It might also force individuals to sell the 2nd home, dropping prices due to increased supply. What percentage of rentals are to landlords with 1 or 2 rental properties. Iirc there was a prime time special around 2012/2013 about accidental landlords stuck with negative equity and it wasn’t worth selling at the time. By now they would be back in positive equity
Still need more tax. I’m a landlord. An accidental one in that it was financially way worse for us to get rid of it when we bought this place. But it is now making us a tidy sum from the state each year on top of paying down the mortgage and it will most likely be my pension. You’d be mad not to do it if you have a property but it’s completely wrong for the country.
2 Likes
With big developers getting tax breaks to build houses, is it not like the State wanting us all to have Pensions and when you invest or set aside for your pension you get tax relief. And we’re all smug about this, our money, the State don’t get their immediate hands on it. Our country needs houses, we need to incentivise those who can provide more of them, ergo this is done by giving them tax breaks. The investment funds buying them all up is a joke alright, that needs to stop.
Until the state builds, owns and eventually maintains and operates a sufficient stock of housing the market will never stabilise.
2 Likes
Yup. But in order to turn off that tap you need alternative accommodation to put people in. It means massive capital investment in order to get out of the out of control current spending, and the out of control public spending needs to continue until the longer term solution is put in place. We essentially need to buy our way out of the position FG policies have put us in.
It’s the exact same in health. Out of control current spending from the “fiscally prudent” FG, which is the result of refusing to invest in public systems.
Luckily we can currently borrow at 0%. All we need is the will to do it. Over to you Sinn Fein.
1 Like
This is it.
The state shouldn’t be in this to make a buck so if the state has the housing supply then houses don’t become unaffordable.
They should be taking this on themselves to build, develop and provide housing and accommodation en masse for social housing and affordable housing.
Whereas if you just leave it to the private sector then it’s going to become a bidding war and as you can see by the rental market, you can probably clear a few hundred over any mortgage you get out from rent.
The housing policy is designed to increase the wealth of people who have significant capital available to invest in it. It is not designed to help people get affordable accommodation and increase the standard of living for all of its citizens.
Yeah that’s it. And to protect the interests of those that already own property.
1 Like
I was actually just looking at an apartment complex I was renting in Dublin back in 2014.
I was paying 500 quid for a room in a 2 bedroom apartment at the time. I was kind of tempted to go after it at that time but I wasn’t really interested in setting roots in Dublin but the mortgage would probably have worked out far cheaper than renting at the time. Rent in the same apartment had gone up to 650 per month by the time I left Dublin.
Anyone I see a 3 bed apartment in the same complex is up for 440k now. If you had the money on hand in the 2010-2014 region you could have made an absolute killing on the property market.
Talking about using public lands for public only housing is great in principle. But this to me is a clear case of biting off the nose to spite the face. Glenveigh are a large property development company. They have multiple projects on the go and specialise in building large housing developments. There are very, very few companies in Ireland capable of building 850+ houses which will now be done through the eTendering process and most likely, will cost far more to build than what Glenveigh would be doing it for. Plus it will take far, far longer to do so. So instead of having 170 social housing and 260 affordable housing within 2 years there, it will now be 8 years to have it all social and affordable. Why it would take as long as 8 years is another matter entirely, and I imagine the DCC head of housing is exaggerating that a bit, but even so, when someone who is directly at the coal face of allocating housing projects and tenders etc knows its ridiculous, then maybe he should be listened to rather than just the usual cliched shite that for the most part wont work with the systems we have in place here. We cant just cut off a sector of the market and automatically think that the state will simply replace house building companies and do the work for them.
The state absolutely should be doing more to develop on their own land, but when we are in the midst of a housing shortage, surely the ultimate goal is to get as many houses completed as quickly as possible, whilst not compromising on quality or affordability on completion. Kicking this down the road 8 or however many years is not a good win. It will end up costing more and it leaves a void that could have been filled in the interim.
5 Likes
Sure they sold off thousands of them at a pittance so they wouldn’t have to maintain them.
2 Likes
And now look where we are.
You want that cycle to recommence?
What cycle? Maintaining a significant stock of public housing is the only way to moderate a housing market in the long term. There’s other ways but that’s the main plank of it.
The government needs to build, own and maintain houses.
Take the houses sold off so we wouldn’t have to maintain them. Wouldn’t it have been better to maintain those houses rather than what we’re doing now, which is paying inflated rents to landlords to house people?
1 Like
The cycle has re-commenced. Their current need to secure housing means they enter into longterm leasehold with private landlords and undertake to maintain the properties. They fitted a brand new kitchen into my sister in laws apartment when she signed up. That’s current policy in fingal.
1 Like
With no asset to the state to show for it.
Our policy is to privatise more and more public money through current spending rather than build and maintain houses.
1 Like
They charged her for the kitchen though.
No. It didnt even need one to be honest. She had no input into the decision.
Ex St Mary’s Leinster and Ireland full back?
And part owner of a field in Kilkenny.
1 Like