Fr McVerry supporting lessons in how to occupy properties

Wheeliebin30

n!ghtmancometh wrote: »

Considering the absolute crisis that is occurring, and the FG landlord led governments reluctance to tax vacant properties/sites that could be used for housing (like most sensible countries do) then yes. What is the alternative to focus people's attention? news reports and countless studies don't seem to be doing the trick to capture peoples attention.

If we fail to remedy the problem now, we are setting future generations up for failure, and all the (costly) social and societal problems this entails. I don't think most people grasp how serious this issue is. Certainly those in power do not.

FG landlord led government?

Here we go again.

Wheeliebin30

begbysback wrote: »

You seem to have all the figures, can you also add here the percentage of those employees which are maybe former homeless and are now employed by McVerry?



Really? ive yet to meet anyone in the private sector who has moved to public sector for the pay.



All major charities are run like businesses - they are in the business of highlighting the need for something.

Maybe its the states way of employing McVerry?

Have we redifined the word charity aswell as homeless?

begbysback

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Have we redifined the word charity aswell as homeless?

Seems your perception needs some assistance so let me help you out there chief

"Run like a business"

Employing people, money incoming, money outgoing, assets, promoting/marketing

dxhound2005

begbysback wrote: »

Seems your perception needs some assistance so let me help you out there chief

"Run like a business"

Employing people, money incoming, money outgoing, assets, promoting/marketing

With the majority of the money incoming being incoming from the government. The same government the priest spends a lot of time giving out about. If they decided not fund him any more, it would be a good test of his business acumen.

CruelCoin

Chelsea Thoughtless Backspace wrote: »

Why did he have to spend 1000's to remove them? What was he doing with the property that required it to be empty?

You've heard of squatting and its effects on ownership, aye?

CruelCoin

TheCitizen wrote: »

You think it's 'whingeing' if professional young people in Dublin find it extremely difficult to buy family homes and are spending all their money on rent. Those students on the protest are attempting to bring real discussion to the issue. I think they have a point, you think they are 'whingeing'. Says a lot about you and your hopeless misunderstanding of this issue.

Being "professional young" doesn't make them any less sub-prime, just as calling yourself a custodial engineer doesn't change the fact you sweep the halls.

There is nothing wrong with being either, but they've been priced out in an open market, just as they should have been given our planning rules.
Right now you cannot buy anything on the average industrial within an hours drive of city centre, any direction.
Loosen the building regs, allow denser building and the less well off can afford stuff within the M50 with time, but it's patent ****ing nonsense to suggest you can mass-appropriate your way out of the problem.

And yes, i do believe it to be whinging.

"ah-bloo-bloo-waah, i can't afford premo **** 2 months outta college."

Spare me.

Subcomandante Marcos

jmayo wrote: »

That is worrying enough.

What's worrying enough? That they don't send staff on pointless training junkets and reserve the bulk of their training days and budget for new entries to their graduate programme or that their staff get paid in line with a scale developed to reflect the fact that they are educated to degree level in a very challenging field with unsociable hours and ongoing physical risk? If you think staff wages are too high, why do organisations like PMVT, Cope, Focus, Merchant's Quay, etc struggle to retain staff? Have a think about that one.

jmayo wrote: »

Now in 2016 they had funding of 17,728,773.
State Funding accounted for 10,720,906
and private/corporate donations and fundraising accounted for 7,007,867


...

BTW their fundraising costs have been hovering at over 550,000 annually over the last couple of years.
What exactly are the fundraising costs ?
Are they paying people out on the street chugging ?
Are they paying for media campaigns ?

So their fund raising costs were 7% of their private/corporate contribution intake? Seems like the fund raising staff aren't doing a bad job there really. The expense going on paying the salaries of professional fundraisers, communications officers, lobbyists, running media campaigns, and running events.
None of this is free, or even cheap, but they managed to raise 12.7 times their cost in the calendar year you singled out from private and corporate donations alone, topping up the government contributions by another approx 70%, providing 41% of the total running costs of the organisation.


I'd suggest it's yourself who has no idea how charitable organisations operate, if you live in some lala-land where staff shouldn't be paid appropriately just because they work for a non-profit or charitable institution. I think you'll find it's another case of the government failing to properly fund essential services and relying on the good nature of private individuals and the CSR practices of private corporations to cover the shortfall.

Subcomandante Marcos

dxhound2005 wrote: »

With the majority of the money incoming being incoming from the government. The same government the priest spends a lot of time giving out about. If they decided not fund him any more, it would be a good test of his business acumen.

Less than 60% of their money coming from government with 100% of their spending going on providing services that the state has neglected since it's foundation. If successive FF/FG governments over the last 80 years hadn't been so utterly shambolic organisations like PVMT wouldn't need to exist at the level they currently do.

