Are the Government helping you

Donadea Leo

This is a genuine question, I feel myself getting more and more disillusioned by how things are done here.

I'm wondering who is benefitting from Government Policy and actions - or is it simply a right of passage that young people with families constantly get screwed to shore up the finances of the super rich.

We recently sold a house we bought not long post boom as prices were on the slide, though they slid quite a bit after that. We lost a nice bit of money though managed to get out of negative equity so were happy as being accidental landlords was not where we wanted to be. It gave us a chance to start again but here we are looking at properties again, just in time to find the bubble increasing by the minute. We have been outbid on 4 occasions now and there are cash buyers in every contest. Even the much maligned estate agents are saying the situation is crazy, houses are going for 70 k over asking - and I'm talking in the 200-300 bracket. I can't believe we're here again and nothing is being done. You might suggest if this is the case sit back and rent and don't buy but there;s the dilemna, our kids are in school, there is currently 0 properties to rent in the area, if something happens such as landlord decides to sell/move back into property, then we're in trouble, people with families have no option but to buy when living outside major urban areas.

I'm not exactly a socialist and would consider myself to have some level of pragmatism13 billion euro of a tax break to Apple just seems unthinkable. I know they bring jobs and other companies but how long is the payback on 13 billion. Also how much are other companies getting - I can;t imagine its only one multinational availing of more than just our generous corporation tax.

When do our people ever come first and will we ever have a government who attempts to look after the people who elect them. Maybe the more learned of you might be able to give me some examples of how the government is helping them. I need some inspiration.

Suryavarman

There was no €13bn tax break for Apple. Ireland only taxes companies on their Irish profits, not global profits. Apple hasn't paid tax on their global profits because they haven't repatriated their global profits to the US yet. When they do that they will pay tax on those profits. The EU ruling holds that Ireland has to act like a tax collector for the rest of the world.

The reality is the Government isn't turning down €13bn. The Government is standing up for the rule of law by refusing to collect retroactive taxation on behalf of other countries.

Cookie_Monster

What have the government ever done for us?

well there's the roads..

The roads go without saying

Er, The water system, free education, healthcare, public transport, being able to walk the streets in safety, a first world economy and a lifestyle & wealth that 90% of the world will never reach.

Well yeah, but ASIDE from all that what have they ever done...

Donadea Leo

Thanks for the perspective on the 13 billion, that's one I didn't understand so actually fair enough, it seems to be presented by the media that its to us Apple owe the tax and not other nations (rightly or wrongly)

In relation to what the governement are actually doing, I'm not trying to pick a fight but are those items such as, free education, healthcare, safety on the streets etc. already established - obviously they have to be managed and run and that is obviously the role of the Government, but maybe we could have a minister for 'learning from our mistakes' or a 'minister for Values' or a minister for dealing with the current crisis (whatever that is - superminister - with cape and speedos built in).

Maybe I am actually a socialist or maybe I'm just jealous but its hard to keep seeing a system that is designed to take money off one group of people and give it to those who already have the most - yes yes that's capitalism and not the design of the Irish Government but the dominant economic system throughout the world.

BoJack Horseman

Donadea Leo wrote: »

its hard to keep seeing a system that is designed to take money off one group of people and give it to those who already have the most

Tease this out further.

Godge

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

What have the government ever done for us?

well there's the roads..

The roads go without saying

Er, The water system, free education, healthcare, public transport, being able to walk the streets in safety, a first world economy and a lifestyle & wealth that 90% of the world will never reach.

Well yeah, but ASIDE from all that what have they ever done...

What has happened in Ireland is that there is a gap between expectations and reality caused by the boomy boom.

The OP appears to have got in over their head, either buying for investment rather than residence or buying in the wrong place. By their username, they seem to be compounding the problem by wanting to buy in an unsustainable location at an unsustainable price.

The sooner Irish people realise that buying a house with a garden is unattainable for the vast majority of humanity and a sense of perspective arrives, the better.

We have poor government services because we have a dispersed population. The row in Waterford is a clear example of this. A second lab is a case of putting in expensive facilities that will be riskier to health caused by not having enough bigger cities.

Donadea Leo

Godge wrote: »

What has happened in Ireland is that there is a gap between expectations and reality caused by the boomy boom.

The OP appears to have got in over their head, either buying for investment rather than residence or buying in the wrong place. By their username, they seem to be compounding the problem by wanting to buy in an unsustainable location at an unsustainable price.

The sooner Irish people realise that buying a house with a garden is unattainable for the vast majority of humanity and a sense of perspective arrives, the better.

We have poor government services because we have a dispersed population. The row in Waterford is a clear example of this. A second lab is a case of putting in expensive facilities that will be riskier to health caused by not having enough bigger cities.

So what happens to places that are considered unsustainable, should everyone live in a city. I actually moved for having to relocate for work rather than economic or simply wanting more for the same money, or for being unable to afford where we were, if I could have moved the house with us, I gladly would have. We weren't over our head and that's what I m afraid of becoming now.

I don't think out expectations are based on the boom and in a country like Ireland it is not unreasonable for people to want a garden, after all outside of Dublin, most households would have had this for generations, albeit with a much lower standard of housing and living for that matter. I do think we need to develop our regions and not rely so heavily on our capital city, that is undoubtedly a role for government.

Jim2007

Donadea Leo wrote: »

Maybe I am actually a socialist or maybe I'm just jealous but its hard to keep seeing a system that is designed to take money off one group of people and give it to those who already have the most - yes yes that's capitalism and not the design of the Irish Government but the dominant economic system throughout the world.

Where do you think the money comes from to provide all the services that are available??? It comes from taking it from those that have it and using it from those that have. But you can't take too much or they'll move off to somewhere else!

BOHtox

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

What have the government ever done for us?

well there's the roads..

The roads go without saying

Er, The water system, free education, healthcare, public transport, being able to walk the streets in safety, a first world economy and a lifestyle & wealth that 90% of the world will never reach.

Well yeah, but ASIDE from all that what have they ever done...

Brought peace?

Cookie_Monster

BOHtox wrote: »

Brought peace?

To where, Ireland hasn't exactly had too many issues with non peacefullness in the last 80 years.

NI doesn't count as its a separate country

BOHtox

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

To where, Ireland hasn't exactly had too many issues with non peacefullness in the last 80 years.

NI doesn't count as its a separate country

it's a The Life of Brian reference

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSELOCMmw4A

Akrasia

Suryavarman wrote: »

There was no €13bn tax break for Apple. Ireland only taxes companies on their Irish profits, not global profits. Apple hasn't paid tax on their global profits because they haven't repatriated their global profits to the US yet. When they do that they will pay tax on those profits. The EU ruling holds that Ireland has to act like a tax collector for the rest of the world.

The reality is the Government isn't turning down €13bn. The Government is standing up for the rule of law by refusing to collect retroactive taxation on behalf of other countries.

The money was just resting in their account.

