All the current uproar is making such a difference.
As I understand it, the current surplus is considered once off which means that if they spend lots of it in a certain area, they won’t be able to keep up the funding.
So let’s say they spend a huge amount on housing. They’d then need to import or train in construction workers. They’d also have to ramp up supply lines for construction material, buy more equipment etc.
Then once the one off surplus is gone, they’d be stuck with too many workers and too much equipment which they won’t have the money to use.
Also I believe they haven’t even been able to spend the current housing budget.
They’re definitely not doing enough though, but I feel like money isn’t the issue. It’s the importance they’re putting on keeping house prices high.
I’m by no means an expert so happy to hear differently.
Well folks I hate to break it to ye but there’s a plan to expand the population by a million people by 2040. The government is cramming in as many immigrants into the country as they can and the EU are demanding those immigrants have priority to housing.
So if you’re not in a high paying job you’re fucked but don’t worry your taxes will be well spent housing others.
I expect the usual reality denying replies but I don’t care. Shoot the messenger.
There’s plenty of houses waiting to be built. Getting someone to build them is the problem.
Funding isn’t the issue with housing.
The budget was €4 billion last year and they spent just over €3 billion, including almost a billion directly purchasing housing.
The problem is supply chain issues and a lack of skilled construction workers.
Because the problem isn’t money.
If just throwing money at the housing problem would solve it? It would be fixed already.
The main problems are availability of labour & materials. There is a significant shortage of both.
Things are being build as quickly as possible at the moment. Anybody who tells you that they aren’t, or that they will build them faster is a liar.
Money does not fix the problem. Most homes are self financed via mortgages so the money is there and we have an already huge budget to build public houses.
The issue is not enough labour/workforce, NIMBYS, slow planning processes and it just takes a long time from planning to getting a house fully completed.
Even if there are factors that prevent spending the budget, it still reflects priorities. Currently there is more money being spent on housing Ukrainians, and that serves more as a comment this government’s priorities. It’s not that the Ukrainian’s are getting too much, it’s that the government isn’t prioritising housing as much as they claim they are.
And resource constraints aside in terms of the ability to spend any budgeted money, more money does stimulate the supply side, and the lack of focus on providing more apprentices by increasing their income to meet this demand also highlights the lack of priority.
It’s all there for everyone to see, but we’re told the emperor is fact not naked despite our eyes telling us otherwise. You’d think some people might catch on after repeating the same excuses for the better part of a decade now. But the gaslighting is the point at this stage.
Yes, the government should definitely repeat the policy mistakes made by the FF led coalitions of 1997-2010.
Paschal Donohoe has been pretty adamant about keeping the surplus, cause he knows the corporate tax bonanza we currently have is going to dry up in the near future.
It’s the most sensible decision IMO.
What does he think the Housing for all protests were about?
PBPs are always saying build social housing. I’m a member so I follow the TDs and councillors and it comes up all the time on my feeds.
Another lightweight article from Hearn, completely ignores the structural issues in actually spending the cash. As a load of other comments have highlighted, having billions extra to spend doesn’t make building more housing much easier.
Should give one of these socialists a 100million in a Brewster Millions experiment and ask them to come back with 300 new houses that weren’t already in motion in a couple years.
Big shortage of trades people to actually build houses, no matter how much money they throw at it.
14 comments
That’s what Ireland needs – more uproar.
All the current uproar is making such a difference.
As I understand it, the current surplus is considered once off which means that if they spend lots of it in a certain area, they won’t be able to keep up the funding.
So let’s say they spend a huge amount on housing. They’d then need to import or train in construction workers. They’d also have to ramp up supply lines for construction material, buy more equipment etc.
Then once the one off surplus is gone, they’d be stuck with too many workers and too much equipment which they won’t have the money to use.
Also I believe they haven’t even been able to spend the current housing budget.
They’re definitely not doing enough though, but I feel like money isn’t the issue. It’s the importance they’re putting on keeping house prices high.
I’m by no means an expert so happy to hear differently.
Well folks I hate to break it to ye but there’s a plan to expand the population by a million people by 2040. The government is cramming in as many immigrants into the country as they can and the EU are demanding those immigrants have priority to housing.
So if you’re not in a high paying job you’re fucked but don’t worry your taxes will be well spent housing others.
I expect the usual reality denying replies but I don’t care. Shoot the messenger.
Link without the facebook tracking: https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/2023/07/31/why-isnt-there-uproar-about-the-decision-not-to-invest-budget-surpluses-in-housing/
There’s plenty of houses waiting to be built. Getting someone to build them is the problem.
Funding isn’t the issue with housing.
The budget was €4 billion last year and they spent just over €3 billion, including almost a billion directly purchasing housing.
The problem is supply chain issues and a lack of skilled construction workers.
Because the problem isn’t money.
If just throwing money at the housing problem would solve it? It would be fixed already.
The main problems are availability of labour & materials. There is a significant shortage of both.
Things are being build as quickly as possible at the moment. Anybody who tells you that they aren’t, or that they will build them faster is a liar.
Money does not fix the problem. Most homes are self financed via mortgages so the money is there and we have an already huge budget to build public houses.
The issue is not enough labour/workforce, NIMBYS, slow planning processes and it just takes a long time from planning to getting a house fully completed.
Even if there are factors that prevent spending the budget, it still reflects priorities. Currently there is more money being spent on housing Ukrainians, and that serves more as a comment this government’s priorities. It’s not that the Ukrainian’s are getting too much, it’s that the government isn’t prioritising housing as much as they claim they are.
And resource constraints aside in terms of the ability to spend any budgeted money, more money does stimulate the supply side, and the lack of focus on providing more apprentices by increasing their income to meet this demand also highlights the lack of priority.
It’s all there for everyone to see, but we’re told the emperor is fact not naked despite our eyes telling us otherwise. You’d think some people might catch on after repeating the same excuses for the better part of a decade now. But the gaslighting is the point at this stage.
Yes, the government should definitely repeat the policy mistakes made by the FF led coalitions of 1997-2010.
Paschal Donohoe has been pretty adamant about keeping the surplus, cause he knows the corporate tax bonanza we currently have is going to dry up in the near future.
It’s the most sensible decision IMO.
What does he think the Housing for all protests were about?
PBPs are always saying build social housing. I’m a member so I follow the TDs and councillors and it comes up all the time on my feeds.
Another lightweight article from Hearn, completely ignores the structural issues in actually spending the cash. As a load of other comments have highlighted, having billions extra to spend doesn’t make building more housing much easier.
Should give one of these socialists a 100million in a Brewster Millions experiment and ask them to come back with 300 new houses that weren’t already in motion in a couple years.
Big shortage of trades people to actually build houses, no matter how much money they throw at it.