The Frederick St protest and reaction

Sweet.Science

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/council-tenants-owe-65m-in-unpaid-rent-437052.html


So the council literally want to give people free houses as it costs more to chase rent.

Great little country

Hitman3000

Sweet.Science wrote:

So the council literally want to give people free houses as it costs more to chase rent.

Hilarious you provide a link to an article and you clearly have not read it. Read it again and then say who has suggested free houses ie rent free. I 'll give you a clue he doesn't work for any council.

sexmag

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Hilarious you provide a link to an article and you clearly have not read it. Read it again and then say who has suggested free houses ie rent free. I 'll give you a clue he doesn't work for any council.

articles also 2 years old

hatrickpatrick

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Is this another statement without any real figures to compare?

How about this, a 3,000 euro pay rise in a few weeks.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/60000-public-servants-to-get-3k-rise-in-next-budget-870968.html

We can’t be sure but id take a guess 3,000 euro extra might well be more than the majority of people rent increases, but I’m willing to wait and see some figures you can produce that shows this isn’t true?

First of all, you do realise that there are people who rent and don't work in the public or civil service, right?

Second of all, I assume (although it doesn't actually specify in the article) that the €3,000 pay rise refers to annual pay rather than monthly pay. The average rent in and close to Dublin City is now almost €2,000 per month (source). Compare that to in and around €1,400 per month for 2016 (source) and you have a figure of renting in the capital being roughly €600 more expensive per month than two years ago. With twelve months in a year, €600x12 = €7,200.

So in fact, even if civil and public servants were the only people renting homes in Dublin, the pay rise you've cites wouldn't even cover half of the increase in rents over the last two years.

So yes, as I've said, pay increases have not kept pace with inflation as far as the cost of housing is concerned. Thanks for illustrating my point for me!

hatrickpatrick

blanch152 wrote: »

In every other country in the world, children can be brought up in an apartment block

In every other country in the world, urban areas have public toilets and properly policed, safe public green spaces. Dublin City has neither of these. Where I live in Dun Laoghaire does, but apparently providing such facilities in Dublin City is totally beyond the city council. So the idea that one must provide properly provisioned green space for children in one's home in Dublin City isn't entirely unreasonable - of course, if the council would get its act together and sort out the lack of public toilets, and if the national government would get its act together and sort out the lack of severe jail sentences for scumbags who heckle, hassle and harass members of the public going about their day, the necessity to have one's own private outdoor space would be massively lessened.

Hell, look at the other thread about that poor couple sunbathing in Darndale Park and having some absolute piece of sh!t run over the lad's face with a quad bike and leaving him severely brain damaged - green spaces in Dublin are unsafe and unprovisioned. If that same couple hadn't been run over with a bike, they'd have had to go home every time they wanted to take a piss and then come back out again.

Where I live, we have public parks which are regularly policed and have their own public toilets. And we have apartment blocks here which people are happy to bring up a family in, because outdoor space which is safe for kids is a stone's throw away.

Wheeliebin30

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

First of all, you do realise that there are people who rent and don't work in the public or civil service, right?

Second of all, I assume (although it doesn't actually specify in the article) that the €3,000 pay rise refers to annual pay rather than monthly pay. The average rent in and close to Dublin City is now almost €2,000 per month (source). Compare that to in and around €1,400 per month for 2016 (source) and you have a figure of renting in the capital being roughly €600 more expensive per month than two years ago. With twelve months in a year, €600x12 = €7,200.

So in fact, even if civil and public servants were the only people renting homes in Dublin, the pay rise you've cites wouldn't even cover half of the increase in rents over the last two years.

So yes, as I've said, pay increases have not kept pace with inflation as far as the cost of housing is concerned. Thanks for illustrating my point for me!

Are you telling me everyone is paying 2,000 a month rent?

And that everyone had an increase of 600 euro a month?

Oh and that the 500,000 people renting who you claimed are struggling because they rent all live in Dublin City????

You haven’t illustrated anything.

This all started from a claim that the majority are struggling.

Then you said well it’s the 500,000 renters who are because of rising rents, with nothing to back that up.

Now it’s the people renting in Dublin city have seen a big increase.

So it’s not the majority or 500,000 people that you claimed....

hatrickpatrick

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Are you telling me everyone is paying 2,000 a month rent?

And that everyone had an increase of 600 euro a month?

Oh and that the 500,000 people renting who you claimed are struggling because they rent all live in Dublin City????