Ireland allowed apple to funnel income earned in other juristictions through Ireland without declaring it as a tax liability in Ireland or the place where it was earned.

Did Apple have that 13/19 billion euros set aside on their balance sheet as a future tax liability to the countries that they owed that money to? (and in fact, the 13 billion euro figure would be much much higher if the local corporate tax rates were applied, and not the 12.5% Irish rate of cpt)

If not, then they were blatantly evading tax, and we were facilitating it.

Apple needs to pay it's taxes. Ireland has a history of allowing transfer pricing and other tax evasion on our shores, Not just by Apple, but by many other multinational corporations, and the people of Ireland, and the people of other nations who have been denied their legitimate taxation, are the ones who have to pay to subsidize their dishonesty.

Godge

Donadea Leo wrote: »

So what happens to places that are considered unsustainable, should everyone live in a city. I actually moved for having to relocate for work rather than economic or simply wanting more for the same money, or for being unable to afford where we were, if I could have moved the house with us, I gladly would have. We weren't over our head and that's what I m afraid of becoming now.

I don't think out expectations are based on the boom and in a country like Ireland it is not unreasonable for people to want a garden, after all outside of Dublin, most households would have had this for generations, albeit with a much lower standard of housing and living for that matter. I do think we need to develop our regions and not rely so heavily on our capital city, that is undoubtedly a role for government.

`

Having a house with a garden for most households is an unrealistic aspiration if you want to deliver excellent public services.

As for developing our regions - a big no to that. However, developing our regional cities - Cork, Limerick, Galway and maybe one or two more - a big yes to that. The unstoppable trend across the world is urbanisation. Thinking that little Ireland can resist this is not sustainable.

Jim2007

Akrasia wrote: »

Ireland allowed apple to funnel income earned in other juristictions through Ireland without declaring it as a tax liability in Ireland or the place where it was earned.

...

If not, then they were blatantly evading tax, and we were facilitating it.

This is factually incorrect!

Sand

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

What have the government ever done for us?

well there's the roads..

The roads go without saying

Er, The water system, free education, healthcare, public transport, being able to walk the streets in safety, a first world economy and a lifestyle & wealth that 90% of the world will never reach.

Well yeah, but ASIDE from all that what have they ever done...

Its a good skit from Life of Brian, but the government doesn't deliver anything well.

The water system: 47,000 people in Mayo are facing boil notices due to a cryptosporidium contamination. Contamination from the use of lead piping is a real issue. Despite being a country where it rains most of the year, the water supply often teeters on the edge of capacity with several managed cutoffs and reductions. Decades of underinvestment in the infrastructure - oh and Irish Water the worst, the worst launch of a public utility in living memory across Europe.

Free education: The government doesn't, though does it? It handed over the education system to the Church for decades and 'free' is a bit of an exaggeration with books and uniforms and various 'collections' and fees. Irish universities are nosediving in the international rankings for lack of funds. The overall effectiveness of the education can be determined by the vast majority of people leaving the education system unable to have even a short, basic conversation in the supposed national language.

Healthcare: Ah, please. We're talking about a government where it takes decades to decide where to put a children's hospital. Where people have to take out private insurance get even passable medical care. Where the health service can poison people with hepatitis and not only is no one held accountable but the government will pursue the victims in the courts. Incredible.

Public transport: Dublin Bus is a monopolistic racket - its behaviour has been described a 'predatory' even by the government themselves. The Irish government for years back a similar monopoly operated by Aer Lingus, forcing Irish people to pay ridiculous fees to travel abroad and even considered introducing laws to may it illegal to undercut Aer Lingus. Irish rail has to travel at low speeds because the infrastructure is to old and worn to risk. Irish government intervention in public transport can be summarised by how it destroyed a huge, successful and functional Dublin tram company in the 1950s, paved over the tram line network and now is spending huge sums to recreate a tiny fraction of the network. And thats as far as public transport goes - outside Dublin the state of public transport is such that the government has failed in such basic tasks as keeping enough salt in storage to keep the roads open during winter.

Being able to walk the streets in safety: Well, thats a perception thing but Dublin has pervasive problem with junkies and their behaviour because the government decided to put all the methadone clinics in the city centre. Organised crime is out of control with gangs brazenly assassinating each other. The guards are so undermanned and underfunded that most stations struggle to keep a functioning car on the road and lack basic equipment like radios. Only a few months ago it was acknowledged that the Gardai had no driver training for pursuits (as they do in the UK) and it contributed to the death of a woman who was killed in her car in a pursuit by untrained but eager Gardai.

A first world economy: Ah come on - The Irish economy is a cargo cult. It is so beholden to a few multinationals that Irish GDP moved by 26% due to some corporate paperwork being filed. People laughed - Ireland's economy is a joke. Brazil now officially considers Ireland to be a tax haven. Brazil - Brazil thinks Ireland is dodgy. And they have cause as the EU has found Ireland has granted illegal state aid to multinationals like Apple for decades. Irelands economic planning was so poor that it gutted its own tax base and when the last bubble burst it was completely without revenue. That is piss poor planning and the costs were inflicted on the Irish taxpayer.

A government collects taxes from its citizens, and nominally at least it uses them to deliver public goods and services. If the value of the goods and services exceeds the cost of the taxes levied, then the government is generating value. It is getting more out of the money than through its efficiency, planning and effectiveness. The Irish government does not do that - large amounts of money go into the Irish government, large amounts of money get spent but the water is dangerous to drink, you still have to pay for your education if you can get a place, the health service may kill you, if you live outside the city centre you're on your own getting anywhere, if you get attacked in the street don't even waste your time reporting it and we are still paying through the nose for the last round of government economic planning.

So the government does deliver services to us - really, really, really badly. At some point you have to wonder if the government really is focused on delivering services to the citizens or if it has some other objective that it is succeeding at. We do after-all have some of the best paid politicians, quangos and civil servants in the world.

Sand

Sand wrote: »

The water system: 47,000 people in Mayo are facing boil notices due to a cryptosporidium contamination.

Due to years of mismanagement and horrific allocation of resources. The previous Government put measures in place to correct this and were lynched for it.

Sand wrote: »

Contamination from the use of lead piping is a real issue.

Lead Piping is not used in mains, and is an issue on the home side of the water supply.
https://www.water.ie/help-centre/questions-and-answers/lead-pipes-information-for-customers/

Sand wrote: »

Despite being a country where it rains most of the year, the water supply often teeters on the edge of capacity with several managed cutoffs and reductions.

See my first answer.

Sand wrote: »

Decades of underinvestment in the infrastructure - oh and Irish Water the worst, the worst launch of a public utility in living memory across Europe

We spent all our money on pay increases for the public sector, and motorways to backwaters. We the people elected those who promised this at the expense of underinvestment. That was our decision. The system in place (no centralised authority) made it next-to-impossible to adequately plan and resource for the investment that was required. Again, the measures put in place to counter this by the previous Government saw them ran out of the Dáil, with Labour almost disappearing into the ether.

