Planet Rugby Forum

Massey Ferguson wrote:

ruckinhell wrote:

nardol wrote:

ruckinhell wrote:

CM11 wrote:Is this not really dodgy if true or am I missing something?

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/pol ... 21733.html

He is an incredible buffoon and has single-handedly made a lot of career politicians look slick by comparison. It's easy to shout from the cheap seats which is where the goon should have stayed.

Talking about the healy rays now I assume?

No, the establishment figures he lampoons in his "books".

Healy Raes are a scourge on Irish society.

Danny's a dickhead but I have to admit I quite like Michael. Very different characters.

not sure if you caught Michael on the Tommy Tiernan show a few weeks back. meself and missus were groaning at the sh1te that would be spewed,,,,we begrudgingly admittedly to be pleasantly surprised.....still plenty of shite ;

Bullettyme wrote:

Uncle Fester wrote:

CM11 wrote:Ill advised comment from Leo with regards to house deposits but it's depressing to see the opposition latch on to only the bit they didn't like about his comments and ignore all the other bits. Par for the course.

What exactly was being debated? A loosening of the mortgage rules surrounding deposits? Don't first time buyers get some leeway as it is?

Whatever about suggesting that they tap up their parents, saying that they should borrow money for the deposit is scandalous and is as bad as any of the nonsense FF people came out with during the bubble.

He's a complete idiot for doing so, whatever about it being true or untrue for some of us, it doesn't do much for the image of him being an out of touch rich boy. "Just borrow it from your parents" it's laughable.

Or even worse, just emigrate.

Long way to go before it approaches "don't know why some people just don't kill themselves" territory.

Bullettyme wrote:

Uncle Fester wrote:

CM11 wrote:Ill advised comment from Leo with regards to house deposits but it's depressing to see the opposition latch on to only the bit they didn't like about his comments and ignore all the other bits. Par for the course.

What exactly was being debated? A loosening of the mortgage rules surrounding deposits? Don't first time buyers get some leeway as it is?

Whatever about suggesting that they tap up their parents, saying that they should borrow money for the deposit is scandalous and is as bad as any of the nonsense FF people came out with during the bubble.

He's a complete idiot for doing so, whatever about it being true or untrue for some of us, it doesn't do much for the image of him being an out of touch rich boy. "Just borrow it from your parents" it's laughable.

Or even worse, just emigrate.

He outlined all the different ways people got a deposit for a house. Not just borrow from parents or emigrate, ffs.

As I said, I don't know what the discussion was about exactly but he's right saying we shouldn't be going back to 100% mortgages and the reality is that the methods he outlined are pretty much it, as it takes years to save for a deposit while renting, if you can even afford to save. I'm not sure what exactly you want from him in this situation? Giveaways from the money tree?

Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

CM11 wrote:

Bullettyme wrote:

Uncle Fester wrote:

CM11 wrote:Ill advised comment from Leo with regards to house deposits but it's depressing to see the opposition latch on to only the bit they didn't like about his comments and ignore all the other bits. Par for the course.

What exactly was being debated? A loosening of the mortgage rules surrounding deposits? Don't first time buyers get some leeway as it is?

Whatever about suggesting that they tap up their parents, saying that they should borrow money for the deposit is scandalous and is as bad as any of the nonsense FF people came out with during the bubble.

He's a complete idiot for doing so, whatever about it being true or untrue for some of us, it doesn't do much for the image of him being an out of touch rich boy. "Just borrow it from your parents" it's laughable.

Or even worse, just emigrate.

He outlined all the different ways people got a deposit for a house. Not just borrow from parents or emigrate, ffs.

As I said, I don't know what the discussion was about exactly but he's right saying we shouldn't be going back to 100% mortgages and the reality is that the methods he outlined are pretty much it, as it takes years to save for a deposit while renting, if you can even afford to save. I'm not sure what exactly you want from him in this situation? Giveaways from the money tree?

He was responding to the prices of rents. Moving home and saving or borrowing money from parents isn't an option for a lot of people. You keep banging on about supply side, why didn't he mention that?

Mullet 2 wrote:Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

Mullet playing the man not the ball again.

And I've already criticised him for his comment.

