Leo Varadkar

[SoundMan]

I asked a question to FSG because his post didn't make sense.

Not sure why you felt the need to get involved tbh.

Do you want to answer the question now? Do you accept that the drawing down of 500 mortgages doesn't necessarily equate to 500 new houses?

 

[Matlock]

Do you want to answer the question now? Do you accept that the drawing down of 500 mortgages doesn't necessarily equate to 500 new houses?

I never said that the drawdown of 500 mortgages equated to 500 new houses.

You do this all the time. You make up something, pretend that another poster has said it, and then asked them to confirm or admit something that they never said.

It is beyond stupid, and very irritating. I'm never sure if you do it on purpose or if you are just unable to construct a logical argument. Either way, I have no interest in engaging with it.

 

[FSG OUT]

I never said that the drawdown of 500 mortgages equated to 500 new houses.

You do this all the time. You make up something, pretend that another poster has said it, and then asked them to confirm or admit something that they never said.

It is beyond stupid, and very irritating. I'm never sure if you do it on purpose or if you are just unable to construct a logical argument. Either way, I have no interest in engaging with it.

Yes you did.
You mentioned 500 drawdowns and asked why were so many being drawn down if there were no houses available.
Stop back tracking.

 

[Matlock]

Yes you did.
You mentioned 500 drawdowns and asked why were so many being drawn down if there were no houses available.
Stop back tracking.

I'm not backtracking at all.

You clearly mixed up mortgage approval and mortgage drawdown. Once you realised that, you tried to obfuscate by saying that not everyone who draws down their mortgage buys a house but you refused to answer how it was that was happening.

 

[FSG OUT]

I'm not backtracking at all.

You clearly mixed up mortgage approval and mortgage drawdown. Once you realised that, you tried to obfuscate by saying that not everyone who draws down their mortgage buys a house but you refused to answer how it was that was happening.

You are backtracking.
You were the one who mentioned 500 drawdowns per week. Why bring that up so? That's maximum 26,000 new houses.
We have over 100,000 20-30 year olds living at home. That'll only grow. They'll also need homes.
I always mention the 250,000 deficit in housing for a reason.

 

[Matlock]

You are backtracking.
You were the one who mentioned 500 drawdowns per week. Why bring that up so? That's maximum 26,000 new houses.
We have over 100,000 20-30 year olds living at home. That'll only grow. They'll also need homes.
I always mention the 250,000 deficit in housing for a reason.

No I wasn't.

I am not disputing any numbers.

There are about 500 mortgage drawdowns each and every week as well as social houses coming on stream.

That + cash buyers etc.

Just keep catastrophizing everything all the time anyway.

Stacky brought it up.

500 Mortgage drawdowns means fcuk all. There are no bloody houses you gobshite. 11 years of underinvestment, 12,000 homeless, not including couch surfers, those in direct provision, and a deficit in supply of 250,000 houses are all bloody facts. The scumbags have destroyed the housing market.
Nobody is catastrophizing anything.
If anything everything is downplayed.

And then you made this comment on it

 

[Stacky]

Do you want to answer the question now? Do you accept that the drawing down of 500 mortgages doesn't necessarily equate to 500 new houses?

Who claimed that it did?

It could also be for the purchase of existing properties.

 

[slick fingers]

Mortgage Breakdowns Q1 23

The following are the key figures from the Mortgage Drawdowns Report for Q1 2023:

• A total of 10,908 new mortgages to the value of €2,868 million were drawn down by borrowers during the first quarter of 2023.
• This represents an increase of 10.1% in volume and 14.1% in value on the corresponding first quarter of 2022.
• A comparison with the previous quarter (Q4 2022) shows a decrease of 31.3% in volume and 34.1% in value.
• First-time buyers (FTBs) remained the single largest segment by volume (50.8%) and by value (51.1%).
• Re-mortgage/switching volumes and values rose by 22.5% and 25.3% year on year respectively but fell by 52.1% and 53.7% on the previous quarter.

In addition, BPFI also published today the latest figures from the BPFI Mortgage Approvals Report for March 2023:

• A total of 4,520 mortgages were approved in March 2023 – some 2,801 were for FTBs (62% of total volume), while mover purchasers accounted for 1,019 (22.5%).
• The number of mortgages approved in March rose by 33.8% month-on-month and fell by 1.2% year-on-year.
• Mortgages approved in March 2023 were valued at €1,301 million – of which FTBs accounted for €819 million (62.9%) and €332 million by mover purchasers (25.5%).
• The value of mortgage approvals rose by 37.7% month-on-month and 7.7% year-on-year.
• Re-mortgage/switching activity fell by 54.4% year on year in volume terms and by 53.1% in value in the same period.

 

[FSG OUT]

No I wasn't.

Stacky brought it up.

And then you made this comment on it

Mortgage Breakdowns Q1 23

The issue is lack of supply.
Nobody ever said people weren't getting mortgages. There could be 1,000 drawdowns a week and it wouldn't make any difference. It's a moronic point to make
11 years of underinvestment by successive governments means we have a deficit of 250,000 homes.
The government UNDERSPENT by €1bn during a housing crisis.
Over 70s are being forcibly evicted.
12,000 + are homeless, including women and children.
500 drawdowns per week means nothing if your rent is €1750 pm.

 

[SoundMan]

I never said that the drawdown of 500 mortgages equated to 500 new houses.

You do this all the time. You make up something, pretend that another poster has said it, and then asked them to confirm or admit something that they never said.

It is beyond stupid, and very irritating. I'm never sure if you do it on purpose or if you are just unable to construct a logical argument. Either way, I have no interest in engaging with it.

I never said that you said the drawdown of 500 mortgages equated to 500 new houses and you do that kind of simulated indignation all the time. Neither did I say you said the moon is made out of green cheese btw, so please don't accuse me of saying you actually said that either.

You said to him that his "calculations are based on the assumption that all house purchases involve a mortgage, which isn't true." as though he was incorrect with the figure of 500 in that some houses are purchased without a mortgage. But when I pointed out the corollary to your suggestion that it could actually have been less houses purchased than the 500 some might imply from mortgage drawdown, ie that not all mortgage drawdowns equate to a new house, you got an attack of the vapours!

And that's not the first time you've feigned such indignation to avoid the actual matter