Tiny number of social units being built:

Mr. Incognito

Deleted User wrote: »

And how do you get into your "own accommodation"? On footpaths and roads funded by taxes which the rest of us pay, or are you rich enough to have built all such roads and paths out of your own money without leeching off the hard-pressed taxpayers of this state? Why should we have to fund stuff you have that we don't benefit from?

And education, who has funded your education since primary school, the education which no doubt was vital in your ability to get a job? And healthcare - are you rich enough to own your own hospital with your own funded specialists on standby - or do you depend upon this state's taxpayers for A&E departments and everything else including the state-trained medical professionals (and most of the other stuff private healthcare uses)? Even if you are in a private healthcare scheme, does it not seem a bit sycophantic to be unable to access private healthcare without depending upon other people in the scheme to in effect subsidise you if you end up in hospital?

And so on ad infinitum. This simplistic "I pay my own way" Libertarian nonsense doesn't really stand up to scrutiny in the reality of our world.

My tax pays for that.

Arent you proving your own contention.

I dont get my own roads, or hospital, or education.

Why then am I "entitled" to a free house?

Using this analogy people should be living in shared social housing.

beauf

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Doesn't appear so. I dont need Minister Murphy. I work and pay for my own accomodation.

Perfectly happy to do so.

The lack of social housing is driving the shortage of private housing and rentals, and the costs up for everyone including you...

Are you happy about that?

hawkwing

Doesn't matter how many 1000's of houses are built in Dublin as long as you have open borders. Build 300,000 then the rents go down briefly and more people will come to the country,then we need more houses as rents have gone back up--non-stop cycle until the economy goes backwards and everyone leaves then they are all worth nothing again (for a while).

Mr. Incognito

beauf wrote: »

The lack of social housing is driving the shortage of private housing, and the costs up for everyone including you...

Are you happy about that?

That's a false analogy.

The shortage of private housing has been driven by rent controls and lack of supply. INstead of renting private landlords put their properties on air bnb because they keep getting burned by tenants who pay no rent for 18 months and get away with it because the RTB protects them.

So the spongers are causing the lack or rental places driving up the costs for everyone else. INcluding me.

I'm not happy about that.

If you cannot afford to rent you have two options.

1. Increase your earning capacity by getting a job.

2. Move.

People who have intellecutal or disabilities should be prioritised. Not people who are able bodied, declare themselves homeless and moan about the lack of free houses.

Topgear on Dave

beauf wrote: »

Unrestricted immigration is also having an effect.

Racist to say it though. :pac:

Olsky

beauf wrote: »

The lack of social housing is driving the shortage of private housing and rentals, and the costs up for everyone including you...

Exactly. And I would contend that is the foundation and purpose of the current policy.

Del2005

ARNOLD J RIMMER wrote: »

The Government should be rolling out rent to buy houses

Payìng set rents which are deducted from the overall price

If you move out at any time while paying the set rent then the price of the house resets for the next people.

If you do not meet your obligations of paying the set rent then fast track eviction take place for the next tenant.

You must be in employment at xxxxxxxxx income to take part in the scheme.

That's where the problem started when we sold off all the social housing. Social housing should not be a house for generations it should be returned to the pool when the tenant leaves either by moving or dieing, their children should have the same rights as any other person to get the house then. Rent to buy should not be done by the government.

Mr. Incognito

Olsky wrote: »

Exactly. And I would contend that is the foundation and purpose of the current policy.

So they cannot afford rent and yet they renting in the private market?

Does not compute.

Either they are renting and therefore do not require social housing or

they are not renting and therefore not in the private market.

ARNOLD J RIMMER

Del2005 wrote: »

That's where the problem started when we sold off all the social housing. Social housing should not be a house for generations it should be returned to the pool when the tenant leaves either by moving or dieing, their children should have the same rights as any other person to get the house then. Rent to buy should not be done by the government.