Bullettyme wrote:

CM11 wrote:

Bullettyme wrote:

Uncle Fester wrote:

CM11 wrote:Ill advised comment from Leo with regards to house deposits but it's depressing to see the opposition latch on to only the bit they didn't like about his comments and ignore all the other bits. Par for the course.

What exactly was being debated? A loosening of the mortgage rules surrounding deposits? Don't first time buyers get some leeway as it is?

Whatever about suggesting that they tap up their parents, saying that they should borrow money for the deposit is scandalous and is as bad as any of the nonsense FF people came out with during the bubble.

He's a complete idiot for doing so, whatever about it being true or untrue for some of us, it doesn't do much for the image of him being an out of touch rich boy. "Just borrow it from your parents" it's laughable.

Or even worse, just emigrate.

He outlined all the different ways people got a deposit for a house. Not just borrow from parents or emigrate, ffs.

As I said, I don't know what the discussion was about exactly but he's right saying we shouldn't be going back to 100% mortgages and the reality is that the methods he outlined are pretty much it, as it takes years to save for a deposit while renting, if you can even afford to save. I'm not sure what exactly you want from him in this situation? Giveaways from the money tree?

He was responding to the prices of rents. Moving home and saving or borrowing money from parents isn't an option for a lot of people. You keep banging on about supply side, why didn't he mention that?

There are various different options for people. He outlined them all. What ones did he miss? There's little he can do about the rental market or supply at this stage and to be honest we should be moving on to a situation where people don't see renting as a big problem anyway.

As I said the comments were ill advised because people with nothing better to do were always going to pick up on them but again, what exactly do you want him to do here?

ticketlessinseattle wrote:

Massey Ferguson wrote:

ruckinhell wrote:
Healy Raes are a scourge on Irish society.

Danny's a dickhead but I have to admit I quite like Michael. Very different characters.

not sure if you caught Michael on the Tommy Tiernan show a few weeks back. meself and missus were groaning at the sh1te that would be spewed,,,,we begrudgingly admittedly to be pleasantly surprised.....still plenty of shite ;

Didn't see that but any time I've seen him in a 1 on 1 discussion he comes across quite well. He seems genuine. I suspect he cringes internally whenever his brother opens his mouth in public.

CM11 wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

Mullet playing the man not the ball again.

And I've already criticised him for his comment.

Yes yes the floating voter.

CM11 wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

Mullet playing the man not the ball again.

And I've already criticised him for his comment.

This is like the times you tries to explain Schmidt's more puzzling squad selections, without actually endorsing said selections.
You can either criticise him completely, or fully support him; no room for nuance.

Mullet 2 wrote:

CM11 wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

Mullet playing the man not the ball again.

And I've already criticised him for his comment.

Yes yes the floating voter.

Which part of me thinking FG are the best people to run the country currently are you having difficulty with?

Nolanator wrote:

CM11 wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

Mullet playing the man not the ball again.

And I've already criticised him for his comment.

This is like the times you tries to explain Schmidt's more puzzling squad selections, without actually endorsing said selections.
You can either criticise him completely, or fully support him; no room for nuance.

Yup Mullet/FF and Earl/Ulster is pretty much equivalent.

CM11 wrote:

Nolanator wrote:

CM11 wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

Mullet playing the man not the ball again.

And I've already criticised him for his comment.

This is like the times you tries to explain Schmidt's more puzzling squad selections, without actually endorsing said selections.
You can either criticise him completely, or fully support him; no room for nuance.

Yup Mullet/FF and Earl/Ulster is pretty much equivalent.

Which part of me thinking FF are the best people to run the country currently are you having difficulty with?

Mullet 2 wrote:

CM11 wrote:

Nolanator wrote:

CM11 wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

Mullet playing the man not the ball again.

And I've already criticised him for his comment.

This is like the times you tries to explain Schmidt's more puzzling squad selections, without actually endorsing said selections.
You can either criticise him completely, or fully support him; no room for nuance.

Yup Mullet/FF and Earl/Ulster is pretty much equivalent.

Which part of me thinking FF are the best people to run the country currently are you having difficulty with?

When have I displayed a difficulty with that? I've tried to ask your opinion as a FFer loads of times and all I get is abuse.

