Talk:Irish property bubble

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Disputed neutrality[edit]

The Irish Property Bubble is a controversial topic, with many "experts" denying its existence at all. ... The author seems a little testy, hmm? --12.162.215.130 14:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence immediately ridicules those that deny the existence of the property bubble by putting quotation marks around "experts." The authors follow this up with rhetorical questions more appropriate in a persuasive essay than an encyclopedic article. The complete lack of sources cited also makes the entire article suspect. I see weasel statements as well.

"It appears that the only way for agricultural land to pay for itself at current market values is if it can be:"

Who sees this as the only way? The authors?

I see a disparity of detail between the bearish arguments and bullish arguments, with a snide little gem--"The media in general, taking advertising revenue from the estate agents"--given with no source. The implied criticism there belongs in the bearish arguments section.

I feel great alarm at this subject as well, because my own country has a serious property bubble problem as well. A NPOV article would still show the severity of the problem, but in a more appropriate and credible way.--SpacemanAfrica 04:46, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. I suggest to change <"experts"> to <market commentators>. But the point I think must be that many people with a vested interest - those who benefit from selling property, providing loans, etc. - declare themselves as "expert" without providing the balanced opinion we would expect from real non-biased experts. Also, the mortgage banks especially in Ireland have vast resources and PR departments available which keep feeding the media with bullish information about the Irish Property Market.
You are right about the weasel statements and lack of sources. But argue it here about how the land will pay for itself. Ask the sugar beet farmers for example what comes next for their land. (their industry is GONE in 24 months from now...)
I would also suggest a new article Irish Property Market which even in its title is more neutral. Calling something a bubble is already taking a point of view. T0ky0 09:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If that's true, the article should be deleted, or at the very least moved to Irish Property Market and given a substantially more neutral tone. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Articles which inherently stump for one POV have no place here. Ξxtreme Unction|yakkity yak 12:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want the article deleted, because I feel that the issue has significance. Having an article on the bubble but not the actual property market shows a definite systemic bias, but this encyclopedia would have far fewer articles if we deleted some for a lack of more. Let me quote from US property bubble:
"US property bubble' refers to a belief that there is a United States economic bubble in real estate."
The very first sentence negates the inherent bias of the article's title. Besides, if you move it to another article, you'd have to make a section heading anyways, right?
T0ky0, I won't argue about how the land will pay for itself, because I suspect that it simply can't. --SpacemanAfrica 00:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fundementally the article is a good one but it does need de-poving and a general tidy up. Djegan 19:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this article should be there at all. If at all, there should be an article on the Irish Property Market - with a para. on possible bubble. Bubble's should be explained in generic terms. There may or may not be a bubble - but having the title the Irish Property Bubble presupposes that one exists. On that basis the article should be deleted.

I think you can only talk about a "property bubble" effect from a neutral point of view if it already has happened in case of the Japanese property bubble. In case of the Irish property market, I've seen people call it a bubble as far back as 2000 and growth has been dramatic since then. There is no conclusive evidence that the "bubble" will burst (the term bubble would indicate a dramatic collapse of the prices), the prices of property could just as easily stabilise. So, despite the merits of the article, this talk about Bubble is all conjecture and speculation. Twigler 23:35, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I merged the two sections of 'Crash predictions' and 'Crash denials' into a single Crash predictions and denials, with subheadings 'Predictions' and 'Denials' - not a very elegant solution, I know, but the two big headings seemed clumsy as well, and I thought doing it this way would still be acceptable to everybody? I trust it doesn't change much i.t.o. the meaning or relative importance of the two viewpoints. Leviel 21:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction section[edit]

The introduction really needs work. It needs to be *far* more neutral and less loaded, and needs to more clearly set the context for readers from various people around the world who don't know squat about Ireland or it's current condition (e.g. 4th highest GDP per capita in the world - 2006)

The latter sections of the article are perhaps more interesting.