Where did I say either "everyone" or "500,000 people"? Go back and read the post which started this particular quote chain, I said "large sections of society". My exact words were You've got to be kidding, right? If larger numbers of people are renting, and the cost of renting is going up relative to incomes, then things are obviously getting harder for large sections of society.

I'm pretty sure that the citizens of Dublin, a primate capital city, count as "a large section of society".

This all started from a claim that the majority are struggling.

Then you said well it’s the 500,000 renters who are because is rising rents, with nothing to back that up.

Now it’s well people renting in Dublin city have seen a big increase.

So it’s not the majority or 500,000 people that you claimed....

That was a different poster, not me. I never claimed to have such figures, but they wouldn't even remotely surprise me so I'll do some digging and find out how many people in Dublin actually are renting.

I can tell you that 20% of people in Ireland overall are indeed renting as of 2016 (source), which is roughly 960,000 people. Again, a large section of society I think most will agree. :rolleyes:

Wheeliebin30

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Where did I say either "everyone" or "500,000 people"? Go back and read the post which started this particular quote chain, I said "large sections of society". My exact words were You've got to be kidding, right? If larger numbers of people are renting, and the cost of renting is going up relative to incomes, then things are obviously getting harder for large sections of society.

I'm pretty sure that the citizens of Dublin, a primate capital city, count as "a large section of society".



That was a different poster, not me. I never claimed to have such figures, but they wouldn't even remotely surprise me so I'll do some digging and find out how many people in Dublin actually are renting.

I can tell you that 20% of people in Ireland overall are indeed renting as of 2016 (source), which is roughly 960,000 people. Again, a large section of society I think most will agree. :rolleyes:

And I asked where are you getting it from that it’s getting harder for a large section of society?

Rents going up doesn’t validate that claim.

hatrickpatrick

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

And I asked where are you getting it from that it’s getting harder for a large section of society?

Rents going up doesn’t validate that claim.

How does it not validate that claim? More disposable income eaten up by rents = less disposable income for everything else. This is very far from rocket science.

Wheeliebin30

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

How does it not validate that claim? More disposable income eaten up by rents = less disposable income for everything else. This is very far from rocket science.

But it doesn’t validate that a large section is struggling.

Just because rents have increased it doesn’t mean people automatically are struggling.

And income has gone up there is no denying it.

Again what number is this large section?

10,000?

100,000?

Where are you getting this figure from?

blanch152

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Where did I say either "everyone" or "500,000 people"? Go back and read the post which started this particular quote chain, I said "large sections of society". My exact words were You've got to be kidding, right? If larger numbers of people are renting, and the cost of renting is going up relative to incomes, then things are obviously getting harder for large sections of society.

I'm pretty sure that the citizens of Dublin, a primate capital city, count as "a large section of society".



That was a different poster, not me. I never claimed to have such figures, but they wouldn't even remotely surprise me so I'll do some digging and find out how many people in Dublin actually are renting.

I can tell you that 20% of people in Ireland overall are indeed renting as of 2016 (source), which is roughly 960,000 people. Again, a large section of society I think most will agree. :rolleyes:

Large sections of society are doing well.

Large sections of society are doing brilliant

Large sections of society are struggling.

Large sections of society want Dublin to win six-in-a-row

Large sections of society want Dublin to lose the next 50 All-Irelands

Large sections of society want anything you can think of, just a different large section of society.

shivermetimber

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

But it doesn’t validate that a large section is struggling.

Just because rents have increased it doesn’t mean people automatically are struggling.

And income has gone up there is no denying it.

Again what number is this large section?

10,000?

100,000?

Where are you getting this figure from?

I can count on one finger the amount of people I know who have had their income increased in the past 5 years and I'm sure I'm not alone in this. Seems to be a common point floating around these discussions that I never understood.

sexmag

shivermetimber wrote: »

I can count on one finger the amount of people I know who have had their income increased in the past 5 years and I'm sure I'm not alone in this. Seems to be a common point floating around these discussions that I never understood.

private sector worker here, our income went up 3% last year, all 1100 of us for the company

shivermetimber

sexmag wrote: »

private sector worker here, our income went up 3% last year, all 1100 of us for the company

Count yourself lucky then. Nobody I know on low incomes have had a tap in years and the only one I do who has is on middle wage

Wheeliebin30

shivermetimber wrote: »

Count yourself lucky then. Nobody I know on low incomes have had a tap in years and the only one I do who has is on middle wage

How about this, a 3,000 euro pay rise in a few weeks.


https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/60000-public-servants-to-get-3k-rise-in-next-budget-870968.html

Maybe the people you know are afraid to tell you they got a rise in case you label them “lucky”

shivermetimber

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

How about this, a 3,000 euro pay rise in a few weeks.

https://www.breakingne...t-budget-870968.html

Maybe the people you know are afraid to tell you they got a rise in case you label them “lucky”

Nope. They're all honest, open working class people who are sharing the same stories.