You do not.

I always treat your questions with the utmost respect.

Mullet 2 wrote:You do not.

I always treat your questions with the utmost respect.

I might believe that when you finally answer one.

Massey Ferguson wrote:

ticketlessinseattle wrote:

Massey Ferguson wrote:

ruckinhell wrote:
Healy Raes are a scourge on Irish society.

Danny's a dickhead but I have to admit I quite like Michael. Very different characters.

not sure if you caught Michael on the Tommy Tiernan show a few weeks back. meself and missus were groaning at the sh1te that would be spewed,,,,we begrudgingly admittedly to be pleasantly surprised.....still plenty of shite ;

Didn't see that but any time I've seen him in a 1 on 1 discussion he comes across quite well. He seems genuine. I suspect he cringes internally whenever his brother opens his mouth in public.

i think Tommy Tiernan had the same impression, he went for the jugular straight away taking the piss out of him about drink driving - he pretty much said what you're saying above by end of the interview. Its probably to do with the fact that it turns our he's 95% Cork........just him, not the brother or any other Healy Raes

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/pol ... 26204.html

Looks like a hit and miss from the opposition. Although, I'd be happy to call it a draw.

Leo hardly comes out of that little rant smelling of roses.

He is leader of a country with a schism between young and old and despite his young age he is underlining the fact he came of age before the crash and very much belongs to the latter.

Allo the while he is leader of a country that has (as of yet) done very little to address the issue.

CM11 wrote:

Nolanator wrote:

CM11 wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:Statto the floating voter with another spirited defence of the Taoiseach.

Mullet playing the man not the ball again.

And I've already criticised him for his comment.

This is like the times you tries to explain Schmidt's more puzzling squad selections, without actually endorsing said selections.
You can either criticise him completely, or fully support him; no room for nuance.

Yup Mullet/FF and Earl/Ulster is pretty much equivalent.

Shut up you CamRAc

Mullet 2 wrote:Shut up you CamRAc

You bollix.

Accusing me of belonging to a Brit organisation that promotes beers other than the pint of plain is really well beyond the pale.

Banning material even.

How does Sirr's assertion that prices would increase stack up with the mortgage limits? The number of cash buyers has been reasonably static, so there aren't that many people with the readies to go out and buy gaffs.

Plus investment properties have really shít returns.

So the local government is going to provide mortgages to people who can't get one at a better rate than say me who is paying rent and saving at the same time and who jumped through all the hoops required of my bank to get approved?

Which means house prices will go up, right?
Which will fudge me over again. Thanks FG.

anonymous_joe wrote:How does Sirr's assertion that prices would increase stack up with the mortgage limits? The number of cash buyers has been reasonably static, so there aren't that many people with the readies to go out and buy gaffs.

Plus investment properties have really shít returns.

He's talking out his arse. I heard McWilliams talk the same shite about property not respecting the laws of supply and demand. Fúcking spas.


The lending limits now in place tie Mortgages to income. If builders want to make real money (which you do by building VW Passats not RR Phantoms) they must build to those limits. That is how you avoid mad speculation. Just ask Canadians.

So I assume. The costs of building are the biggest problem here. If the standards were great, fine, but everybody I know in the industry says it's costing a fortune to build shit houses at the moment, through a mix of bad regulations, cartel like material costs, and rather expensive labour.

It's all well and good saying housing is different to some other commodities, but even gold obeys the laws of supply and demand.

40% of the costs of a house are taxes and local authority levies.

I was trying to work out the figures recently.

Plus professional fees aren't exactly cheap either. I say, getting ready for an arbitration on a building agreement gone wrong.

Im glad we have come to the the conclusion that its aj's and his kind fault

anonymous_joe wrote:I was trying to work out the figures recently.

Plus professional fees aren't exactly cheap either. I say, getting ready for an arbitration on a building agreement gone wrong.

Nearly 10% of the costs will be professional fees

Being serious, conveyancing here is still far too opaque and the PRA really needs to be better funded and forced to take a much more active role.

Mullet 2 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:I was trying to work out the figures recently.

Plus professional fees aren't exactly cheap either. I say, getting ready for an arbitration on a building agreement gone wrong.

