Protesters occupy privately owned house to raise awarness?

DONTMATTER

sexmag wrote: »

Will show us proof they're a gangster please and not someone just doing business in a capitalist society

Read the links.

P_1

soups05 wrote: »

how about a compromise? the dcc buys the house, gets it to a decent state, then sells it for a fair market value to someone who is working for a living.

the profit is then used to build social housing elsewhere for those looking for the "free gaff".

landlord does not make obscene profit from hoarding stock.

hard working people get a house at a reasonable price.

free loaders, eh i mean the less well off get a house albeit not in the center of a high price urban area.,

the dcc uses its money in a practical way to help all levels.

now to me, i think the landlord can do what he wants with HIS property, he took the risk of buying so he gets to do as he likes, but the above would seem like a good way to keep the protesters happy.

thoughts?

btw, if it were my house i would be demanding a riot squad clear the fkers out or its can of petrol time

That sounds a fair deal. Based on what has presumably been said by the people evicted the landlord sounds like the sort of prick youd hate to work for

sexmag

DONTMATTER wrote: »

Read the links.

What links? There have been no links posted here

PlaneSpeeking

P_1 wrote: »

That sounds a fair deal. Based on what has presumably been said by the people evicted the landlord sounds like the sort of prick youd hate to work for

I wouldn't class those evicted as particularly impartial witnesses.

Omackeral

DONTMATTER wrote: »

This adds more detail to things. We shouldn't be worried about the owner of this house. They are not worrying about people struggling on the streets, a greedy landlord who wants to make profit off the back of others suffering.

Yeah if it was your mother's house you'd soon change your tune.

DONTMATTER

sexmag wrote: »

What links? There have been no links posted here

The facebook page.

P_1

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I wouldn't class those evicted as particularly impartial witnesses.

Well given how they've been treated can you blame them really? I mean 450 for a bed in a slum? Jaysis

sbsquarepants

Donald Trump wrote: »

Once it is turned into a slum, your property values plummet. and you no longer have to worry about the pesky 60k a month


Profit


apparently



:pac:

It's the art of the deal Donald:D

DONTMATTER wrote: »

You support the gangster landlord?

What makes him a gangster? (I'm not saying he's not, I don't know anything about him)

But I certainly do support the fact that he should be able to use his property for whatever use he wants, subject to the normal planning restrictions. If he wants to buy houses and turn them into shops, or offices, or just nicer houses that's fine by me. Nobody should have a right to live in someone elses house.

I bought my house for my use, I don't give a rats arse who else feels entitled to live there, they can fúck right off, it's mine. That same principle applies whether you have 1 house or 1,000 houses.

DONTMATTER

P_1 wrote: »

Well given how they've been treated can you blame them really? I mean 450 for a bed in a slum? Jaysis

It's really a desperate situation people find themselves in. That it's got to this level is a disgrace, that nothing has been done about it is criminal.

Omackeral

DONTMATTER wrote: »

There's no one in the house and as we've just heard, the owner of the house could make a difference but is adding to the misery of locals.

You talk some amount of bollox but this is close to the top of it.

padd b1975

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Shower of smelly crusties.

Wonder if Hansard will call round.

I expect so, the usual suspects are already flat out on Twitter offering "solidarity".

Flies around cow's sh1te...

DONTMATTER

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's the art of the deal Donald:D



What makes him a gangster? (I'm not saying he's not, I don't know anything about him)

But I certainly do support the fact that he should be able to use his property for whatever use he wants, subject to the normal planning restrictions. If he wants to buy houses and turn them into shops, or offices, or just nicer houses that's fine by me. Nobody should have a right to live in someone elses house.

I bought my house for my use, I don't give a rats arse who else feels entitled to live there, they can fúck right off, it's mine. That same principle applies whether you have 1 house or 1,000 houses.

I think you should read the facebook links and look into this more.

andekwarhola

It's always a redbrick gaff within walking distance of town isn't it.

Heart goes out to people genuinely affected by a real crisis, but can't help noticing stuff like when artists bemoan the lack of affordable rent, it's always Rathmines, Phibsboro, SCR etc out of which they're being priced out.