Sand wrote: »

Free education: The government doesn't, though does it? It handed over the education system to the Church for decades and 'free' is a bit of an exaggeration with books and uniforms and various 'collections' and fees. Irish universities are nosediving in the international rankings for lack of funds. The overall effectiveness of the education can be determined by the vast majority of people leaving the education system unable to have even a short, basic conversation in the supposed national language.

Whilst I fundamentally agree on the issue of the church's sometimes disgraceful power and interference in the education system, it has to be noted that we have always ranked well internationally in education.
http://www.mbctimes.com/english/20-best-education-systems-world
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland

Sand wrote: »

Healthcare: Ah, please. We're talking about a government where it takes decades to decide where to put a children's hospital. Where people have to take out private insurance get even passable medical care. Where the health service can poison people with hepatitis and not only is no one held accountable but the government will pursue the victims in the courts. Incredible.

Again, ranked 19th in the world - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_ranking_of_health_systems_in_2000
{bear with me as I try to find more up-to-date statistics}
It sure-as-**** is not perfect, but then again, few are.

Sand wrote: »

Public transport: Dublin Bus is a monopolistic racket - its behaviour has been described a 'predatory' even by the government themselves. The Irish government for years back a similar monopoly operated by Aer Lingus, forcing Irish people to pay ridiculous fees to travel abroad and even considered introducing laws to may it illegal to undercut Aer Lingus. Irish rail has to travel at low speeds because the infrastructure is to old and worn to risk. Irish government intervention in public transport can be summarised by how it destroyed a huge, successful and functional Dublin tram company in the 1950s, paved over the tram line network and now is spending huge sums to recreate a tiny fraction of the network. And thats as far as public transport goes - outside Dublin the state of public transport is such that the government has failed in such basic tasks as keeping enough salt in storage to keep the roads open during winter.

We spent all our money on public pay increases and motorways to nowhere. We voted for the same plan every time.

I agree that the public transport infrastructure in this country is an absolute disaster, though it does 'ok' with the investment that it has had. But the simple fact of the matter is that the money that we should have used to improve it, was used to line people's pockets instead. And we the people were okay about this at the time, we voted for parties that explicitly said that they were going to do it!

Sand wrote: »

Being able to walk the streets in safety: Well, thats a perception thing but Dublin has pervasive problem with junkies and their behaviour because the government decided to put all the methadone clinics in the city centre. Organised crime is out of control with gangs brazenly assassinating each other. The guards are so undermanned and underfunded that most stations struggle to keep a functioning car on the road and lack basic equipment like radios. Only a few months ago it was acknowledged that the Gardai had no driver training for pursuits (as they do in the UK) and it contributed to the death of a woman who was killed in her car in a pursuit by untrained but eager Gardai.

#12 Global Peace Index - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index
#12 Safest Country in the World - http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/safest-countries-in-the-world.html

Perhaps your perception is at odds with reality? Once again, Ireland is not perfect, but the utopia that you appear to be comparing it to does not exist. Hardly a fair comparison to make in that case.

Sand wrote: »

A first world economy: Ah come on - The Irish economy is a cargo cult. It is so beholden to a few multinationals that Irish GDP moved by 26% due to some corporate paperwork being filed. People laughed - Ireland's economy is a joke. Brazil now officially considers Ireland to be a tax haven. Brazil - Brazil thinks Ireland is dodgy. And they have cause as the EU has found Ireland has granted illegal state aid to multinationals like Apple for decades. Irelands economic planning was so poor that it gutted its own tax base and when the last bubble burst it was completely without revenue. That is piss poor planning and the costs were inflicted on the Irish taxpayer.

That many misunderstand what GDP is, what it is used for, and what we as a small open economy can truly infer from it is not Ireland's issue.

Ireland's economy is not a joke, and certainly not because of the placing of Apple IP into our national accounts.

Our tax laws are scandalous, and I'm quite happy that the EU is now starting to stir things up in the grey area of how we assist MNCs in getting access to the EU Single Market but avoid paying the costs of it.

The only problem is, that if and when we do close off the loopholes correctly, we might not have too many of them left contributing. I personally feel that that risk is worth taking though.

Sand wrote: »

A government collects taxes from its citizens, and nominally at least it uses them to deliver public goods and services. If the value of the goods and services exceeds the cost of the taxes levied, then the government is generating value. It is getting more out of the money than through its efficiency, planning and effectiveness. The Irish government does not do that - large amounts of money go into the Irish government, large amounts of money get spent but the water is dangerous to drink, you still have to pay for your education if you can get a place, the health service may kill you, if you live outside the city centre you're on your own getting anywhere, if you get attacked in the street don't even waste your time reporting it and we are still paying through the nose for the last round of government economic planning.

This hyperbole belongs in the 'post-factual' politics realm. You argue perception over facts (Newt Gingrich style). You embellish anecdote over statistics. You cite extremes as norms.

It's not the best country in the world with the greatest little Government going, but it is closer to that than this banana republican dystopia you are portraying it as.

Sand wrote: »

So the government does deliver services to us - really, really, really badly. At some point you have to wonder if the government really is focused on delivering services to the citizens or if it has some other objective that it is succeeding at. We do after-all have some of the best paid politicians, quangos and civil servants in the world.

There's a fantastic way for us the people to have anything different, given that we the people decide all of this. All of it.

I abhor the effort that people go to to put up some form of border between the person and the Government. The Government are the representatives chosen by the people to formulate the strategy, laws and implementation of the State. That is democracy. We the people gift our responsibility to the Government through elections, even if indeed our chosen candidate comes dead last and we didn't fill in our preferences. That is democracy. We bear the risk of them failing. That is democracy. We share the spoils of them succeeding. That is democracy.

'The Government' are quite simply a group of people chosen by all of the other people to make decisions for the State on their behalf.

That is democracy.

Sand

Deleted User wrote: »

Due to years of mismanagement and horrific allocation of resources [by the government]. The previous Government put measures in place to correct this and were lynched for it.

Lead Piping is not used in mains, and is an issue on the home side of the water supply [regulated (or not) by the government and in the public network as per your own link].
https://www.water.ie/help-centre/questions-and-answers/lead-pipes-information-for-customers/

See my first answer.

We [The government] spent all our money on pay increases for the public sector, and motorways to backwaters. We the people [The Dail] elected those who promised this and at the expense of underinvestment. That was our their decision. The [governments] system in place (no centralised authority) made it next-to-impossible to adequately plan and resource for the investment that was required. Again, the measures put in place to counter this by the previous Government [had nothing to do with] saw them being ran run out of the Dáil, with Labour almost disappearing into the ether.

Whilst I fundamentally agree on the issue of the church's sometimes disgraceful power and interference in the education system, it has to be noted that we have always ranked well internationally in education.
http://www.mbctimes.com/english/20-best-education-systems-world
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland

Again, ranked 19th in the world - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_ranking_of_health_systems_in_2000
{bear with me as I try to find more up-to-date statistics}
It sure-as-**** is not perfect, but then again, few are.