I edited while you were quoting me

Mr. Incognito

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Racist to say it though. :pac:

Because it is racist.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/pme/populationandmigrationestimatesapril2017/

The number of immigrants to the State in the year to April 2017 is estimated to have increased by 2.8% from 82,300 to 84,600, while the number of emigrants declined over the same period, from 66,200 to 64,800. These combined changes have resulted in net inward migration for Ireland in 2017 (+19,800), the highest level of net inward migration since 2008. See table 1.

Irish nationals continue to experience net outward migration, although at a much lower level than in the previous year, falling from -8,800 to -3,400, while net inward migration among non-Irish nationals decreased from 25,000 to 23,200. See table 2.

The number of births in the period was 63,900 while the number of deaths was 30,800, resulting in a natural increase of the population of 33,100. See table 1.

The combined effect of natural increase and positive net migration resulted in an overall increase in the population of 52,900 bringing the population estimate to 4.79 million in April 2017. See table 1.

oneilla

How can there be a housing crisis when everyone but you is getting a free house and tonnes of free money from the poor taxpayer!? :eek:

Olsky

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

So they cannot afford rent and yet they renting in the private market?

Does not compute.

.

That is the ideologically driven policy that the Minister is refusing to change from.
Refuse to provide social housing.
Pour vast amounts of money into the pockets of private landlords and investors instead.
It is called a social housing "solution"

end of the road

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

If you have a problem with social housing

Get a job and buy a house.


Lets call a spade a spade here

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp5hpi/cp5hpi/hpi/

Persons in accommodation Male 3,914 Female 2,869 Total 6,783

Persons sleeping rough Male 104 Female 19 Total 123

There are less than 200 people sleeping rough in Irealnd. Most of these are due to drug/ alcohol addiction problems.

Most people that are "homeless" which is a further 4,000 since these 2016 Figures are people who have declared themselves "homeless" trying to skip to social housing lists.

The "Government" doesnt owe you a free house. I am sick of people who don't work, and expect everything handed to them out of the taxes of people who do.

1. many if not most people struggling due to the housing issue have jobs. this includes a number of those who declared themselves homeless.
2. the banks are (rightly) not giving out mortgages like sweets to anyone any more. dispite having a job, lots of people aren't going to fit the criteria to be given a mortgage.
3. the wages in many jobs aren't able to keep up with the cost of living including rising house prices.
4. the people who are expecting everything for free are very likely unemployable and are really irrelevant to this discussion.
so saying garra job and buy a house rabel rabel doesn't deal with reality, i'm afraid. it's deflection tbh.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Doesn't appear so. I dont need Minister Murphy. I work and pay for my own accomodation.

Perfectly happy to do so.

as does everyone to a greater or lesser extent. except the house prices are rising and the incomes aren't keeping up, so more people are ending up in state subsidized accommodation because government aren't tackling the cost of living.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

My tax pays for that.

Arent you proving your own contention.

I dont get my own roads, or hospital, or education.

Why then am I "entitled" to a free house?

Using this analogy people should be living in shared social housing.

there are no "free" houses.

end of the road

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

That's a false analogy.

it really isn't. it's reality. a shortage of something, with more wanting that something, means prices go up.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

The shortage of private housing has been driven by rent controls and lack of supply. INstead of renting private landlords put their properties on air bnb because they keep getting burned by tenants who pay no rent for 18 months and get away with it because the RTB protects them.

So the spongers are causing the lack or rental places driving up the costs for everyone else. INcluding me.

I'm not happy about that.

the effect that issue has on prices is nothing near as much as the shortage of houseing in the first place has though. the RTB does not protect tenants who break their agreements. i have never heard of such happening. the rent controls are to try and stop the prices from rising (all though again they are simply papering over the cracks) and to try and stave off having to build houses.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

If you cannot afford to rent you have two options.