So they're gearing up to emigrate to Berlin or Barcelona rather than renting in Tallaght or Blanchardstown and getting the bus into Whelans.

dav3

I know the default for some people on here is to take the side of the landlord or the vulture fund. But it's not as straight forward as they think. There are huge amounts of properties around the country that definitely should not be vacant during the current housing crisis.

You have landlords who bought up property during the boom now refusing to pay the mortgage on these properties and allowing them to fall into ruin. Landlords deliberately holding back properties to drive up rent and prices in a certain area. Landlords allowing properties to fall into ruin to pick up nearby properties at a cheaper price. Landlords waiting until rents rise above a certain level before they take any action on their property which could take another 5 to 10 years.

I think a case could be made to at least look at using these properties.

With Fine Gael a little bit too close to landlord's in this country, I guess some people don't see anything constructive happening to ease the crisis anytime soon.

https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/revealed-183000-vacant-homes-lying-idle-in-demand-hotspots-nationwide-35710041.html

DONTMATTER

There seems to be a lot of snobbery on this thread. Looking down firstly at people who are trying to help and then at the people who are in horrible situations. Just think what it's like to be living on the street!

soups05

dontmatter, thats the point. there is no free houses, thats what they are protesting, so use my plan to build some lol.

unless your one of those who claim the house is not free as the tenant pays rent. its been pointed out that the rent comes from their dole, they do not work for it, so therefore free house.

you will also note i put " " around the term so that i could avoid the whole argument about who is paying for the house, tax payer or dole claimant.




it should be noted that if i come across as a dole basher its because i am currently on the dole, seeking work, so any anger/bitterness/loathing is directed at myself for failing to provide for my family. the ongoing shame of receiving a "hand-out" from the people who work hard for their money is slowly eroding my soul, my hatred is directed inward, not outward. (unless you piss me off)

PlaneSpeeking

I wish I had a bridge to sell to some on here, it would be snapped up in seconds.

So gullible!

PlaneSpeeking

soups05 wrote: »

dontmatter, thats the point. there is no free houses, thats what they are protesting, so use my plan to build some lol.

unless your one of those who claim the house is not free as the tenant pays rent. its been pointed out that the rent comes from their dole, they do not work for it, so therefore free house.

you will also note i put " " around the term so that i could avoid the whole argument about who is paying for the house, tax payer or dole claimant.




it should be noted that if i come across as a dole basher its because i am currently on the dole, seeking work, so any anger/bitterness/loathing is directed at myself for failing to provide for my family. the ongoing shame of receiving a "hand-out" from the people who work hard for their money is slowly eroding my soul, my hatred is directed inward, not outward. (unless you piss me off)

You should not feel bad, a temporary setback can be just that, you sound like you will work so hard to get out of it and no one would criticise that.

It's the third generation professional scroungers people have a problem with - those who pop out kids for the benefits and never intend to work, ever.

Good luck with your job hunt!

DONTMATTER

dav3 wrote: »

I know the default for some people on here is to take the side of the landlord or the vulture fund. But it's not as straight forward as they think. There are huge amounts of properties around the country that definitely should not be vacant during the current housing crisis.

You have landlords who bought up property during the boom now refusing to pay the mortgage on these properties and allowing them to fall into ruin. Landlords deliberately holding back properties to drive up rent and prices in a certain area. Landlords allowing properties to fall into ruin to pick up nearby properties at a cheaper price. Landlords waiting until rents rise above a certain level before they take any action on their property which could take another 5 to 10 years.

I think a case could be made to at least look at using these properties.

With Fine Gael a little bit too close to landlord's in this country, I guess some people don't see anything constructive happening to ease the crisis anytime soon.

https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/revealed-183000-vacant-homes-lying-idle-in-demand-hotspots-nationwide-35710041.html

That's shocking. Interestingly you mention Fine Gael are a bit too close to landlords, here's a list of landlords who are in Fine Gael!

Tánaiste Simon Coveney, Social Protection Minister Regina Doherty, Agriculture Minister Michael Creed, Minister for Older People Jim Daly, Fine Gael chair Martin Heydon, Sean Canney, John Paul Phelan, Paul Kehoe, Pat Deering, Alan Farrell and John Deasy.