Subcomandante Marcos

Turnipman wrote: »

Clearly your extensive study of the New Testament overlooked the bit where Jesus told Peter McVerry to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. (Matthew 22.15-22 or Mark 12.13-17 as you prefer).

Clearly you need to stop watching Faux News and American idiots who don't bother reading the bits before or after the quotes they mine for to use out of context.

Ipso

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Clearly you need to stop watching Faux News and American idiots who don't bother reading the bits before or after the quotes they mine for to use out of context.

Because fox are all about paying taxes.

sheesh

this thread is a complete mess!

If occupying unused buildings in dublin gets the government to tax unused properties it will have been a worth while exercise.

Dublin seems to have some infrastructure problems with regard to transport it is expensive and time consuming to get to the city centre from the commuter belts so transport links need to be improved. water infrastructure needs to be improved . and they need to build more houses apartment or flats along the commuter but not crappy ones like we did in the past or during the end of the boom.

Everybody agrees that something needs to be done but we cannot agree what to do.

Topgear on Dave

sheesh wrote: »

Everybody agrees that something needs to be done but we cannot agree what to do.

+1

I think we are agreed that we don't want to pay for it though:pac:

the_syco

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/in-an-emergency-you-take-emergency-action-fr-mcverry-supports-take-back-the-city-workshops-on-occupying-vacant-buildings-37327369.html

He said that the occupation of vacant buildings is fine, once there is no violence or damage to the property.
...
A spokesperson for 'Take Back the City' told the Irish Independent that this will include means of barricading inside buildings, along with a number of other support mechanisms.

How does one make a barricade without damaging the property?

"I think one of the emergency actions the Government should take is to make it illegal to evict people into homelessness and to do that for a period of say three years, until we get to grips with this crisis.

"In the absence of legislation like that, I think people are entitled to take whatever action they wish, again provided it's non-violent, there's no damage to property, to avoid evictions..

If this came into affect, all illegal evictions would always contain masked men in the middle of the night.

jmayo wrote: »

Are they paying people out on the street chugging ?

Chuggers used to get between a fifth and a third of their take. can be a nice weekend earner if have good people skills, and not annoying.

jmayo wrote: »

Most people's ideas of charity is misplaced.
This is more like a business.

If not ran like a business, how should it be ran?

jmayo wrote: »

And it is yet another example of the state paying someone else to deal with problems.

It's also another example of duplicated resources. Having all homeless organisations under the one roof will cut down on duplicated resources.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Every vacant useable property left idle that is peacefully occupied highlights the issue further and pushes the government towards the inevitable action: a vacancy tax. That and severe short term letting restrictions will alleviate the current crisis in urban areas significantly.

Is this vacancy tax just for houses, or offices as well? And if the latter, how will that work?

n!ghtmancometh wrote: »

(like most sensible countries do)

What's the eviction process when the tenant fails to pay rent in these sensible countries?

Chelsea Thoughtless Backspace wrote: »

What was he doing with the property that required it to be empty?

Possibly converting either the (now illegal) bedsits or offices into legal apartments.

Omackeral

Saying the word "occupying" is akin to saying "undocumented Irish". The reality is that it's breaking and entering/trespassing, just like the "undocumented" are illegal immigrants.

padd b1975

Fr. McVerry is a well-meaning but ultimately mis-guided individual.

I suspect he's being used by Murphy etc to fly their most extreme kites that would totally wipeout the couple of percentage points they're currently clinging to in the polls if they voiced them themselves.

A useful idiot being used by the useless.

TheCitizen

CruelCoin wrote: »

Being "professional young" doesn't make them any less sub-prime, just as calling yourself a custodial engineer doesn't change the fact you sweep the halls.

There is nothing wrong with being either, but they've been priced out in an open market, just as they should have been given our planning rules.
Right now you cannot buy anything on the average industrial within an hours drive of city centre, any direction.
Loosen the building regs, allow denser building and the less well off can afford stuff within the M50 with time, but it's patent ****ing nonsense to suggest you can mass-appropriate your way out of the problem.

And yes, i do believe it to be whinging.

"ah-bloo-bloo-waah, i can't afford premo **** 2 months outta college."

Spare me.

You say they should do this and they should do that to make it more possible that young people can buy houses and rent while saving for mortgages within the M50. They're not doing that ("Loosen the building regs, allow denser building etc.") is the whole point.

It doesn't matter if you think it is whingeing. If the protest gains enough traction and support then those in charge may finally get the finger out and do something about affordable accommodation in this country as well as taxing landlords who are sitting on vacant premises.

Those involved in the protest are engaging with the issue and hoping to engage wider support, you'll just sit there and moan about them. You're the one that's whinging pal.

markodaly

JupiterKid wrote: »

This neo-liberal Thatcherite free market ideology has utterly failed and the consequences are there for all to see.

rent control
local council rules regarding building heights
ban on bedsits
dual aspect apartments
huge levies on landlords


yet, its the 'free market' that is at fault.

