Homelessness on the rise (over 130 more children) - Mod Warning Post #392

Old diesel

Deleted User wrote: »

Sleeper12 wrote: »

And the root cause of this is government policy. Or lack off

Half of those facing “homelessness” in hubs or hotels are actually provided with homes instead.

What homes are they being provided with???.

A hotel isn't a home and neither is a hub where you literally have one room and you must share the kitchen with 18 other families.

Like the one in Cork

Sleeper12

Deleted User wrote: »

Half of those facing “homelessness” in hubs or hotels are actually provided with homes instead.

I'm not sure what is your point here. half go to hubs & the other half are still homeless in hostels?

Old diesel

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

Half of those facing “homelessness” in hubs or hotels are actually provided with homes instead.

I'm not sure what is your point here. half go to hubs & the other half are still homeless in hostels?

I think she's either......

Saying that Hotels and hubs are homes.....

OR

50 percent of people in hotels and HUBs could take up an available home (ie turned down an offer).

Old diesel

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

Half of those facing “homelessness” in hubs or hotels are actually provided with homes instead.

I'm not sure what is your point here. half go to hubs & the other half are still homeless in hostels?

I think she's either......

Saying that Hotels and hubs are homes.....

OR

50 percent of people in hotels and HUBs could take up an available home (ie turned down an offer).

OR

50 percent of people in Hotels and HUS actually move on to homes eventually.

Sleeper12

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'm not sure what is your point here. half go to hubs & the other half are still homeless in hostels?

No. Half are housed in either houses or apartments. The other half go to hubs or hotels. They are taking over from other families who have in turn gotten a home (NOT the half who were housed before reaching homeless status)

Sleeper12

Sleeper12 wrote: »

And the root cause of this is government policy. Or lack off

Doing nothing is a policy and sometimes it is the best policy.

The government are probably well aware from polling numbers that there are few votes to be gained fixing the housing crisis when the huge cost to the taxpayer is revealed. Shortage of skilled tradespeople and high building costs would make any public housing programme prohibitively expensive.

FG are never getting votes from the left who are most vocal on this issue so why pander to them and upset their base and target voters?

Just think of the childrens hospital fiaso except with no political upside for FG.

Old diesel

Deleted User wrote: »

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I'm not sure what is your point here. half go to hubs & the other half are still homeless in hostels?

No. Half are housed in either houses or apartments. The other half go to hubs or hotels. They are taking over from other families who have in turn gotten a home (NOT the half who were housed before reaching homeless status)

So we only have houses for 50 percent of those needing a new place to stay.....

Squatter

Sleeper12 wrote: »

And the root cause of this is government policy. Or lack off

Make up your mind!

Old diesel

Squatter wrote: »

Sleeper12 wrote: »

And the root cause of this is government policy. Or lack off

Make up your mind!

Government policy is lacking in some areas.

So that's why "due to Govt policy or lack off" can both be correct

Squatter

I read in the press today that the political parties who target the votes of the sans culottes have arranged one of their beloved 'street protests' in Dublin on May 18th. This one is about homelessness so I assume that the fecund and feckless Margaret Cash and her ilk will be fêted as 21st century heroes.

My commiserations to the unfortunate business owners in the City Centre who will have to endure this nonsense yet again and to the members of AGS who will have to police the protest.

Old diesel

Old diesel wrote: »

So we only have houses for 50 percent of those needing a new place to stay.....

There is definitely a shortage of Social houses. There are enough houses for everyone if so many weren’t being let short term via AirBnB etc.

I suppose my main point is that there isn’t a homeless crisis. If you can jump the queue by declaring yourself homeless, why not do so and feck the poor devils already on the list. Short term pain for long term gain. Why do you think that so many are doing it?

Sleeper12

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Let's not forget they do actually provide a service. A 24 hour, 7 day week, 365 day per year service in most cases. In fact a service that the government would have to provide if these charities didn't provide said service. The government obviously feels the charities are doing a better job than it ever could & at a lower price. At the rate the government is squandering our money on the childrens hospital I would expect FG to provide the same service as the charities with 1800 staff & a cost of €180 million :mad:

The point is..... PmcV and the others receive millions in funding from the government, millions which doesn't even cover the wages and pensions of these employees. A certain percentage of the amount donated towards these charities by members of the public goes on staff costs, that's before a single child has been housed for the night. That is the literal definition of squandering. If they didn't exist or were amalgamated into one group and the money used collectively, we'd be much better off.

yagan

It's no harm if the current definition of homeless pressure the political will to improve security of tenure for all non owner occupiers.

jasper100

Offer the a cash incentive to move to the west of Ireland where towns and villages need population growth.

