For example, what is relative population growth, immigration (eastern Europe & China to Ireland), age demographic of home buyers (eg: % of population currently seen as eligble or likely buyers).

There is far too much missing from the analysis for it to stand as a reliable comparison. It doesn’t work to say “what if” … “then you still have 25 times” … when there could be a galaxy of information/context missing (or subject to different definition or interpretation) between the numbers being offered here.

A rule of thumb I usually stick too is to completely ignore what is in the newspapers. I wouldn’t normally read or respond to blogs either but I got a keyword alert for this particular piece.

But even if you took the anticipated US figure of sales of 720,000 and, say, doubled it, to give one and a half million builds, you would still only have the US building total at twenty-five times that anticipated in Ireland in 2008, when an equal number per capita would mean seventy-five times as many. Ireland would be building three times as many houses per capita as the United States.

- Annualised rate based on one months particularly low figure is not necessarily a sound basis for judgement.

- Exactly what a “sale” is, is not qualified. Needs to be judged in a context of tradition of ownership V rental.

- The quotes are talking -sales- in the US v. -builds- in Ireland.

- Would also need to consider home ownership rates, local government housing, etc.