Nearly 10% of the costs will be professional fees

Yeah, from brickies to barristers and architects, we pay people too much.

anonymous_joe wrote:Being serious, conveyancing here is still far too opaque and the PRA really needs to be better funded and forced to take a much more active role.

The battle over legal fees was lost.

Not a dickie on reform since Shatter ate the shotgun.

I was talking to a client today who finally closed a deal he did with NAMA last Friday, two years after going sale agreed.

In that time 12 different Solicitors acted for NAMA!

anonymous_joe wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:I was trying to work out the figures recently.

Plus professional fees aren't exactly cheap either. I say, getting ready for an arbitration on a building agreement gone wrong.

Nearly 10% of the costs will be professional fees

Yeah, from brickies to barristers and architects, we pay people too much.

Engineers are cheap.

Mullet 2 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:Being serious, conveyancing here is still far too opaque and the PRA really needs to be better funded and forced to take a much more active role.

The battle over legal fees was lost.

Not a dickie on reform since Shatter ate the shotgun.

I was talking to a client today who finally closed a deal he did with NAMA last Friday, two years after going sale agreed.

In that time 12 different Solicitors acted for NAMA!

I wouldn't lay the blame in that regard at the foot of the lawyers. NAMA are notoriously shít at responding to legal letters.

In terms of fees, Shatter didn't try and do anything either. The solution there is more judges, more case management and less work having to be done by the lawyers alongside more work concentrating in the hands of a handful of senior specialists in most areas.

anonymous_joe wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:Being serious, conveyancing here is still far too opaque and the PRA really needs to be better funded and forced to take a much more active role.

The battle over legal fees was lost.

Not a dickie on reform since Shatter ate the shotgun.

I was talking to a client today who finally closed a deal he did with NAMA last Friday, two years after going sale agreed.

In that time 12 different Solicitors acted for NAMA!

I wouldn't lay the blame in that regard at the foot of the lawyers. NAMA are notoriously shít at responding to legal letters.

In terms of fees, Shatter didn't try and do anything either. The solution there is more judges, more case management and less work having to be done by the lawyers alongside more work concentrating in the hands of a handful of senior specialists in most areas.

I'm not, just pointing out the madness of system.

NAMA are the people the left want to solve the crises

Mullet 2 wrote:40% of the costs of a house are taxes and local authority levies.

And another 20-30% on the price of the land.

anonymous_joe wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:I was trying to work out the figures recently.

Plus professional fees aren't exactly cheap either. I say, getting ready for an arbitration on a building agreement gone wrong.

Nearly 10% of the costs will be professional fees

Yeah, from brickies to barristers and architects, we pay people too much.

So you think, speaking about civil/structural engineers, 2.5 - 3% covers the risk involved including any latent defects that may arise. Construction risk has a very long tail indeed, far longer than any lawyer would accept.

camroc1 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:I was trying to work out the figures recently.

Plus professional fees aren't exactly cheap either. I say, getting ready for an arbitration on a building agreement gone wrong.

Nearly 10% of the costs will be professional fees

Yeah, from brickies to barristers and architects, we pay people too much.

So you think, speaking about civil/structural engineers, 2.5 - 3% covers the risk involved including any latent defects that may arise. Construction risk has a very long tail indeed, far longer than any lawyer would accept.

I've no idea how many hours, etc, go into it tbh.

There's talk from the new Dáil committee of council lads signing off now, no longer engineers and architects.

anonymous_joe wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:I was trying to work out the figures recently.

Plus professional fees aren't exactly cheap either. I say, getting ready for an arbitration on a building agreement gone wrong.

Nearly 10% of the costs will be professional fees

Yeah, from brickies to barristers and architects, we pay people too much.

So you think, speaking about civil/structural engineers, 2.5 - 3% covers the risk involved including any latent defects that may arise. Construction risk has a very long tail indeed, far longer than any lawyer would accept.

I've no idea how many hours, etc, go into it tbh.

There's talk from the new Dáil committee of council lads signing off now, no longer engineers and architects.

It's nothing to do with hours; it's taking on a risk that can last 20 yrs beyond your last payment, and finding an insurance policy that will cover you, at some sort of reasonable rate for that activity.