In any case, lots of work needed, but this is a genuinely useful topic for Wikipedia to include, as it is one of the more important topics concerning contemporary Ireland that needs to be documented here.

zoney ♣ talk 22:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I divided the very long lead paragraph into an introductory sentence (I couldn't determine what other information was really critical to the lead, but of course a paragraph ought to be written for it) and two sections:

I also moved the Growth background section the Crash predictions and denials section, because it seemed to fit in better with the previous two sections, although I might be wrong. Leviel 21:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

Current article name is not NPOV, I propose moving it to a name which does not presuppose one of the POVs it describes. Demiurge 16:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pathlessdesert 17:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Real estate bubble and Japanese asset price bubble are fine where they are (the first describes the general phenomenon and the second describes a historical event), the other articles suffer from the same syndrome as this one so I'd be inclined to rename them too. However, pending that, I don't see why we can't rename this article -- why should the poor naming of those articles prevent us from fixing this one? Demiurge 18:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. As per Demiurge's points. Plenty of citable references exist regarding 'bubble' nature of the market, but it is still a POV - albeit with economic credibility. Ekilfeather 18:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't believe that the title in any of these cases takes for granted the existence of a bubble. In common with the above articles, the Irish Property Bubble Article states from the outset that there may or may not be a bubble, and presents information that supports both points of view. Is the article on Evolution POV because of its title, which does not give equal weight to, for example, Intelligent Design? Under the reasoning behind this proposed name change, the Evolution article would need to be scrapped and put under some sort of umbrella article. Pathlessdesert 20:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The theory of evolution is a well-defined concept with countless notable adherents and countless published articles in reputable sources. Contrast that with the original research and uncited facts in this article. Demiurge 11:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In mentioning the evolution article, my point was that the title itself is not inherently POV (since the article name is under discussion here). From what you are saying, it seems clear that your objection, then, is to the content of the article as opposed to its title. Pathlessdesert 14:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hi. Now that Nick Leeson has substantially quoted from the article (see http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2006/10/08/story17890.asp) and USED THE TERM "Irish property bubble" twice in the article, I think that the title should remain as is. David McWilliams also uses the term. T0ky0 10:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the strong opposition above to the requested move, I have declined it. Martinp23 19:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unverified claims[edit]

I removed claims tagged with {{Fact}} along with the "unreferenced, original research" tag as per WP:CITE. Pathlessdesert 22:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing in Ireland as a "Minister for Housing" 137.43.153.221 16:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite. This referred to Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government and has been changed. Pathlessdesert 19:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFC?[edit]

Where is the RFC section? --- Skapur 17:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Argument not included[edit]

One argument I have heard that is not detailed here, is that the Irish house market was historically drastically undervalued (i.e. because most people in Ireland didn't have money in say, 1980s-early 1990s - and those who did didn't need to spend much to live like a king as a result).

Any sources for this, or analysis? While some (maybe even most) of the house price increases are not necessarily based in reality, it doesn't seem strange that houses in idyllic locations in Wicklow for example have gone from prices of tens of thousands to a million or more in just a couple of decades.

zoney ♣ talk 15:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel this is an extremely unique situation. I dont think any other nation on earth has as much investment in housing, it is a common belief "the only way is up". I feel this article has put the economical data together very well but maybe it would be beneficial to include the bullish pyschology of the irish people on property???? It would be interesting to have poll on heavily invested irish real estate personel and ask just why they think prices will keep on rising????

Bias in article[edit]

May I start by saying I actually agree that Irish property appears (in my subjective opinion) to be overvalued; however the level of bias in this article is breathtaking. By definition the existence of an asset price bubble cannot be proven until that bubble bursts. May I suggest adding the following facts to balance the overall polemic:

1) Ireland still has one of the lowest amounts of housing per head of population of any country in Europe. In 1970 on average 4 people occupied every household; in 2001 this had declined to 3. The Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors as late as 2004 described Ireland as being 'towards the bottom of the Housing Availability League' (RICS European Housing review 2004). To a considerable extent the building boom reflects the fact that housing supply is still well behind the European norm and Ireland is finally attempting to catch up with its continental neighbours.