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

The government only managed to supply 15 houses over 2 years from a plan that was to deliver 3500. There might be no house available in Leitrim.

I thought the figure was 780 in 2017? https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/ourview/social-housing-total-number-built-is-abysmal-846073.html I’m sure that if I look hard enough that there are other figures.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

I’m sure that if I look hard enough that there are other figures.

You can look at today's Times newspaper. Only 15 houses delivered under the R.L. scheme out of a mooted 3500.

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Article in today's Irish Times. Murphy admitted the figure of 15.

Does that scheme involve people offering their houses to be refurbished before renting as social housing? Is it the one where less than 1,000 houses were offered with only a small number suitable for renovation within the budget allowed?

If so, it’s only ONE scheme and nothing to do with houses being built.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

Does that scheme involve people offering their houses to be refurbished before renting as social housing? Is it the one where less than 1,000 houses were offered with only a small number suitable for renovation within the budget allowed?

Read the article. Really poor effort on behave of government despite launching it twice to much fanfare.

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Read the article. Really poor effort on behave of government despite launching it twice to much fanfare.

I did read it. Did you? Hardly the Governments fault if people are unwilling to hand over their properties for renovations or that the ones handed over need too much work to make them viable?

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

I did read it. Did you? Hardly the Governments fault if people are unwilling to hand over their properties for renovations or that the ones handed over need too much work to make them viable?

The government claimed it would deliver 3500 houses into the system it has only delivered 15 . So whose fault is it?

facehugger99

Hitman3000 wrote: »

The government claimed it would deliver 3500 houses into the system it has only delivered 15 . So whose fault is it?

Let me guess - the Gubberments?

Alrigghtythen

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/almost-one-third-of-families-refusing-social-housing-were-homeless-1.3414714%3fmode=amp


“Almost one-third of families refusing social housing were homeless”

“Nearly one-third of families who turned down local authority social housing offers in Dublin last year were homeless”






Haha it’s gone beyond comedy at this stage.

This whole homelessness “crisis” is a farce and a scam.

What a total farce.

Wheeliebin30

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

What a total farce.

Build homes for the homeless they say, it’s that simple they say.

Yeah pretty hard to justify that when homeless people are turning houses down that are already built!!!!!!!!!

Hitman3000

Looks like Minister Murphy doesn't have the full support from all of his party ahead of tomorrow's no confidence vote . Junior minister Catherine Bryne may abstain. Squeaky bum time for Leo's buddy. Back benches for Bryne if she does abstain.

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Looks like Minister Murphy doesn't have the full support from all of his party ahead of tomorrow's no confidence vote . Junior minister Catherine Bryne may abstain. Squeaky bum time for Leo's buddy. Back benches for Bryne if she does abstain.

And her objection is? His plans to build more homes in her constituency!

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

And her objection is? His plans to build more homes in her constituency!

She claims it's over development, still it's not great if you can't count on the automatic support of a ministerial colleague.

sexmag

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Looks like Minister Murphy doesn't have the full support from all of his party ahead of tomorrow's no confidence vote . Junior minister Catherine Bryne may abstain. Squeaky bum time for Leo's buddy. Back benches for Bryne if she does abstain.

Well I mean it's hardly his fault, he didn't create the crisis, in fact he could hardly have had much effect in the time he's been there,he's trying to build more houses in her constituency with a very fair ratio of social and affordable housing.

She should be rightly sacked if she obstains or votes no confidence

sexmag

Hitman3000 wrote: »

She claims it's over development, still it's not great if you can't count on the automatic support of a ministerial colleague.

She has her own agenda because of her constituents and what's that? The bleeding anti social behaviour,she wants that resolved before anything is built.....eh maybe tell the parents to get off their holes and bloody parent their own children, it's not the governments job.

Jeez, give me a free house,raise my children,all these people want everything done for them