Incentivise property owners in these areas to renovate run down property. Lease these properties for 10 years so people don't have to put up with dealing with **** tenants in their properties.

This is a complete non issue. People wanting somebody else to provide them with a house just need to be relocated to where stock is available.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There is definitely a shortage of Social houses. There are enough houses for everyone if so many weren’t being let short term via AirBnB etc.

Why should someone be forced to rent their house to a social welfare tenant? Are are you implying that the council are on air bnb?

jasper100

jasper100 wrote: »

This is a complete non issue. People wanting somebody else to provide them with a house just need to be relocated to where stock is available.

Nail on head. It's like someone with four blankets on their torso complaining that their legs arecold. It's not that long ago we were banging on about the number of ghost estates.

You're homeless?...... Here's a list of three houses that are available within 100 km. Pick one, we'll sort you out with a travel pass, job done. You refuse? Off the social housing list, no HAP, you're on your own. Time to get a job or find someone who'll take you in.

Old diesel

Deleted User wrote: »

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There is definitely a shortage of Social houses. There are enough houses for everyone if so many weren’t being let short term via AirBnB etc.

Why should someone be forced to rent their house to a social welfare tenant? Are are you implying that the council are on air bnb?

Every house that's on Air bnb is one house less for someone to live in.

Diceicle

Old diesel wrote: »

What homes are they being provided with???.

A hotel isn't a home and neither is a hub where you literally have one room and you must share the kitchen with 18 other families.

Like the one in Cork

Are 'hubs' not shared housing or what exactly are they?
By shared housing I mean a 3 or 4 bed home divided into self-contained units with a shared kitchen space.
I was listening to a podcast recently and this is what the hubs were described as.

Old diesel

Diceicle wrote: »

Old diesel wrote: »

What homes are they being provided with???.

A hotel isn't a home and neither is a hub where you literally have one room and you must share the kitchen with 18 other families.

Like the one in Cork

Are 'hubs' not shared housing or what exactly are they?
By shared housing I mean a 3 or 4 bed home divided into self-contained units with a shared kitchen space.
I was listening to a podcast recently and this is what the hubs were described as.

They seem to vary.

But the description of the one in Cork is

"You have just the one room for you and your kids, share 4 cookers between 18 families.

Shared laundry".

Doesn't really sound like a home - especially if you are not allowed have friends call - or have your mum etc come over to babysit.

Old diesel

I HAVE heard of ONE HUB where each family appears to have their own apartment in the building.

I suspect that's far from standard.

In fact I don't think there is any uniform standard for them

98q76e12hrflnk

Old diesel wrote: »

Every house that's on Air bnb is one house less for someone to live in.

Who will pay for all the rent of these places?

So your saying you want private assets to be forced be given to mostly lazy f**kers who will not treat the place with respect.

Old diesel

Old diesel wrote: »

They seem to vary.

But the description of the one in Cork is

"You have just the one room for you and your kids, share 4 cookers between 18 families.

Shared laundry".

Doesn't really sound like a home - especially if you are not allowed have friends call - or have your mum etc come over to babysit.

declare yourself in need of emergency accommodation

get emergency accommodation

the high bar you or anyone else sets on expectations is not really a concern

if you want a 'home' go on the housing list, meet the terms and wait your turn

Diceicle

ronoc wrote: »

Doing nothing is a policy and sometimes it is the best policy.

The government are probably well aware from polling numbers that there are few votes to be gained fixing the housing crisis when the huge cost to the taxpayer is revealed. Shortage of skilled tradespeople and high building costs would make any public housing programme prohibitively expensive.

FG are never getting votes from the left who are most vocal on this issue so why pander to them and upset their base and target voters?

Just think of the childrens hospital fiaso except with no political upside for FG.

That makes sense. Finé Gaels target-base are the landlord class; the investors and companies making money via the state through providing Direct Provision. It suits their political compass to keep the crisis bubbling over.

yagan

Deleted User wrote: »

Nail on head. It's like someone with four blankets on their torso complaining that their legs arecold. It's not that long ago we were banging on about the number of ghost estates.

You're homeless?...... Here's a list of three houses that are available within 100 km. Pick one, we'll sort you out with a travel pass, job done. You refuse? Off the social housing list, no HAP, you're on your own. Time to get a job or find someone who'll take you in.

Ok, there's only one issue I have with this and it will become a growing problem with the average voter if their kids are actually priced out of living nearby.

Now nimbyism makes some of them their own worst enemy, but higher density is inevitable. I always thought it was a huge wasted opportunity during the boom that so much was sunk into a type of housing that didn't cater for singles and those who actually have zero interest in having a garden.

L1011

Slydice wrote: »

...linkdump snipped...