1. Increase your earning capacity by getting a job.[/QUOTE]


2. Move.[/QUOTE]

as explained, most of the people struggling due to the housing issue have jobs. upskill or get another job isn't an answer as depending on circumstances it's not viable. the same with moving, that's often not financially viable, or viable due to other reasons. so again, your suggestions are simplistic and are unable to solve the problem.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

So they cannot afford rent and yet they renting in the private market?

Does not compute.

Either they are renting and therefore do not require social housing or

they are not renting and therefore not in the private market.

it computes. they are either.
1. able to afford the rent, but are at the stage where they are one increase or some other incident away from being unable to afford it. or,
2. they are social tenants who are being part subsidized in a private rental accommodation, who are still renting in the private rental market but not at market rates due to their income.
the issue isn't simply about social housing but affordible housing for buyers and renters as well.

pearcider

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Because it is racist.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/pme/populationandmigrationestimatesapril2017/

Actually your estimates show it's a huge issue. Almost half the new people in Ireland per year are immigrants. This accounts for at least half the housing crisis. Smart countries like Singapore and Switzerland don't allow this. Of course the pro immigration agenda is essential for driving down wages and increasing profitability. No mention of the tremendous pressure it puts on our infrastructure, schools and social and health services. Your own link says only 55% of the immigrants have a job. So who is paying for them?

Wheeliebin30

end of the road wrote: »

1. many if not most people struggling due to the housing issue have jobs. this includes a number of those who declared themselves homeless.
2. the banks are (rightly) not giving out mortgages like sweets to anyone any more. dispite having a job, lots of people aren't going to fit the criteria to be given a mortgage.
3. the wages in many jobs aren't able to keep up with the cost of living including rising house prices.
4. the people who are expecting everything for free are very likely unemployable and are really irrelevant to this discussion.
so saying garra job and buy a house rabel rabel doesn't deal with reality, i'm afraid. it's deflection tbh.



as does everyone to a greater or lesser extent. except the house prices are rising and the incomes aren't keeping up, so more people are ending up in state subsidized accommodation because government aren't tackling the cost of living.



there are no "free" houses.

When you are in receipt of money from the state and you use that money to pay your 30 euro a week to the council well yes it is a free house.


Look, there is nothing fair about someone paying a mortgage on a house of 400k, getting up every morning getting home late from work, missing kids bedtime, while someone next door pays 40 euro a week and sleeps in while their neighbour goes to work to pay both their morgtages.

Fair society the left keep screaming for? Pull the other one.

ChikiChiki

Del2005 wrote: »

For all the people complaining about FG/FF what is the viable alternative?




After what this government has done to private landlords I don't think they have much interest in them. The REITs are the only landlords they look after and when all the small landlords are driven out of the market, which the government has said it wants to do, then we'll see what happens to the rental market and it won't be good.

There simply is no viable alternative and thats why we are ****ed now and for the future. Both parties have a reactive mindset instead of being proactive. An absolute shambles. FG and FF full to the brim of self interested greedy twats who do not put the interests of those they govern for as a priority.

CruelCoin

Idbatterim wrote: »

What about the people on decent incomes who can’t affird housing? I agree with you about the wasters, but many people here Against social and affordable housing, would have a very different opinion if they were trying to buy or rent at current prices ...

Everyone can afford a home. Everyone with a job can.

Just not where you want to be.

Shock horror that the words "prime location" actually have meaning now.

Del2005

Del2005 wrote: »

That's where the problem started when we sold off all the social housing. Social housing should not be a house for generations it should be returned to the pool when the tenant leaves either by moving or dieing, their children should have the same rights as any other person to get the house then. Rent to buy should not be done by the government.

Another great policy imported by an Irish government from Thatcher's Britain and its "privatise everything!" ideology. The idea being if a social housing recipient can buy out their house at a steep discount they are more likely to be very grateful to the established political party and become a conservative voter.