We The government spent all our money on public pay increases and motorways to nowhere. We The government voted for the same plan every time.

I agree that the public transport infrastructure in this country is an absolute disaster, though it does 'ok' with the investment that it has had. But the simple fact of the matter is that the money that we the government should have used to improve it, was used to line people's pockets instead. And we the people the government were okay about this at the time, we voted for parties that explicitly said that they were not going to do it!



#12 Global Peace Index - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index
#12 Safest Country in the World - http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/safest-countries-in-the-world.html

Perhaps your perception is at odds with reality? Once again, Ireland is not perfect, but the utopia that you appear to be comparing it to does not exist. Hardly a fair comparison to make in that case.


That many misunderstand what GDP is, what it is used for, and what we as a small open economy can truly infer from it is not Ireland's issue.

Ireland's economy is not a joke, and certainly not because of the placing of Apple IP into our national accounts.

Our tax laws are scandalous, and I'm quite happy that the EU is now starting to stir things up in the grey area of how we the government assist MNCs in getting access to the EU Single Market but avoid paying the costs of it.

The only problem is, that if and when we the government do close off the loopholes correctly, we the government might not have too many of them left contributing. I personally feel that that risk is worth taking though.

You keep using this term 'we' when what is accurate to say is the government. It is the government that decides policies. I fixed your post above to reflect this.

Maybe you are a member of government, but there is no 'we' when it comes to determining the budget, that is the remit of the MoF, the DoF and the cabinet. There is no 'we' when it comes to appointing managers or civil servants. There is no 'we' when it comes to claiming credit with the government loudly claiming to be responsible for anything and everything.

This hyperbole belongs in the 'post-factual' politics realm. You argue perception over facts (Newt Gingrich style). You embellish anecdote over statistics. You cite extremes as norms.

There is no hyperbole. You ignored the difficult parts - on crime for example you dodged the under manning and poor equipment and training of the Guards and instead deflected onto semantics about perceptions. You mostly agree with the points of mine you chose to respond to. But you blame the voter for the policies, not the actual civil servants and government ministers constitutionally empowered and responsible for setting and carrying out government policy. You seem to think there are all these terrible outcomes and policies and yet the government is somehow not the culprit. Its you who are engaged in perceptions, embellishment and extremes.

It's not the best country in the world with the greatest little Government going, but it is closer to that than this banana republican dystopia you are portraying it as.

I'm not portraying it as a dystopia. That's more embellishment and extremes from yourself. I'm pointing out the government is very poor are delivering outcomes. and citing examples.

There's a fantastic way for us the people to have anything different, given that we the people decide all of this. All of it.

I direct you to the Irish constitution. You'll find that we are only consulted in electing a whipped TD (not the government, a TD). And from time to time we may be asked to answer a yes/no question in a referendum.

Irish voters do not elect the government, and have absolutely no role in setting government policy or carrying it out. Most people claim this is a very good thing and indeed Irish governments have worked extremely hard to keep policymaking as far away from voters as possible.

I abhor the effort that people go to to put up some form of border between the person and the Government. The Government are the representatives chosen by the people to formulate the strategy, laws and implementation of the State. That is democracy. We the people gift our responsibility to the Government through elections, even if indeed our chosen candidate comes dead last and we didn't fill in our preferences. That is democracy. We bear the risk of them failing. That is democracy. We share the spoils of them succeeding. That is democracy.

'The Government' are quite simply a group of people chosen by all of the other people to make decisions for the State on their behalf.

That is democracy.

I abhor how people will credit the government with all the good stuff and blame the voter for all the negatives on decisions they did not make and were not empowered to make.

I guess it was me who solved the Northern Ireland conflict. Yes, not the government, not Bertie. Me. Because I'm the voter and I was in charge so I get the credit.

Yeah, you see it never works that way though does it?

I am also puzzled by the cognitive dissonance that decries the Irish voter for the historically poor government policies, but thinks it hyperbolic to point out those historically poor government policies. Why should the Irish voter change anything if everything is broadly grand?

Who choses the Government Sand?

Sand

Deleted User wrote: »

Who choses the Government Sand?

The voters don't. I think you know this. Afterall, FF and FG both campaigned on the basis they would not cooperate to form a government.

Mr Martin also claimed there would be no circumstances he would do business with Fine Gael.

ENDA KENNY HAS sought to draw a line under ongoing speculation about Fine Gael doing a post-election deal with Fianna Fáil by insisting he has already ruled it out 10 times over the last fortnight.

'I was the first party leader to rule out Fianna Fáil. I’ve ruled them out on at least 10 occasions in the last fortnight and I do so again now, very clearly.'

Clear?

But as soon as the election is over the manifesto TDs were elected on by the voters is thrown away.

And you have to remember, the reason the focus is on if Kenny and Martin will do a deal is because when it comes to electing the government, the TDs do not report to the voters. They report to Enda Kenny and Michael Martin. I didn't vote for either of those people to represent me. Did you?

Sand

Sand wrote: »

The voters don't.

Try again. I'll give you a hint. This is exactly wrong.

Ironic use of examples, given that both FF and FG's prior-to-election 'promises' of not entering coalition have been kept.

alastair

Sand wrote: »

Irish voters do not elect the government, and have absolutely no role in setting government policy or carrying it out.

We elect the parliament, and the make up of that Parliament determines what form the government takes. Same story with every democracy everywhere - you elect representatives, they determine who does what job.

The electorate clearly di have a role in setting government policy, as they respond to policy platforms when voting. It's called a representative democracy for a reason.

Sand

Deleted User wrote: »

Try again. I'll give you a hint. This is exactly wrong.

Well, that's a compelling argument.

Sand

alastair wrote: »

We elect the parliament, and the make up of that Parliament determines what form the government takes. Same story with every democracy everywhere - you elect representatives, they determine who does what job.

The electorate clearly di have a role in setting government policy, as they respond to policy platforms when voting. It's called a representative democracy for a reason.

It is not representative of the voters when their elected TDs are whipped by the parties inner circle. As for the voters role in setting government policy - please. Manifestos are a fiction which is disposed of as soon as the election is over and the voter is never consulted again until the government is at an end.

Last time out the voters couldn't even trust the parties to stick to their word on who they would or wouldn't deal with to form a government.

alastair

Sand wrote: »

It is not representative of the voters when their elected TDs are whipped by the parties inner circle. As for the voters role in setting government policy - please. Manifestos are a fiction which is disposed of as soon as the election is over and the voter is never consulted again until the government is at an end.

Last time out the voters couldn't even trust the parties to stick to their word on who they would or wouldn't deal with to form a government.

Voters cast their ballot for political party members, knowing that they are committed to party discipline. That in no way undermines the principle of representational democracy. Parties manifestos are not fiction, they're a reflection of policy decisions made within those parties, and reflect the intentions of those parties/candidates if elected. Voters are not consulted once awkward realities get in the way of policy, because that's the system we, like all other representational democracies employ - we vote for a government to govern on our behalf.