You need to provide some commentary of your own at the very least - this is not a blog, linkdumps are not acceptable. You've been warned about this before. Threads which basically become linkdumps are locked

tretorn

We are never going to be able to solve the housing problem until some people start taking responsibility for their families, ie turn on the lightbulbs in the heads of those people who have five children by the time they are twenty five, and no job and no intention of getting one because they have no qualifications so all they will get is job with long hours that pays ten euros an hour. Its much more profitable to keep having children and depend on local authorities to house you and the Department of Social welfare to pay for everything else.

The Gardai arrested a woman the other day, she is thirty two years of age and she has fourteen children, her fifteenth is on the way. I reckon thats over thousand tax free into her pocket every month assuming the fourteen and counting children are dependents. I dont know ifshe lives in Social housing but lots of people like her do, well, not many have fourteen children but lots have three four and five children and its financially advantageous to have big families. This has to change immediately, there should be cash payments for two children only and thats it, no appeal and no going to community welfare officers or anyone else for more money. The State can help the family live day to day by providing vouchers for groceries and clothes, these vouchers to be made non transferrable and not to be used to buy alcohol or cigarettes.

Wanderer78

tretorn wrote: »

We are never going to be able to solve the housing problem until some people start taking responsibility for their families, ie turn on the lightbulbs in the heads of those people who have five children by the time they are twenty five, and no job and no intention of getting one because they have no qualifications so all they will get is job with long hours that pays ten euros an hour. Its much more profitable to keep having children and depend on local authorities to house you and the Department of Social welfare to pay for everything else.

The Gardai arrested a woman the other day, she is thirty two years of age and she has fourteen children, her fifteenth is on the way. I reckon thats over thousand tax free into her pocket every month assuming the fourteen and counting children are dependents. I dont know ifshe lives in Social housing but lots of people like her do, well, not many have fourteen children but lots have three four and five children and its financially advantageous to have big families. This has to change immediately, there should be cash payments for two children only and thats it, no appeal and no going to community welfare officers or anyone else for more money. The State can help the family live day to day by providing vouchers for groceries and clothes, these vouchers to be made non transferrable and not to be used to buy alcohol or cigarettes.

how many humans have actually come from planned pregnancies, and what should we do if these humans already exist?

Old diesel

Deleted User wrote: »

Old diesel wrote: »

They seem to vary.

But the description of the one in Cork is

"You have just the one room for you and your kids, share 4 cookers between 18 families.

Shared laundry".

Doesn't really sound like a home - especially if you are not allowed have friends call - or have your mum etc come over to babysit.

declare yourself in need of emergency accommodation

get emergency accommodation

the high bar you or anyone else sets on expectations is not really a concern

if you want a 'home' go on the housing list, meet the terms and wait your turn

My point is - emergency accommodation is NOT a home.

Yet some people seem to think it is.

It's an extremely expensive form of accommodation too.

3,500 euros a fortnight I saw cited for one family in Cork recently..

ogsjw

It really is starting to bother me how every mention of homelessness in Ireland ends with (XXX children). Yes it's unacceptable to have children in this situation, the picture of that kid under the tarp on bare concrete with his dad last year was especially unacceptable.

But homelessness has always been, and continues to be, a disproportionately single male issue. It just feels like they're being abandoned and forgotten, or that 'it's not surprising' it happened to them.

Not all homeless are narcotics experts anymore. The housing market has made landlords very brazen. I know many homeless people who are perfectly normal and have no addiction issues and they cannot get any tangible help even from homeless charities because they never had a welfare baby or developed an addiction knowing the government or people in the street would float their habit. The UK has the same issue, judging by any documentaries I've seen on the matter. Homeless charities won't lift a finger for genuine cases, even if they have supposed 'accomodation finding services', i.e. they help people look for rented housing. They won't give that help to single males.

Diceicle

Diceicle wrote: »

That makes sense. Finé Gaels target-base are the landlord class; the investors and companies making money via the state through providing Direct Provision. It suits their political compass to keep the crisis bubbling over.

To get a sense of the scale of this problem.

If every household in the country (1,195,467) contributed the same as the TV license Eur 160 per year.

We would have Eur191,274,720‬ extra per year.

To build in Dublin (where the housing crisis is centered)
You would get :

330 and 650 2 bed apartment units per year at a cost per unit between 293,000 and 578,000 source
or
Approx 580 3 bed houses @ development costs of 330,000

A drop in the ocean.

Note figures are not current but housing costs have inflated since 2016


Government is unlikely to increase taxes for a number of resaons.

• Election coming
• Previous experience of levying extra charges like water
• The (possibly mistaken) belief by many this is a contrived crisis
• The country vote resenting contributing funds to a Dublin crisis when there is cheaper housing elsewhere in the country