DONTMATTER

soups05 wrote: »

dontmatter, thats the point. there is no free houses, thats what they are protesting, so use my plan to build some lol.

unless your one of those who claim the house is not free as the tenant pays rent. its been pointed out that the rent comes from their dole, they do not work for it, so therefore free house.

you will also note i put " " around the term so that i could avoid the whole argument about who is paying for the house, tax payer or dole claimant.




it should be noted that if i come across as a dole basher its because i am currently on the dole, seeking work, so any anger/bitterness/loathing is directed at myself for failing to provide for my family. the ongoing shame of receiving a "hand-out" from the people who work hard for their money is slowly eroding my soul, my hatred is directed inward, not outward. (unless you piss me off)

So there's no free houses.

andekwarhola

The vacant properties are a tricky one. Home owners should be allowed to do what they want with their property (funds stockpiling land or property is a different matter) but its clearly a touchy issue to have so many vacant properties in the current climate.

The real blame, though, is with governments of the last 20 years. They halted social housing construction and abdicated responsibility for general housing needs to developers engaged in a turbo charged, unregulated property bubble.

It shouldn't have to be about demonizing a single person that owns a vacant property in the city.

jobbridge4life

sexmag wrote: »

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/housing-groups-occupying-vacant-dublin-building-say-theyre-overwhelmed-by-public-support-37195456.html

I'm sorry but how is breaking into a privately owned house raising awareness?

This is a criminal act and should be treated as such

Well it is being covered in the newspapers and media in general so I guess that is raising awareness.

I support the occupation.

DONTMATTER

1 in a 5 TD's are landlords! No wonder this issue hasn't been sorted. It's not in the landlords interests. The current rental market is their dream scenario. They couldn't care less about the homeless or those who can't afford rent.

sbsquarepants

DONTMATTER wrote: »

I think you should read the facebook links and look into this more.

No, I just refuse to do facebook for any reason.

What made these evictions illegal?

PlaneSpeeking

sbsquarepants wrote: »

No, I just refuse to do facebook for any reason.

What made these evictions illegal?

This should be good!!!

DONTMATTER

sbsquarepants wrote: »

No, I just refuse to do facebook for any reason.

What made these evictions illegal?

You can't be informed of the situation if you don't read the information available.

ArmaniJeanss

https://slumleaks.wordpress.com/ is one of my bookmarks and they've been looking into the O'Donnells for a while.
There's no actual proof, no smoking gun, nothing which would get them convicted if that's the standard of link you are looking for. It's just interesting stuff and strikingly familiar with how landlords/developers used to operate in certain parts of London or Manchester - ruthlessly maximise rent and occupancy whilst simultaneously running down the building/area to eventually force redevelopment through that you make even more on.
They should be sueing slumleaks if it's not true.

andekwarhola

DONTMATTER wrote: »

1 in a 5 TD's are landlords! No wonder this issue hasn't been sorted. It's not in the landlords interests. The current rental market is their dream scenario. They couldn't care less about the homeless or those who can't afford rent.

You'd think if that was the case, they'd stop rising property taxes and try and stop up to 50% of their rental income going to income tax?

I'd say most landlords are like us (me and wife). Stuck with a single extra property, providing a family with a much needed long term home and just about scraping even after the mortgage is cleared when the income tax, property tax and maintenance gets taken out.

sbsquarepants

DONTMATTER wrote: »

You can't be informed of the situation if you don't read the information available.

You don't know, do you?:rolleyes:

DONTMATTER

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

https://slumleaks.wordpress.com/ is one of my bookmarks and they've been looking into the O'Donnells for a while.
There's no actual proof, no smoking gun, nothing which would get them convicted if that's the standard of link you are looking for. It's just interesting stuff and strikingly familiar with how landlords/developers used to operate in certain parts of London or Manchester - ruthlessly maximise rent and occupancy whilst simultaneously running down the building/area to eventually force redevelopment through that you make even more on.
They should be sueing slumleaks if it's not true.

Thanks for the link. People should have a read of it.