Sand

alastair wrote: »

Voters cast their ballot for political party members, knowing that they are committed to party discipline. That in no way undermines the principle of representational democracy. Parties manifestos are not fiction, they're a reflection of policy decisions made within those parties, and reflect the intentions of those parties/candidates if elected. Voters are not consulted once awkward realities get in the way of policy, because that's the system we, like all other representational democracies employ - we vote for a government to govern on our behalf.

We do not vote for a government. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of constitutional fact. You are investing the Irish voter with far more influence than they actually have.

Should you wish the Irish voter to elect the government, you can of course vote for...well, you cant actually vote for investing the Irish voter with more powers. That is entirely the remit of the Irish government which is appointed by the Taoiseach. Who is rubberstamped by the President (a constitutional non-entity). Having been nominated by the Dail under party whips. And even if you were a TD, you would either be the minority in which case you are nobody, or you would be under the party whip which follows the orders of the Taoiseach (being the party leader) which clearly has no interest in divesting power. You would do as you are told by the government. And you would comfort yourself that the voter elected you to do what you were told by the whip under orders from the government. Because it is definitely not the job of the Dail to hold the government to account. Because the Dail takes it orders from the government and you don't hold your boss to account.

alastair

Sand wrote: »

We do not vote for a government. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of constitutional fact. You are investing the Irish voter with far more influence than they actually have.

The Irish electorate, like every other democratic electorate, vote for the formulation of a government, by choosing the mix of representatives that can make up a government. No democratic state pretends to have directly elected governments.

El_Duderino 09

Cookie_Monster wrote:

Er, The water system, free education, healthcare, public transport, being able to walk the streets in safety, a first world economy and a lifestyle & wealth that 90% of the world will never reach.

The childcare subsidy, Reducing corruption to make Ireland the 17th least corrupt country in the world, ending the war in northern Ireland, employment laws which mean you can't just be turfed out of your job at the drop of a hat.

The OP says they're not a socialist but seems to be giving out about the government for not helping them to buy a house! Well OP the government didn't help me buy a holiday this year, nor did it help me buy a car. Should I be aggrieved too? We can be aggrieved together but I'm not saying any more bloody taxes

El_Duderino 09

Sand wrote:

Its a good skit from Life of Brian, but the government doesn't deliver anything well.

It boils my p1ss when I see things like this. The government's job isn't to make everything run perfectly. It's the government's job to manage it's resources and get the best value for money for the taxpayer.

Sand wrote:

So the government does deliver services to us - really, really, really badly. At some point you have to wonder if the government really is focused on delivering services to the citizens or if it has some other objective that it is succeeding at. We do after-all have some of the best paid politicians, quangos and civil servants in the world.

If you think the Irish government is really really bad compared to other governments tgen it's clear that you have never lived in a country without law and order, or a country where you don't know how your children will get an education, or if your child gets appendicitis they will likely die, or a country where there isn't a water infrastructure.

Deleted User wrote:

Perhaps your perception is at odds with reality? Once again, Ireland is not perfect, but the utopia that you appear to be comparing it to does not exist. Hardly a fair comparison to make in that case.

Expectations are at odds with reality. The reality is that people in other countries die from curable illnesses and in Ireland the same person is cured by the state but the system is imperfect.

I'll get involved in a movement to improve the systems but I won't nod along to his rubbish about Ireland being a third world country.

I'll decent the government all day long for this little oasis of relative paradise compared to the conditions most of the world's population live in

micosoft

Sand wrote: »

You keep using this term 'we' when what is accurate to say is the government. It is the government that decides policies. I fixed your post above to reflect this.

And this is the fundamental problem with this country. Your statement is simply untrue.

• Political parties present policies.
• The electorate choose the political parties likely to form a government based on those policies.
• ergo it is the electorate that choose policies. A fairly fundamental tenet of democracy.

As long as we have an electorate filled with people with this viewpoint we will continue to have poor policies driven by populism. An electorate that abdicates it's responsibility to vote in sensible policies but instead engages in the corrupt act of voting for politicians in return for short term localised gain is the real problem here.

micosoft

Sand wrote: »

It is not representative of the voters when their elected TDs are whipped by the parties inner circle. As for the voters role in setting government policy - please. Manifestos are a fiction which is disposed of as soon as the election is over and the voter is never consulted again until the government is at an end.

Last time out the voters couldn't even trust the parties to stick to their word on who they would or wouldn't deal with to form a government.

-Whips ensure party members vote for party policy. So you criticise parties for not implementing policies but then argue they should have no way to enforce their policies.
-If the facts change parties may amend the policies if the electorate decide not to give any one party a majority. In which case a negotiation occurs between the policies of the parties forming a government representing the will of the people.
- In what way are manifestos fiction? You are consistently making sweeping statements with no evidence to support them.

micosoft

Excellent article in the Times today on Bridget Laffan's lecture “In Defence of the State: Fractious Politics in Hard Times”. In it she critiques the medias role for lionising populists such as Varoufakis who seriously damaged the Greek economy but relentlessly critiqued the unpopular but necessary decisions our own Ministers for Finance had to make from Lenihan, Noonan and Howlin. I think going to the OP and some posters here point or lack of, two key paragraphs stand out.

As Irish Times opinion polls and focus groups in the run-up to the election demonstrated, many voters here are seriously ill-informed about most of the basic facts of political and economic life in the country in which they live. The media must share some responsibility for this state of affairs.
and
“The treatment of these issues in the media does not help us address them. Political commentary more often than not portrays politics as a game; who is in or out; who will be the next taoiseach, will John Halligan survive and so on. The John Halligan story mattered of course for the future of the Government but the big issue at stake was and is the allocation of very scarce public resources to the Irish health system.”

Ultimately if the media allow perceptions that for example 13 billion are going a begging and for some reason Noonan has decided he wants to be unpopular and give it away to billionaires, or that our medical system would be perfect if only every Halligan in the country had their way is not being adequately challenged or explained to the public. This only gets worse in a world where many rely on Facebook for their "news".

Donadea Leo

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The childcare subsidy, Reducing corruption to make Ireland the 17th least corrupt country in the world, ending the war in northern Ireland, employment laws which mean you can't just be turfed out of your job at the drop of a hat.

The OP says they're not a socialist but seems to be giving out about the government for not helping them to buy a house! Well OP the government didn't help me buy a holiday this year, nor did it help me buy a car. Should I be aggrieved too? We can be aggrieved together but I'm not saying any more bloody taxes

Just to clarify something here, I don't expect the government or anyone else here to buy me a house. I am concerned that once again we appear to be heading down the path of unaffordable homes. This would be less of an issue if we had a functioning rental market but we don't. Knowing people working in the homeless sector, they are seeing a new kind of homeless client, people whose lives are actually going according to plan but simply can't find a home to live in. Maybe we need to ensure we have a more professionalised landlord sector, I don't know, I would like the government to start trying to figure this out, that's hard to see.