Wheeliebin30

Let them eat Hake wrote: »

They should look at phasing out the billions of euros worth of social housing in Dublin city centre and relocating people elsewhere. It's crazy to think people are given free houses overlooking the Liffey around Lombard st. There are blocks of flats just off St Stephen's Green ffs. It's unfair that people get these houses when I and everyone else have to work their bollocks off to pay a mortgage or rent something and commute into the City Centre. Sell the Social Housing land in the city centre and put the money into building social housing for a fraction of the price elsewhere.

How on earth do you get one of these places in town actually?

Go “homeless”

Wheeliebin30

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Look, there is nothing fair about someone paying a mortgage on a house of 400k, getting up every morning getting home late from work, missing kids bedtime, while someone next door pays 40 euro a week and sleeps in while their neighbour goes to work to pay both their morgtages.

Well, obviously they could give up their job and join that supposed high life which their reputedly smarter neighbour has managed to create.

Revealingly, they never want to do that...

Cyrus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I seem to remember reading where Ruth Coppinger lives in a social housing apartment.

A marketing ploy if ever there was one

JupiterKid

Completely agree with the OP. I have extensive experience in housing policy research and the only real solution is a return to large scale social housebuilding. Current policies favour landlords and existing outright owners and have utterly distorted the housing market and are an abject failure.

It's all about ideology - favour existing property owners to garner political support. Utterly cynical but predictable. The sooner Varadkar, Murphy et al and their neo-Thatcherite ideology are gone the better.

I loathe FF for what they did to the country during the last bubble and I always swore I'd never vote for them but I think they would at least do something better to tackle the housing crisis.

The current lot in power are spineless weasels content in preserving the status quo. They dont give a damn about those most in need of housing. Utter weasels.

Is this country just an economy or a society?

Wheeliebin30

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well, obviously they could give up their job and join that supposed high life which their reputedly smarter neighbour has managed to create.

Revealingly, they never want to do that...

Yes because of pride, setting an example to their kids and been honest.
Basic things lacking in our “most vulnerable” class.

Wheeliebin30

JupiterKid wrote: »

Completely agree with the OP. I have extensive experience in housing policy research and the only real solution is a return to large scale social housebuilding. Current policies favour landlords and existing outright owners and have utterly distorted the housing market and are an abject failure.

It's all about ideology - favour existing property owners to garner political support. Utterly cynical but predictable. The sooner Varadkar, Murphy et al and their neo-Thatcherite ideology are gone the better.

I loathe FF for what they did to the country during the last bubble and I always swore I'd never vote for them but I think they would at least do something better to tackle the housing crisis.

The current lot in power are spineless weasels content in preserving the status quo. They dont give a damn about those most in need of housing. Utter weasels.

Is this country just an economy or a society?

How much is this going to cost and where is the money coming from?

EdgeCase

The UN special rapporteur on housing was pointing out that there's been a rise in homelessness across all countries, including all the richest ones. Notably, Finland was the only exception.

Her comments were basically that housing has been turned into an unprotected investment commodity and they the ideology of housing being a special class of asset has been hugely erroded, with many states pulling back from social housing too.

There's definitely been an ideological shift and I think the Irish political centre tends to follow that trend very heavily.

What worries me is that if the state fails to regulate and intervene in a market that's failing the population and actually working to extract money from the economy rather than provide housing at a reasonable cost, the result is likely to be the rise of social problems and ultimately political problems.

You have to look at housing as something other than just a speculative investment asset. This is what sank out economy in 2008 and we still seem to be incapable of thinking differently about it.

Extremely expensive housing just sucks disposable income out of the economy. It's like a pyramid scheme where you've people paying high rents to feed high mortgages or stretched to their limits on mortgages to pay local banks who've borrowed the money on the markets. A number mid-level local rungs (banks, developers and large speculators) make money but mostly we are just pumping hard earned real money out into the global markets and inflating consumer debt.