2) Because supply of property is inelastic (it takes time to move) any advance in incomes is likely to have an immediate effect on house prices, especially where supply starts from a position of being inadequate. In this context, increased house prices can in part be explained as the natural effect of rising incomes: according to the Central Statistics Office the average Irish industrial wage rose by 42% between 1998 and 2005, with take home pay rising by even more due to significant cuts in taxation.

3) Ireland is currently experiencing exceptionally high rates of immigration and the argument is frequently made that it is natural for this surge in demand for housing to push up house prices. Even if immigrants only rent (in fact many are clearly becoming property owners themselves) the argument can be made that this makes owning an investment property more attractive to others. Others counter that a housing boom dependent on immigration, which is in itself dependent on the overall health of the jobs market, is capable of increasing the eventual likelihood of a property price bust. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.156.117.1 (talk) 18:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Sources? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.101.23.25 (talk) 01:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interest rates[edit]

The page needs to mention that interest rates are determined by the European Central Bank, and that they are unlikely to rise significantly (making less money available to buy houses in Ireland) until Germany resumes a significant level of economic growth. 87.187.74.244

Loose lending[edit]

The growth background section should really describe the enormous amounts of money being borrowed from credit institutions, and the loose prudential policies being applied by banks. The wide availability of credit, rather than the price-stability policies followed by the ECB, is the driving force of the boom in house prices.

Subprime lending and mortgage-backed securities should also be dealt with.--Shtove 20:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here we are in 2011. Guess the bubble deniers must feel a bit foolish now. they look like Holocaust deniers at this stage. Way to go property rampers.Emerald ire (talk) 01:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bust[edit]

Someone document the bust, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.226.80.254 (talk) 08:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Massively out of date[edit]

Most of this article is way out of date, the talk page is hilarious because I had forgotten how in denial most of us were at the time but anyway here are some links that should help get someone started updating it: http://www.daft.ie/report/ http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/StatisticsandRegularPublications/HousingStatistics/ http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/StatisticsandRegularPublications/PlanningStatistics/ http://www.environ.ie/en/DevelopmentandHousing/Housing/News/MainBody,25485,en.htm http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/Europe/Ireland/Price-History http://www.cso.ie/statistics/Construction.htm Seos (talk) 14:11, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps better graph?[edit]

Hi, I'm MartinD on the Dutch Wikipedia and Commons. I'm the one who made the graph featured in this article, using data from Permanent TSB. However, Permanent TSB has not been updating its numbers since 2010Q2. Recently the Irish CSO has published monthly index numbers, starting at 2005. These have been used in File:Irish house prices Central Statistics Office.png. Best regards, MartinD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.171.19.139 (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Further Factors in the Demographics Section[edit]

Some reliable figures relating to migration - notoriously difficult to find considering - need to be added. The number of houses/homes in Ireland doubled in the decade to 2007 (- a remarkable occurrence in any Nation in recent history, surely ? ), and, as stated, this can't be accounted for by an earlier rise in birth-rates that necessitated the increase. There are also the non-EU accession migrants to be added - there are numerous reputable records from the early 2000s referring to the increase in registered births to foreign-born parents increasing to 80% of all births for a couple of years - it was used as the reasoning behind the Citizenship referendum, so there's plenty of contemporary journalism from the time. While there are aspects here that are usually quietly glossed over to avoid immigration-related incitement,it can, of course, all be handled neutrally; no article purporting to deal with the Irish housing boom will be even nearly relevent without addressing migration fully. In the long run, I think, this article will need to be expanded/amalgamated with the story of the Irish banking crisis/collapse, and the resultant Bank Guarantee, as the whole 'building-boom' story is part of the same story. The full history of it all has yet to be written, of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.76.203.100 (talk) 20:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Osiris (talk) 14:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.banking-business-review.com/news/anglo_irish_bank_posts_massive_loss_of_41b_010609
    Triggered by -business-review\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 17:33, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Irish property bubble. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Irish property bubble. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Irish property bubble. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:38, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Irish property bubble. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:09, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Irish property bubble. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:30, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Irish_property_bubble&oldid=1200177009"