Jim2007

Sand wrote: »

We do not vote for a government. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of constitutional fact. You are investing the Irish voter with far more influence than they actually have.

And you clearly have not got the foggiest idea how a parliament of Westminster style democracy works, despite the fact that it is one of most popular styles of democracy.

Who is rubberstamped by the President (a constitutional non-entity).

Again your ignorance of the constitution and history comes true. The President plays a fundamental role in our system as he is responsible for ensuring that the constitution is upheld. You only have to look at crises such as the arms trial, the Paddy Donegal speech, Brian Lenihan Snr. run for the presidency and the rejection of the 35 amendment to see that the Irish people most certainly do not consider the position a non-entity as you put it.

Because it is definitely not the job of the Dail to hold the government to account. Because the Dail takes it orders from the government and you don't hold your boss to account.

And yet all across the world in Westminster style democracies leaders are forced from office by the deputies elected to parliament.

Sand

Sand wrote: »

Its a good skit from Life of Brian, but the government doesn't deliver anything well.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

It boils my p1ss when I see things like this. The government's job isn't to make everything run perfectly.

Well, I am not asking for perfection. I'm shooting for competent, principled or honest. I am sure that so unachievable for an Irish government that it might seem like I am demanding perfection though.

alastair wrote: »

The Irish electorate, like every other democratic electorate, vote for the formulation of a government, by choosing the mix of representatives that can make up a government.

You vote for a TD. You do not vote to select a government, or the makeup of that government, or the ministers appointed in that government or the programme of that government. The Irish voter is not consulted on any of those decisions - just the choice of a local TD.

micosoft wrote: »

And this is the fundamental problem with this country. Your statement is simply untrue.

No, my statement is entirely true.

micosoft wrote: »

As long as we have an electorate filled with people with this viewpoint we will continue to have poor policies driven by populism. An electorate that abdicates it's responsibility to vote in sensible policies but instead engages in the corrupt act of voting for politicians in return for short term localised gain is the real problem here.

This is the prevailing attitude I completely disagree with neatly summarised, so thank you for offering it so I can expand my position a little.

The most corrosive issue in Irish politics and the failure of successive Irish governments to govern competently is not the Irish voter - it is the failure of Irish governments, parties and the political classes to accept *any* personal responsibility in their appointed roles, the use of the powers granted to them or the carrying out of the policies and decisions. Political office or a senior civil service position is not seen as duty or a responsibility - it is seen as a chance to get your snout in the trough, to loot and pillage, to enjoy the perks and to share the spoils of victory at the taxpayers expense.

It is absolutely ludicrous to hold some random no-mark voter more accountable for the failures of Irish governance than the actual people, ministers and civil servants that comprise that government. People not only invent entirely imaginary powers for the Irish voter, they expect and demand more from the voter than they do from a Minister with a team of civil servants behind them! It is an attitude that only gives cover and support to the worst failures of Irish governments. Hold the individuals in the government accountable first for their own decisions and their own actions, demand better from them and then maybe talk about the voters.

Jim2007 wrote: »

And you clearly have not got the foggiest idea how a parliament of Westminster style democracy works, despite the fact that it is one of most popular styles of democracy.

Well, I wouldn't claim to be an expert but I am able to correct glaring errors like claims the Irish voters elect the government. I think you would agree that's untrue.

K-9

Donadea Leo wrote: »

Just to clarify something here, I don't expect the government or anyone else here to buy me a house. I am concerned that once again we appear to be heading down the path of unaffordable homes. This would be less of an issue if we had a functioning rental market but we don't. Knowing people working in the homeless sector, they are seeing a new kind of homeless client, people whose lives are actually going according to plan but simply can't find a home to live in. Maybe we need to ensure we have a more professionalised landlord sector, I don't know, I would like the government to start trying to figure this out, that's hard to see.

The rental sector is one of the big issues facing the Government as we are never going to get near the 80% house ownership figures we had in the 90's. Social housing is going to have to play a part and that is something that is recognised in the housing plan which is welcome.

As to what is needed to be done, well that's what all these experts are paid for, but if rents keep going the way they are when rises in incomes aren't anywhere near them, it's going to cause issues in the wider economy, never mind social costs.

El_Duderino 09

Donadea Leo wrote:

Just to clarify something here, I don't expect the government or anyone else here to buy me a house. I am concerned that once again we appear to be heading down the path of unaffordable homes. This would be less of an issue if we had a functioning rental market but we don't. Knowing people working in the homeless sector, they are seeing a new kind of homeless client, people whose lives are actually going according to plan but simply can't find a home to live in. Maybe we need to ensure we have a more professionalised landlord sector, I don't know, I would like the government to start trying to figure this out, that's hard to see.

I think something should be done but I can't think of anything that would be seen as a good idea. If they controlled rent and interest rates go up... If they make landlords become more professional then that will bring expense. If they try to invest in infrastructure then it will be seen as too costly and disruptive to build and too expensive to use. If I were in government i probably wouldn't bother either.

What would you suggest as solutions?

Tony EH

K-9 wrote: »

The rental sector is one of the big issues facing the Government as we are never going to get near the 80% house ownership figures we had in the 90's. Social housing is going to have to play a part and that is something that is recognised in the housing plan which is welcome.

As to what is needed to be done, well that's what all these experts are paid for, but if rents keep going the way they are when rises in incomes aren't anywhere near them, it's going to cause issues in the wider economy, never mind social costs.

We don't have a decently regulated rental sector in Ireland. It's all about gouging for as much as you can possibly rip people off for, with mickey mouse tenancy contracts of 12 months, that would be laughed at by most Europeans. Our private rental sector is a joke. Only it really isn't that funny. Renting for any length of time just isn't an option in this country, whereas in Europe, families can rent for generations.

The idea that rents in Dublin are now averaging out at €1500 a month should be absolutely appalling to every decent thinking person in the country, especially when the average wage is supposedly €33,000 per annum.

As a society, we simply cannot keep going down this path. It's really quite unsustainable. But, as long as there is no real political will to tackle this problem, and it very much a serious problem, it'll continue on to a new level of absurdity.

As someone who bought their house ten years ago, I shudder every time I hear about the cost of rent in this city and it simply reinforces the impression that we are remaining on the road of being a pretty shitty society.

Perhaps we need to take a leaf out of the 70's book and look into building social housing estates again. Sure they most definitely aren't the perfect answer, but at least it's an answer. The current approach is clearly unsustainable.

El_Duderino 09

Tony EH wrote:

Perhaps we need to take a leaf out of the 70's book and look into building social housing estates again. Sure they most definitely aren't the perfect answer, but at least it's an answer. The current approach is clearly unsustainable.

What would you say to the hard working entrepreneur who worked their arse off to buy a buy-to-let house in Dublin? They need €X to pay for their investment. Would you support a government telling them they can only charge half of €x for the foreseeable future?

