I'm sure there's a variety of reasons.
But where do we want new builds. Where there's an existing surplus or a shortage.
Are they empty because they haven't been put on the market of because people don't want them at their current price point?
That was the problem during the boom, as pointed out by Ronan Lyons in the article I linked to, building was driven by tax breaks, not market demand.I'm sure there's a variety of reasons.
But where do we want new builds. Where there's an existing surplus or a shortage.
They are pushing up house prices, which you said wasn't the case. They are pushing up rents at pace in the main urban centres.The State is the dominant player in the rental market. The State is pricing private renters out, just as they are pricing private buyers out of the market.
the net result is more housing units. How is that a bad thing?
They are buying higher priced units. There's no evidence that they are pushing up prices.They are pushing up house prices, which you said wasn't the case. They are pushing up rents at pace in the main urban centres.
They are buying higher priced units. There's no evidence that they are pushing up prices.
From your link "Mr McCartney said those properties might not have been developed if those arrangements had not been in place."
The issue is lack of supply. I don't understand the hostility towards capital in-flows that fund extra supply.
Sorry, I meant the general hostility, not from you.Pointing out what's happening is not hostility.
None; supply and demand drive everything.Supply without context is meaningless
Prices are rising. What other proof is needed?
Rent controls never work.The causes are multifaceted. But in the context of rent controls, they haven't worked. Partly because they favor the new rental over an existing one. They favor a large landlord over a small one. Thus ultimately don't stop price rises in fact they encourage.
True, but as you say there are costs involved and it's a large amount of capital.If I'm a landlord with a property on a low rent. I makes sense for me to sell up, no one else can raise the rent on that property. I can then create a new rental somewhere else and raise the rent. There are costs to change. But in a constantly rising market. All I'm doing is adding value on my investment. I will get more rent and the property will be worth more.
Renters want more for less, landlords want the opposite. The interests of the seller and buyer are rarely aligned in any one-off transaction.If I think the risk of the price falling or a problem tenant is too high. I can simply leave the market. I would prefer to be in market with modest income for modest risk. Is that the market that exists. Its debatable.
That's the landlords perspective. Is it aligned with what renters want. Is it aligned with solving the rental crisis. I suggest it isn't.
It is indeed. Viewing economic basics through the prisms of ideology or political populism is never a good idea and that's what's happening here.For me it's someone else's problem. It's just interesting watching it play out.
Opportunity Declined! - Next Generation Visiting Sunday Drives from The Pale should be very interesting (and long).I think the opportunity is going to slip away. There's very little being done to encourage flexible working, and decentralization.
It is indeed. Viewing economic basics through the prisms of ideology or political populism is never a good idea and that's what's happening here.
I think that governments since the boom have behaved quite responsibly. They faced massive pressure to try to raise the Central Bank borrowing limits and have resisted it. They have mostly resisted demand-side stimulus. I do have a big problem with the State buying and renting from the existing private housing stock in order to provide public housing. In effect they are pricing private buyers and renters out of the market with their own money. That's a result of a very populist opposition and their "useful idiots" in the media.Its hard to avoid though if that what successive Govts have been doing.
The heat in the market is driven by a doubling of the global money supply since 2012. When capital is flowing into the market (because there's been no returns on bonds) and supply isn't increasing at the same pace then prices go up. That capital isn't just institutional investors, it's bloated private pensions and capital appreciation in private property creating large inheritances and "Bank of Mum and Dad" scenarios. Around 1% of the residential property stock changes hands each year so very small changes in supply and demand and very small changes in capital availability cause massive changes in overall values.You would assume it would be wise to take some heat out of the market instead of continuing to pump it. Slow and steady rather than boom and bust.
Same here!If I was financially savvy I should be able to take advantage. But I'm not.
It's very difficult to get permission to build on greenfield here unless the LA has specifically zoned the area for residential development, and that doesn't happen quickly with how long it takes to go through the public consultation process.In Ireland it's almost the opposite we are still too fond of building on greenfield sites in the country. Our construction industry does not have the expertise to do high density construction in the cities
Is that really true? What about builders like Paul, Sisk, Rhatigans, Walls doing very large developments, hotels, apartment blocks and more?But look at the St James hospital build and the massive Intel construction site ,the only contractor that was able to do it was BAM the big Dutch company. When Leo had a row with them over the escalating price he had to back down because BAM threatened to walk away and nobody else was in a position to take it on (also the fact that the state itself was largely culpable in the escalating costs)
We don't have a construction industry capable of doing large urban developments on brown field sites. Its still mostly small scale builders building one off houses or housing estates on the edge of towns.
Building a hospital or a semi-conductor fab are very specialised jobs. Housing is simple by comparison.But look at the St James hospital build and the massive Intel construction site ,the only contractor that was able to do it was BAM the big Dutch company.
I mean 6 story streets throughout all the main business districts like you see in every other European city. The only genuine high density building was done by the Georgians and victorians in Dublin. They built most of the city centre in Dublin, we built all the low density suburban areas in cabra, drimnagh ,coolock , tallaght ,blanchardstown etcBuilding a hospital or a semi-conductor fab are very specialised jobs. Housing is simple by comparison.
When you say we can't do high-density. What exactly is it you mean by high density?
That's nothing whatsoever got to do with the capability of builders here, we have plenty of buildings here taller than than, but the development plans in most areas prohibit that scale of development.I mean 6 story streets throughout all the main business districts like you see in every other European city.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?