The David McWilliams thread


I like the way the indo left the stock pic description in place “Full length of bodyguard helping elegant woman stepping out of car at airport terminal”


Good man Dan …“social transfers amount to more than €27bn, spent via welfare payments, the health and education systems and on social housing” …a nice way of saying that there’s people in this country never worked a day in their lives …with a house a car a big tv and 2wks on the costa …if they where anywhere else they’d be living in a trailer park.


Dan leaves out the fact that the wealthy would have lost far more if the banks weren’t bailed out; transferring that burden onto the entirety of society.
Must have overlooked that bit Dan.


Dan starts out with the following “Education is probably the most important factor in allowing people to move up the social escalator.”
Then finishes bemoaning the funding of the “health and education systems”.

I’m the biggest DMcW hater this side of a noxious Beetle … but Dan O’Brien is not the answer.


Well, I’m now spending substantially more on rent so I’m certainly feeling the recovery. :smiley: :confused:


Old people are “wealthy” in the sense of “holding a large amounts of assets relative to their income”, but that’s due to lifetime consumption smoothing.

Wiping out the savings of pensioners is not exactly sticking it to the man.


The older generation have stuck the younger generation with the bill they ran up.


I suppose if you lump people together tightly enough then more will fit in the Carrousel.


He has got it all figured out, again.

Great expectations - the driving force behind latest property crisis … 47910.html


Mr floppy hair comes in at nbr 1. … ic-experts


Quite right too. I get all my macroeconomic insights from Instagram and Foursquare.


Yoda comes in at 14… and he has this to say:


TIL Foursqure is still a thing.


McWilliams in the Business Post:

Rent control is grand, sure they have it in Germany.

Paris and Stockholm have it and there are no problems there.

Not sure if its laziness or dishonesty that lets him overlook the massive over supply in Berlin or the absolute clusterfuck that is the Stockholm rental market. - Another report on the opposite page goes inro some detail on Stockholm. Even quotes
Asaar Lindbeck saying “rent control appears to be the most efficient technique of destroying a city, except for bombing”… As well as
Gunnar Myrdal architect of Swedens Welfare State and Nobel Memorial Laureate who described it as " the worst example of poor planning by governments lacking courage and vision ".

Just goes to show what a populist gasbag he is - oh and naturellement he prefaces his musings with an anecdote which has him playing on the wing in a schools cup final in Lansdowne Road during which he had moment of revelation.


Out of interest, what tax breaks was he talking about removing for landlords?

Article is behind a paywall.


I wondered too - very vague :smiley:

Also mentioned interest expense - unusual for an economist - removing it would destroy large scale landlord investment

this seems to be in addition to Section 43 or whatever though I thought they are history… (Apart from HRI and a few minor ones). I think he’s filling space here…

He even advocates non recourse mortgages!



Thanks slasher.

He seems to contradict himself all over the place.

First, germany is mecca, yet in the paragraph on the right he said Berliners were struggling to find affordable accomodation? Which is it?
Plus, he’s advocating a 2 tier society - those in older units get cheap rent but those in new units pay elevated market rents? This isn’t unusual but it is not ideal, particularly when he’s trying to “fight the corner” of new renters.

The guy is all over the place.

Off topic, the ex Swedish prime minister gave a recent lse public presentation at the LSE - their LSE Events podcasts are really good. He was talking about their “jobs economy”. Worth a listen .


A friend grew up in a rented Berlin apartment.

It was next to impossible to move his parents on and the rent was adjusted in some way as to be generally beneficial to tenants.

The downside was that the place got increasingly shabby. The landlord could never be ‘convinced’ to put in a new bathroom for example.

Communal areas were also grotty. The building (5 floors) could have benefitted from a lift but presumably no one was prepared to pay.

The building was in a great location but the buildings were all quite old and I got the impression that most of the interiors weren’t up to much. Anyone who wanted a nicely fitted apartment had to move to something new further out.


Two Swedes I’ve known through work:

  1. Joined the ‘queue’ for the rent-controlled market in Stockholm as a teenager, was still waiting in his 30s
  2. Was bought an apartment as a teenager by her parents in Stockholm. They knew she would get a sub-market rate if she had to let it (which she does) but that it was worth owning as insurance against having to join the ‘queue’ like in example 1) … stockholm/