I'm not asking because I don't think it should happen. I'm asking because you're suggesting a very socialist policy and I want to know what f you would actually support it. Are you willing to vote for and back a socialist government?

Donadea Leo

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I think something should be done but I can't think of anything that would be seen as a good idea. If they controlled rent and interest rates go up... If they make landlords become more professional then that will bring expense. If they try to invest in infrastructure then it will be seen as too costly and disruptive to build and too expensive to use. If I were in government i probably wouldn't bother either.

What would you suggest as solutions?

I m no expert on these matters and not in government luckily for the Irish people but somehow property needs to be treated as homes once again, so if landlords had more responsibilities towards their tenants when it comes to them moving out, I.e. Something like they have to find them alternative suitable accommodation so when they rent out their property they are no longer providing a house and whatever its contents but a home with the security that provides, so there s a service element to the contract. This would clearly take investment and I do think landlords should be regulated but also rewarded for being good landlords, be that through taxation or breaks on certain expenditure. Clearly there needs to be availability of houses and apartments for landlords to help secure alternatives. A network of professionals may be able to work together to make this happen.

Alongside this as already pointed out and planned we need to invest in social housing in a meaningful way.
I understand lots of landlords would baulk at such suggestions but I have to say of the landlords I have had, they have all been fair reasonable people who do want what's best for their tenants, its not a huge stretch to take that a little further.

Anyway, that might be fantasy and I m sure lots of people can point out a million reasons why that won't work but so be it.

Tony EH

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

What would you say to the hard working entrepreneur who worked their arse off to buy a buy-to-let house in Dublin? They need €X to pay for their investment. Would you support a government telling them they can only charge half of €x for the foreseeable future?

I'm not asking because I don't think it should happen. I'm asking because you're suggesting a very socialist policy and I want to know what f you would actually support it. Are you willing to vote for and back a socialist government?

I'm not trying to say that I know what the answer is. But I DO see that we simply cannot continue where we are going. We certainly need to institute SOMETHING as opposed to nothing though. Standing by and watching things rocket up to extremes is mere folly.

BTW, if any "entrepreneur" is "work(ing) their arse off" to let in the current climate, they may need to check their reality. Rents are unaffordable for a lot of people at present and there's a real possibility that the arse is going to drop out of that market.

Sand

Donadea Leo wrote: »

I m no expert on these matters and not in government luckily for the Irish people but somehow property needs to be treated as homes once again, so if landlords had more responsibilities towards their tenants when it comes to them moving out, I.e. Something like they have to find them alternative suitable accommodation so when they rent out their property they are no longer providing a house and whatever its contents but a home with the security that provides, so there s a service element to the contract. This would clearly take investment and I do think landlords should be regulated but also rewarded for being good landlords, be that through taxation or breaks on certain expenditure. Clearly there needs to be availability of houses and apartments for landlords to help secure alternatives. A network of professionals may be able to work together to make this happen.

Alongside this as already pointed out and planned we need to invest in social housing in a meaningful way.
I understand lots of landlords would baulk at such suggestions but I have to say of the landlords I have had, they have all been fair reasonable people who do want what's best for their tenants, its not a huge stretch to take that a little further.

Anyway, that might be fantasy and I m sure lots of people can point out a million reasons why that won't work but so be it.

That would pretty much kill the rental market stone dead. Between fees and taxes the 'profits' on rental income are not worth the hassle of being someones mum and having to mind them to the extent you envisage. If you try to put those sort of obligations on landlords they will simply exit in even greater numbers than they already* are, reducing supply of rental properties and increasing rents even further.

*16K properties to rent 5 years ago. 5K properties to rent last year. 3,600 properties earlier this year and just 1,400 in Dublin itself. Landlords exit, supply decreases, rents rise.

jesus_thats_gre

Don't normally post on serious threads but couldn't help myself here.

Have to admit that I am really starting to question my future in this country. I am quite lucky to have a very good salary and job but I feel that I am paying far too much tax relative to what I get back in return. I am generally able to appreciate the bigger picture but I just don't see where is all going anymore.

Tony EH

Those in power don't seem to have a clue either and that's what's really scary.

El_Duderino 09

Donadea Leo wrote:

Something like they have to find them alternative suitable accommodation so when they rent out their property they are no longer providing a house and whatever its contents but a home with the security that provides, so there s a service element to the contract. This would clearly take investment and I do think landlords should be regulated but also rewarded for being good landlords, be that through taxation or breaks on certain expenditure.

Would you actually support a government who did this though? It's a very bold move and would love a major additional onus on landlords.

Donadea Leo wrote:

Alongside this as already pointed out and planned we need to invest in social housing in a meaningful way. I understand lots of landlords would baulk at such suggestions but I have to say of the landlords I have had, they have all been fair reasonable people who do want what's best for their tenants, its not a huge stretch to take that a little further.

Imagine the government built social housing and prices went down. Can you imagine the number if people who would be out in negative equity again? Or driven further into negative equity with reduced fixed rent prices. Rent can't pay the mortgage and they can't afford to sell. They could either become a slave working just to top up the mortgage or they could throw their hands up and foreclose.

Again I'm not saying the government shouldn't do it, I'm asking if you would actually support a government who did it.

Tony EH wrote:

I'm not trying to say that I know what the answer is. But I DO see that we simply cannot continue where we are going. We certainly need to institute SOMETHING as opposed to nothing though. Standing by and watching things rocket up to extremes is mere folly.

Tony EH wrote:

BTW, if any "entrepreneur" is "work(ing) their arse off" to let in the current climate, they may need to check their reality. Rents are unaffordable for a lot of people at present and there's a real possibility that the arse is going to drop out of that market.

Lots of people bought in Dublin as an investment. Lots more are accidental landlords. You're talking about wiping out those people's investment. It's extremely socialist and would be very easy to paint as anti-capitalist. A lot of hard working decent people would be burned. That's why I'm asking if you would actually support the government who did it.

Sand wrote:

That would pretty much kill the rental market stone dead. Between fees and taxes the 'profits' on rental income are not worth the hassle of being someones mum and having to mind them to the extent you envisage. If you try to put those sort of obligations on landlords they will simply exit in even greater numbers than they already* are, reducing supply of rental properties and increasing rents even further.

Here's an example of the counter argument to the government getting involved in the rental market.

Tony EH wrote:

Those in power don't seem to have a clue either and that's what's really scary.

Thus is an example of the narrative that would emerge after the stories about who has been hurt by any government measures. Why bother to do anything? They won't be thanked by anyone so there's no incentive.

'We' the electorate have a role to play in democracy. We need to create political from for them to manure. 'We' don't know what we want. We definitely want them to do something but we don't want them to implement any individual plan.

