As a society we can quantify it is lots of ways, but most importantly it’s worth keeping in mind that the taxpayers are not a disinterested party. Unlike Cerberus, we have to pay for social housing one way or another whether that’s in rent allowance, council housing, or whatever. By disposing of these assets we are going to incur costs that haven’t been factored into the sale price. To be honest, I didn’t expect you to understand it.
Land 24% by value? That’s an awful lot of land! Given that the major price component in our over inflated property market is LAND, then there was a very good argument for selling it off in smaller amounts to encourage it’s use rather than the continued hoarding of it.
That land exists either way. It shouldn’t be used as a deciding factor in deciding what to do with the land in Dublin and in the Greater Dublin Area. Argumentum ad absurdum.
A red herring. Nobody is proposing that.
Cerberus have bought almost everything that has come on the market. I would assume they will manage their assets in the best way to maximise their profit. If that means warehousing some assets in order to force up rents and to inflate the value of their development land then that’s what they will do. They have no ‘social obligation’.