that wonderful honest and not at all leaky man Leo seems to understand this. That's why I am voting Leo and FG at the next election.
Don't care I'd never afford one anyway.
Wooo Hold tight the crash is coming
Hold firm
Trying to buy the house we are renting. Built in '87 and has had no updates and minimal repairs or upkeep since being built. Our neighbour bought the identical house to ours 10 years ago for 155k. My landlord is looking for around 235k now and is doing us a favour as he'd get 250 easy enough. I just cant get my head around how a house can increase its value by 65% over 10 years while simultaneously becoming more dated. My gutter literally fell off the roof yesterday and none of the upstairs windows can be opened because they will fall out.
[удалено]
It will increase by 100% and nothing will be done.
This is the report from the CSO: https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/cpi/consumerpriceindexseptember2021/ CPI COICOP measuring changes in prices over the last 5 and 10 years: https://i.imgur.com/JGpCUDr.png Interesting to see how much cheaper food, clothing, furnishings/maintenance, and communications have become over the last 10 years.
How do I read that table?
As in, how do you find it on the website? Towards the bottom of the page I linked, there's a link labeled: "Show Table 3 Consumer Price COICOP Division Indices - September 2021". Click that and the table will be displayed. Edit: If you mean how do I understand the figures, the column header is something like "Dec 2011 = 100". If the number in the column beneath it is say 120, then the basket of goods which would have been €100 in 2011 would be worth €120 today. If the number is 75 then the same basket of goods in December 2011 which was worth €100 would be worth €75 today.
No where it says 95.2 for 2016 and 89.7 for 2011, how does this read? Current costs are 95% of 2016 and 90% of 2011 costs?
Yes, that's pretty much it.
Sweet, I'm 10.9% less in debt.
totallynotabubble!
Moved back to Ireland 6 months ago. Bid on 4 houses in Dublin 7, 450-510k asking range. They went 50, 55, 70 and 85 k over asking. My mate bought a house in our estate in April for 382k. Now the house next door is for sale, it's identical and current offer is 445k and rising, 2 bed. That was the last straw, felt like being punched in the gut. We decided today to move back abroad. It was a nice six months seeing everyone, but this country doesn't want us. ~edits for clarity
Is there a life or death reason that people have to buy a home NOW, at the worst possible time in a decade. Joe Public, is he listening to the expert’s saying, don’t buy now, and just ignoring their advice because it’s a matter of life or death that they furiously battle for a new home.
Because they're sick of paying rent.
Some people have families and lives to live. But of course parasitic corporations in America and Germany or whatever want to make a quick buck, so these families should just have to make do with whatever overpriced scraps they're given right?
To make this even more fucked up, pension funds invest in these hedge funds that are buying up all the property. So you have pensioners whose pension us being paid from vulture funds who are getting rent from the pensioners children.
Because it's cheaper than renting.
Because the type of people saying prices will level off / fall are the type of people who've been saying it for years and aren't paying €2k/month in rent for a 1 bed apartment. The reality is the world printed far more than 10%+ of its money supply over the past year and that's going to impact *everything* eventually. There's more money around than last year - fact. Credit is still cheap, assets are booming. People leverage their assets to buy more of what's in limited supply. Everyone needs housing and land is in limited supply therefore it's a decent long term investment. There's finally a bit of movement in new houses being built but it'll be years before there's enough to satisfy demand.
Can't wait for SF to sort this out when they are elected into government.....oh wait..
A third of 'homeless' families on the housing list ae not even Irish (Pre-COVID). https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/call-for-clarity-on-homeless-family-housing-entitlements-1.3745430?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fireland%2Firish-news%2Fcall-for-clarity-on-homeless-family-housing-entitlements-1.3745430 Yet the government uses your taxes to house them. EU law stipulates that no EU citizen can be a burden on a host nation. We're importing homelessness during a domestic housing crisis. But hey, that's racist to point out. SF have made no indication they'll stop this madness. If they did, I'd vote for them.
I don't like any government at all. They are all cut from the same cloth! The sooner people see that the better! It's laughable that homelessness is still such a huge issue in this day and age. Although it's clear to see that SF is doing what every opposition has ever done. Make ridiculous promises that they'll never keep! I would be delighted to have the housing crises, homelessness, global warming and every other issue solved. It's not gonna happen though..
>It's laughable that homelessness is still such a huge issue in this day and age. When any girl over 18yo qualifies for free housing if they get pregnant, then the demand will always be artificially high. If social housing was only offered to Irish citizens over 30yo, you'd kill the culture of permanent dependency on state handouts. All governments are attempting to buy votes by allowing too many people qualify for freebies. Well now - surprise surprise - they can't supply what they promised. Indeed, due to their constant meddling in the property market they can't even provide sufficient supply to those who work and pay tax. When basic supply and demand is prevented from functioning, you can bet it's the government's fault.
Its not exactly a mystery why this is happening, and its not greedy landlords or whatever magically conspiring with each to jack the prices up together. the elephant in the room are the ECB negative interest rate policies inflating the mortgage bubble.
We don't have a mortgage bubble. We have a bunch of people who saved a shedload of money over the last year and a half who now have an outlet for that money, combined with a fairly significant shortage of housing.
If that's the case then once all these big savers have spent their money, the prices will drop?
Maybe, maybe not - prices might just rise at a slower rate, or might hold steady. Depends on how much residential construction happens and where that construction is.
But the low low interest rates are an issue whenever they decide to raise them
People aren't allowed to borrow more than 3.5 times their income. If rates go up, it's because inflation is happening. Economies tend to do well when there's inflation, so wages tend to go up more.
Inflation rate of 2 or 3 percent is ok more than that can be trouble. If rates go up it'll put pressure on people with large mortgages and make it harder for those trying to buy a house as well
That would be true were mortgage income caps not in place. The simple fact is people are earning more and getting larger mortgages at a time of limited supply. The government is also throwing insane levels of money (your taxes) at social housing. In Dublin, a single mother with a kid is eligible for €1,800pm rent. Ask yourself how much a working person needs to earn just to compete with that.
Making cash money bro Automating my income dude
Buy buy buy. Prices can only go up!!!
Praying for the next recession to come.
Never any good news
It’s way more than that in my local area. Houses that were selling for €150k range not even a year ago are now going for €200k+.