The housing market has been left to its own capitalist devices and gas grown wild. We all agree that it needs to be pruned but we won't agree on how to prune it. If the people stood together with a government who made these very socialist policies, then they might do it. As it stands there's no incentive for a government to touch the housing market. If you were in power I'm sure you'd all conclude the same.

alastair

Sand wrote: »

You vote for a TD. You do not vote to select a government, or the makeup of that government, or the ministers appointed in that government or the programme of that government. The Irish voter is not consulted on any of those decisions - just the choice of a local TD.

Again - it's a representational democracy. We mandate representatives to act on our behalf, including forming a government,and then actually governing. Ireland is no different to any other democracy in that respect. No state has direct popular franchise elections of a government.

Donadea Leo

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Would you actually support a government who did this though? It's a very bold move and would love a major additional onus on landlords.



Imagine the government built social housing and prices went down. Can you imagine the number if people who would be out in negative equity again? Or driven further into negative equity with reduced fixed rent prices. Rent can't pay the mortgage and they can't afford to sell. They could either become a slave working just to top up the mortgage or they could throw their hands up and foreclose.

Again I'm not saying the government shouldn't do it, I'm asking if you would actually support a government who did it.






Lots of people bought in Dublin as an investment. Lots more are accidental landlords. You're talking about wiping out those people's investment. It's extremely socialist and would be very easy to paint as anti-capitalist. A lot of hard working decent people would be burned. That's why I'm asking if you would actually support the government who did it.



Here's an example of the counter argument to the government getting involved in the rental market.



Thus is an example of the narrative that would emerge after the stories about who has been hurt by any government measures. Why bother to do anything? They won't be thanked by anyone so there's no incentive.

'We' the electorate have a role to play in democracy. We need to create political from for them to manure. 'We' don't know what we want. We definitely want them to do something but we don't want them to implement any individual plan.

The housing market has been left to its own capitalist devices and gas grown wild. We all agree that it needs to be pruned but we won't agree on how to prune it. If the people stood together with a government who made these very socialist policies, then they might do it. As it stands there's no incentive for a government to touch the housing market. If you were in power I'm sure you'd all conclude the same.

I agree with you on this, we as a people don't know what we want as a collective. We all have our interests and advantages or disadvantages based on what policies are being implemented or what's being ignored.

We tend to vote on what's in our own interest and maybe become disillusioned when the governments we elect don't go far enough for our own interests.

When it comes to housing, I think we need to change the mentality slowly and over time to houses being about homes and not investments. Obviously we need investment to build buy rent houses and we need to decide how we want to do that. Do we want landlords to be people who buy at the bottom of a market, put as little into their houses, rent them to meet repayments and bounce them once they hit the profit they want to make. Personally, I d like to see a change to this. I m not sure how they manage their rental sectors in Europe but we are told they work so what are they doing and could we do something similar.

In relation to would I vote for a government who actually did x,y or z. Its a good question as at this point I have no idea who I would vote for or what the right idea is. I think we need leadership and someone to lead regardless of consequences, they may well be pushed out in the next election but so be it. I m sure we would all be back here criticising them again but leaving things to their own devices is a risky strategy for many in our population

EndaHonesty

alastair wrote: »

Again - it's a representational democracy. We mandate representatives to act on our behalf, including forming a government,and then actually governing. Ireland is no different to any other democracy in that respect. No state has direct popular franchise elections of a government.

And yet, despite the majority of the electorate NOT voting for Fine Gael, they form the majority of the government.

Representational democracy is a fine ideal but in reality it is a clever way of allowing slimey politicians to follow their own agenda under the guise of "democracy"!

micosoft

Tony EH wrote: »

We don't have a decently regulated rental sector in Ireland.

So the answer is to hire a "regulator" and they wave a magic want and supply suddenly appears? It's just that simple eh? Seems to be the battlecry of some people that we need to regulate everything as if thats the solution to all our ills.

As an aside the evidence is that the increased regulation in the Irish Rental market has simply led to one thing - landlords selling up. Reducing the supply of rental properties.

The issue in Dublin is very very very simple. There is a lack of supply of housing. It's that simple. Nothing more, nothing less. The idea that a regulator or anybody else for that matter can wave a wand and wish away the lack of supply is beyond belief.

The solution is to build more housing. But that believe it or not takes time. It's not like going to Ikea.

- You need serviced land. It takes 2-3 years to service large tranches of land to make them suitable for building homes on. But when you starve some of your utilities (IW) and don't give Councils an income then you don't have the capacity to create serviced land in a timely way. I think we can firmly blame the electorate here for refusing and resisting the sensible property and utility charges that every other OECD country has. Of course the fact the councils have no funding leads to no social housing along with the insistence of those who take social housing to keep it as a permanent life subsidy.

- We need developers. But we've just gone through the biggest housing bust the west has seen. So this is unsurprising. It' takes about 5 years (in the best of worlds) from planning to delivery. We can blame an electorate that voted to make money out of selling property to each other and voting in FF three times in a row for this one.

- We need people to be realistic and accept people are not entitled to live where they want just as people can't afford to live where they would like in capital cities around the world. The bizarre idea that housing is too expensive in only Dublin when just next door in London, in Copenhagen etc etc all have much bigger issues around affordability. The solution here is Public transport which expands the area people can commute. Of course this takes decades in Ireland due to extraordinary planning requirements, lack of say by the Cities, and the lack of return for national governments. So we get a silly unused rail line in the west instead of a comprehensive public transport system. That's without getting into the Irish demand of low density housing driving up land use and making public transport uneconomical.

So in short, it takes time (years), adequate local funding (property taxation and utility charges) and city control (avoiding national populism) to ensure an adequate supply of housing. If we wanted to have a supply of housing on tap we needed to have started in 2009/10. For obvious reasons we didn't and TBH I suspect all the posters railing against the state now for not having invested are the same who said the world was over back in 2009 and that we were forever poor. Just look at the posts back then.

micosoft

EndaHonesty wrote: »

And yet, despite the majority of the electorate NOT voting for Fine Gael, they form the majority of the government.

Representational democracy is a fine ideal but in reality it is a clever way of allowing slimey politicians to follow their own agenda under the guise of "democracy"!

So what's your alternative to representational democracy then?

micosoft

Sand wrote: »

That would pretty much kill the rental market stone dead. Between fees and taxes the 'profits' on rental income are not worth the hassle of being someones mum and having to mind them to the extent you envisage. If you try to put those sort of obligations on landlords they will simply exit in even greater numbers than they already* are, reducing supply of rental properties and increasing rents even further.

*16K properties to rent 5 years ago. 5K properties to rent last year. 3,600 properties earlier this year and just 1,400 in Dublin itself. Landlords exit, supply decreases, rents rise.

Exactly this. Simple solutions to complex problems lead to unintended consequences...

EndaHonesty

micosoft wrote: »

So what's your alternative to representational democracy then?

We have no need for politicians anymore.
They are an impediment to the advancement of society.
They are all compromised individuals who are beholden to other agendas.

Technology now exists where we can have active direct democracy.
We need to move towards that form of democracy.
Politicians will not move us in that direction.