Right so.

BBFAN

The bang of fear and bitterness in here in unreal.

BBFAN

TheCitizen wrote: »

It appears those of a selfish mindset are in the majority on here which is sad

Of course they are, by their very nature keyboard warriors are selfish, lazy and comfortable on their arses doing nothing and throwing criticism at a man who has worked to help others all his working life.

I'm willing to bet half the contributors on boards in general do no more than 4 hours work a day because they spend the other 4 hours spouting bile and personal abuse online.

Fr_Dougal

BBFAN wrote: »

Of course they are, by their very nature keyboard warriors are selfish, lazy and comfortable on their arses doing nothing and throwing criticism at a man who has worked to help others all his working life.

I'm willing to bet half the contributors on boards in general do no more than 4 hours work a day because they spend the other 4 hours spouting bile and personal abuse online.

Hopefully you’ll find somewhere more appreciative of your brilliance.

You have almost 400 posts in a month! :eek:

TheCitizen

markodaly wrote: »

rent control
local council rules regarding building heights
ban on bedsits
dual aspect apartments
huge levies on landlords


yet, its the 'free market' that is at fault.

Right so.

If you think the free market unfettered is the answer to these issues then you're entirely delusional.

NIMAN

TheCitizen wrote: »

You say they should do this and they should do that to make it more possible that young people can buy houses and rent while saving for mortgages within the M50. They're not doing that ("Loosen the building regs, allow denser building etc.") is the whole point.

It doesn't matter if you think it is whingeing. If the protest gains enough traction and support then those in charge may finally get the finger out and do something about affordable accommodation in this country as well as taxing landlords who are sitting on vacant premises.

Those involved in the protest are engaging with the issue and hoping to engage wider support, you'll just sit there and moan about them. You're the one that's whinging pal.

But is it not Sinn Fein who are in majority control of DCC, who have the power to make these changes?

TheCitizen

NIMAN wrote: »

But is it not Sinn Fein who are in majority control of DCC, who have the power to make these changes?

Are you a blueshirt NIMAN?

Link up on what you're speculating on there otherwise I will regard you as being disingenuous and party politically pointscoring on this issue.

BBFAN

corner of hells wrote: »

I work in homeless services and have met that man a number of times over the years and consistently found him to be arrogant and rude.
Ive him treat his own staff and staff from other agencies like dog ****e.
He's retired now but the banana that runs PMVT isn't much better.

His attitude is that homeless addicts , this who I work with , are some how above the law.

Maybe his attitude is that the homeless addict is more important than staff are which is your real problem?

The homeless addict should be more important, they're your customer. :rolleyes:

VinLieger

TheCitizen wrote: »

If you think the free market unfettered is the answer to these issues then you're entirely delusional.

The point is the free market isnt 100% to blame as some people like to make out

Turnipman

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Clearly you need to stop watching Faux News and American idiots who don't bother reading the bits before or after the quotes they mine for to use out of context.

For the record, my post provided a link to the complete context.

However, I do apologise, firstly for not including the text in full, given your evident inability to look up a reference unless your special needs assistant is around and secondly for wrongly assuming that most of the people reading this thread would have at least some passing acquaintance with the New Testament.

markodaly

TheCitizen wrote: »

If you think the free market unfettered is the answer to these issues then you're entirely delusional.

I don't, but at least acknowledge that there is no free market when it comes to the provision of housing and accommodation. There are thousands of laws and rules governing this, so there is no free market.

If we looked at 2 or 3 of those rules, the homeless and rent issue would be nowhere near as bad as it is. But somehow its the fault of the free market.

VinLieger

TheCitizen wrote: »

Are you a blueshirt NIMAN?

Link up on what you're speculating on there otherwise I will regard you as being disingenuous and party politically pointscoring on this issue.

The government does not set build height standards or density for the city thats is the responsibility of the city councils along with the building of social housing. SF are the largest party in DCC and have a majority vote coupled with PBP and the rest of the smaller parties/independents where is their leadership on this issue in Dublin? What measures have they passed? What houses have they built?

Turnipman

NIMAN wrote: »

But is it not Sinn Fein who are in majority control of DCC, who have the power to make these changes?

That's a very unfair assumption!

In Ireland, the lollipop ladies outside national schools have far more power than elected councillors have.

About the apex of the powers of any elected councillor is arranging for a Palestinian flag to be flown from a DCC-owned building - subject to planning permission, of course!

They can also offer the Freedom of the City to various waifs and strays which offers them the opportunity to garner some cheap publicity and to dress up in their robes of office.

markodaly

VinLieger wrote: »

What measures have they passed? What houses have they built?

Well they did vote to fly the Palestine flag over city hall.