Ultimately the money is being vacuumed right out of the Irish economy and is making some global investors, speculating on funds very rich.

A moderately priced housing market would see us having more money in Ireland to spend on other and more useful things as that money would get spent on goods and services and not just siphoned out of the economy.

There's very little benefit in being paper millionaires.

OneEightSeven

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Because it is racist.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/pme/populationandmigrationestimatesapril2017/

Racist, even though most of those immigrants are white??


Nice black and white thinking there by comparing immigrants to emigrants. You fail to realise that those emigrants aren't leaving a empty house behind, they're young people leaving behind an empty room mammy and daddy's house.



Ireland is a small country and land is a finite resource, America, Australia and Canada have the largest homes in the world because they're big countries with a small population, so there's more land to divide among the population, so therefore land is cheaper in those countries. Modern American homes are twice as large as they were in the '70s and it's because population growth has slowed down, easing pressure on the property market.


Back in the '90s there's used to be several empty 40 and 50 foot wide plots of zoned land in my housing estate growing in Ashbourne. In 2007/2008, they built 3-story townhouses with minuscule back gardens and no front gardens because the price of land is through the roof.

RustyNut

Let them eat Hake wrote: »

I'm from Clontarf, but I only earn 35,000, so I can't live anywhere near Clontarf. I've seen people say "they've been there for generations" about social housing in the city centre.
Why am I not entitled to a house in Clontarf? I'll never be able to live there again, and I'd love to.

If there was a proper social housing policy in place there would be state owned housing in Clontarf that would be available to you at a rent you could afford with that rent money going back to the state.

JupiterKid

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

How much is this going to cost and where is the money coming from?

It will cost several billion euro and will come from the taxpayer, like it does in most developed Western European countries - where having a properly functioning society is as important as an economy.

It's sad to see so many on this thread completely fail to see that the failures in the housing market - namely a gross and deliberate undersupply of social housing - is hurting those most vulnerable in this housing crisis. But of course they're all dole scroungers and wasters looking for their "forever" home.

Do you think unrelated working adults in their 30s sharing bedrooms in Dublin in 2018 is acceptable? What about when your children are trying to access the housing market? Live 60 miles from their work with zero quality of life? Pay exorbitant rent for a shoebox? Be hit with negative equity when this new emerging bubble inevitably bursts? Live at home until they're 35? Yes, it is sad to see how so few people properly understand how housing markets really work.

The bang of "I'm all right Jack" off some posters is palpable. Or just bitterness at being priced out of the market themselves and directing their anger at those in social housing instend of where it should be directed - at government and some extremely wealthy vulture fund agencies and property speculators.

Utter short-sightedness and lazy attacking of those most in housing need. Leo and his chums would be delighted with this thread - divide and conquuer tactics are working well for them.

Cyrus

JupiterKid wrote: »

It will cost several billion euro and will come from the taxpayer, like it does in most developed Western European countries - where having a properly functioning society is as important as an economy.

It's sad to see so many on this thread completely fail to see that the failures in the housing market - namely a gross and deliberate undersupply of social housing - is hurting those most vulnerable in this housing crisis. But of course they're all dole scroungers and wasters looking for their "forever" home.

Do you think unrelated working adults in their 30s sharing bedrooms in Dublin in 2018 is acceptable? What about when your children are trying to access the housing market? Live 60 miles from their work with zero quality of life? Pay exorbitant rent for a shoebox? Be hit with negative equity when this new emerging bubble inevitably bursts? Live at home until they're 35? Yes, it is sad to see how so few people properly understand how housing markets really work.

The bang of "I'm all right Jack" off some posters is palpable. Utter short-sightedness and lazy attacking of those most in housing need. Leo and his chums would be delighted with this thread - divide and conquuer tactics are working well for them.

Sorry you are deluded and it’s why you and those who think like you never get anywhere with this

It’s not possible for everyone to have what they want in a capital city , same here as it is in most other capital cities in the developed world