Replying To Galway9801:  "I never said banks sell houses and I never equated the respective roles of banks and landlords in the property market.
More putting words in my mouth (are you Breff in disguise?)

Anyways

Yeah for sure the amount of rent being charged is trapping some people, but putting pressure on the market drives rent up. Failure to build and refusal to lend is making money for landlords but that doesn't mean landlords should be held responsible for the problem. (although I'm there are landlords in government circles)

A relaxation of lending rules would absolutely help first time buyers get onto the property ladder. Your suggestion that it would help landlords more makes it look like you're unaware that there are completely different mortgage rates and lending criteria for owner occupied properties and buy to let properties."

Replying To zinny:  "I would say the conversation has resorted to hyperbole but I am worried you actually believe rubbish.

Nobody has put forward a formula on how to solve the problem. Have you met a builder out of work? how would you suddenly create new houses - ask Leggo to get involved?

There is nothing wrong with landlords and they are necessary as not everyone can afford or want to take on a mortgage. So what you are asking for is for the state to discriminate against them by saying that the property they are in they need to leave because the landlord needs to sell it to someone who wants to own it and live in it. Ireland took its addiction to owning the house from the UK, in Europe the concept of renting is far common but then again Europeans do not have the same need to show that by owning property they are somehow better than others.

Banks are part of the problem and if you think that they are not taking advantage of the situation they you are pretty naive.
I don't believe anyone hasn't got empathy for people stuck in the current crises however believing in simple solutions is not helping."

Replying To Doylerwex:  "Just because Europe don't do it doesn't mean we should.

There are genetic markers of historical oppression that influence our desire to own something. This isn't me being emotive either, this is fact. It has nothing to do with being better than others. I small asset is not much for a lifetime of work.

Yes Europe are more into renting but you have security of tenancy, reasonable rents, you can have pets etc.

True not everyone can afford it, but a vast majority want to.

Do we all have to have standard construction methods? We can build five times as many modular homes without sourcing any new tradesmen.

Relaxing mortgage rules will make it worse. That will only increase competition for limited stock and ultimately increase prices.

The crisis is the banks fault. The taxpayer still holds considerable stake in most banks. We can further limit buy to let mortgages and increase/enforce vacant property penalties.

Then relax planning laws and rezone more land to increase supply of modular homes that can be delivered quickly.

Finance this via state housing agency or perhaps partnership with credit unions. The price is set at an affordable level and first come first serve.

That will solve the problem indefinitely.

Any job should provide enough to have a place to live, otherwise what is the point?

People need to live, not survive."

Replying To oceanofnoise:  "To date, we've had a good 'oul back and forth on this issue. It's quite obvious we don't agree on much when it comes to housing. That being said, I try to be respectful, and I don't personally see the need to question if I'm a different poster masquerading as someone else.

I was responding specifically to the post where you yourself said that "you apply completely different outlooks to both entities" (banks and landlords). This statement implied to me that you yourself would treat/view both entities the same.

In relation to knowledge about the different types of mortgage available: yes, I am aware of this. That doesn't mean I know all there is to know about this topic. I don't have all the answers, or most likely none at all."

Replying To Galway9801:  "Yeah I've enjoyed it too, and to be clear I'm sure you're not masquerading as anyone, it was a dig at Breff who has a habit of putting words in my mouth."

Replying To Breffni40:  "Point out where I've done that please"

Replying To cavanman47:  "I think that's a good post.

I would agree that any full time job should mean ability to own a home.
And I believe I have given examples of exactly how that is in fact the case at present.

But those with more money will always want to live in nicer houses in more convenient locations. That's just human nature.

And those with less money will always have to identify what falls within their means and take 1 of 2 options:
1. Accept that the property you can afford may mean a longer commute to work and won't be as big or as fancy as some others.
2. Reassess your employment situation and make moves to change it, via-skilling, education, job searching, or whatever it may take to improve your situation.


House prices are high here, and banks are slow to lend. That is one side of th argument (and I believe landlords, certainly small landlords, are barely part of problem if not part of the solution)


But the amount of people facing options 1 or 2 above and flat out refusing to do anything but complain about their situation in the hope a magic wand will be waved are a massive part of the problem too."

Replying To cavanman47:  "I think that's a good post.

I would agree that any full time job should mean ability to own a home.
And I believe I have given examples of exactly how that is in fact the case at present.

But those with more money will always want to live in nicer houses in more convenient locations. That's just human nature.

And those with less money will always have to identify what falls within their means and take 1 of 2 options:
1. Accept that the property you can afford may mean a longer commute to work and won't be as big or as fancy as some others.
2. Reassess your employment situation and make moves to change it, via-skilling, education, job searching, or whatever it may take to improve your situation.


House prices are high here, and banks are slow to lend. That is one side of th argument (and I believe landlords, certainly small landlords, are barely part of problem if not part of the solution)


But the amount of people facing options 1 or 2 above and flat out refusing to do anything but complain about their situation in the hope a magic wand will be waved are a massive part of the problem too."

Replying To Doylerwex:  "Just because Europe don't do it doesn't mean we should.

There are genetic markers of historical oppression that influence our desire to own something. This isn't me being emotive either, this is fact. It has nothing to do with being better than others. I small asset is not much for a lifetime of work.

Yes Europe are more into renting but you have security of tenancy, reasonable rents, you can have pets etc.

True not everyone can afford it, but a vast majority want to.

Do we all have to have standard construction methods? We can build five times as many modular homes without sourcing any new tradesmen.

Relaxing mortgage rules will make it worse. That will only increase competition for limited stock and ultimately increase prices.

The crisis is the banks fault. The taxpayer still holds considerable stake in most banks. We can further limit buy to let mortgages and increase/enforce vacant property penalties.

Then relax planning laws and rezone more land to increase supply of modular homes that can be delivered quickly.

Finance this via state housing agency or perhaps partnership with credit unions. The price is set at an affordable level and first come first serve.

That will solve the problem indefinitely.

Any job should provide enough to have a place to live, otherwise what is the point?

People need to live, not survive."

Replying To zinny:  "Ok you were referring to Leggo!

On a more serious note, the use of modular homes for whatever reason has not been something that has become popular in Ireland and that could be for a number of different reasons, one I would suggest is a mindset that they would be inferior to traditional homes. I also believe for some time it was difficult to get finance for them and I wonder what the difference in insurance would look like. Back to the European experience - they have been used in Europe since the 50's 60's but as I said we tend to follow the trends of our neighbors rather than the continent - ironic is it not that we try to claim we are so different to the people of the UK but we mimic them in so many ways.
I believe most of the discussions I have seen on the use of modular homes would say that they are not the answer to the current problem. Yes there may be a time to delivery difference but to think that all it takes is for a lorry to show up (and that's if the ability to get them to where people want their homes exist as they are not heading off down the backroads of Wexford) is totally wrong, you also have the fact that the entire industry is at the moment flat out building and if you think they are going to down tools on what they are doing and switch then you are wrong.
As you pointed out Europe is much better setup for rental than we are but it also applies to modular homes, how long before you would see the complains on the standards in Ireland than just would not exist in Europe?
Loser planning laws - is it the laws or the people? The laws were put in place for a reason - and a nod to Europe again. You are a big advocate for social housing but where? social housing means one thing to a lot of people and therefore nobody wants it near them but also planning has to take account of the infrastructure that surrounds it - our public transport infrastructure is brutal. If we could get the places to put houses we have no infrastructure to ensure that they are served correctly. We build motorways when we should have been building commuter rail lines that would connect the country together. Blame the politicians or blame the people who elect them? we all want immediate results and never want to hear that the answer is more complex and if we don't get immediate results then we vote them out of office. Get immediate results and all it does is create the next crises.
A place to live in doesn't mean you have to own it, a lot of people live comfortably all their lives all over the world in rented accommodation.
The US caused the 2008 GFC and it had its roots in the push to ensure everyone could own their own home - that was considered the only option as there was no hope they could regulate the rental market. Home ownership and a properly regulated rental market go hand in hand - public and private finance have to go hand in hand (but not public ownership of banks which never works). If the system was to changed - either there are too many or there is the perception there are too many who would just take advantage of it, which means nothing changes."

Replying To Galway9801:  "At the top of the previous page (145),, and halfway down page 138 would be good examples."

Replying To Breffni40:  "I addressed this very civilly but its inexplicably not been posted"

Replying To Freethinker:  "This hunt by the FAI for a manager is becoming an embarrassment. Not to me, mind you. We in Wicklow have enough of our own to contend with. Poyet turned a 5 yr term down according to reports. He was supposed to be interested last year. I suppose it's not possible to embarrass the FAI. They have certainly had their problems the past few yrs - most of which were self inflicted."

Replying To bruffgael:  "Even in the bad old days getting a manager wasn't as long as this."

Replying To GreenandRed:  "What's the rush? No competitive game for 5 months."

Replying To Breffni40:  "I addressed this very civilly but its inexplicably not been posted"

Replying To GreenandRed:  "What's the rush? No competitive game for 5 months."

Replying To Freethinker:  "I suppose none really, as long as John O'Shea is prepared to step in from time to time. Having said that, it must be heading for 6 months since Mr Kenny ran out of road, so it could hardly be called a "rushed" process."

Replying To thelongridge:  "The options for a new manager suffered a setback when Gus Poyet withdrew from the race. The new man has the problem, that Ireland are not a good team. We lack quality players, and the Swiss game showed how limited a team Ireland are."