Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

5000 applicants turn down social housing

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    voluntary wrote: »
    You see, the genuinely homeless have often underlying issues, mental problems, deep depressions, drug/alkohol related brain dysfunctions. You're right. It's not enough to give them food and shelter. They need a complex support, assuming they even want a change. Many of homeless would qualify for treatment in psychiatric hospital or at least attend proper, long term therapies.

    and there-in lies the problem. Many of them don't want to change, they would just like a free gaf they could sit their arse in and drink cans infront of the tv, rather than drink cans on the street. They see absolutely no qualms about refusing any effort or change on their front and lay blame squarely at the government for not looking after them hard enough,


  • Options
    #33
    NasserShammaz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 886 ✭✭✭NasserShammaz


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    and there-in lies the problem. Many of them don't want to change, they would just like a free gaf they could sit their arse in and drink cans infront of the tv, rather than drink cans on the street. They see absolutely no qualms about refusing any effort or change on their front and lay blame squarely at the government for not looking after them hard enough,[/quote

    While they do this they Hoover up resources that could be going on services for children , mental health for those who want to recover education. And not forgetting the amount of time wasted by ambulance and police service ,the courts and local community welfare. They are not worth it and should receive only the bare basics .indulging these cnuts is only adding to their longevity and creating a whole sub class in society which is both expensive and useless .


  • Options
    #34
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    and there-in lies the problem. Many of them don't want to change, they would just like a free gaf they could sit their arse in and drink cans infront of the tv, rather than drink cans on the street. They see absolutely no qualms about refusing any effort or change on their front and lay blame squarely at the government for not looking after them hard enough,

    Many people with serious mental issues would end up in similar situations if not for minding families and supportive friends. I wouldn't judge everyone the same.


  • Options
    #35
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    kceire wrote: »
    Thankfully the refusal is capped now. If you refuse 2 I believe, you are dropped to the bottom of the list.
    As some say they hate living in the "hotels", it seems others prefer living there.

    Oh, and being deferred means living there another year.

    Perhaps if they refused two places, they get moved to another "hotel", picked at random. Still housed, but so that they're aware that they don't get to stay where they are if they refuse the offer or houses.


  • Options
    #36
    NasserShammaz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 886 ✭✭✭NasserShammaz


    the_syco wrote: »
    As some say they hate living in the "hotels", it seems others prefer living there.

    Oh, and being deferred means living there another year.

    Perhaps if they refused two places, they get moved to another "hotel", picked at random. Still housed, but so that they're aware that they don't get to stay where they are if they refuse the offer or houses.

    Are they under any obligation to improve their situation find a job get .... again I'm not talking about working homeless who should get priority but the useless


    When I signed on at the start of the recession every fu#king week i was asked what have I done to get a job prove it and attend bul**** meetings with some dope in a penny's suit. In the time it took to get a job the only people asked this were the ones that actually always worked the f#ckin wasters breezed in reled of some **** about some bul**** an walked out smirking of to get their money.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    NasserShammaz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 886 ✭✭✭NasserShammaz


    <MOD SNIP>


  • Options
    #38
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Mod Note

    folks, the standard of posts in this thread needs to improve.

    If you're new to A & P, welcome. Have a read of the forum charter.

    Thanks


  • Options
    #39
    voluntary
    Registered Users Posts: 871 ✭✭✭voluntary


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    not really though, we tax everyone who works to death so that we can hand out free dole and free houses to people who don't want to work, we look after everyone cradle to grave as long as they never make anything of themselves.
    .

    Think about this as a price to pay for a relative peace and safety so the poor don't take it off you by force.


  • Options
    #40
    Sheeps
    Registered Users Posts: 2,762 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    "free housing"


  • Options
    #41
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    terrydel wrote: »
    We have virtual zero unemployment so what's wrong with giving a few extra quid to those on the dole? It won't bankrupt the country, we leave that job to the neoliberal, free market banks and right wing economic types which you are no doubt a member of.
    This thread is basically dismissing the homeless crisis in this country, which is utterly pathetic really.

    we already have the most overbloated welfare state in europe. Doesnt need more money, especially in 'full employment' any able bodied person who isnt employed at the moment should be having their welfare cut and a big kick up the backside to go join polite society.

    It would help the housing crisis a lot if everyone who could work actually did and didnt clog up lists .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    jay0109
    Registered Users Posts: 2,669 ✭✭✭jay0109


    terrydel wrote: »
    We have virtual zero unemployment so what's wrong with giving a few extra quid to those on the dole? It won't bankrupt the country, we leave that job to the neoliberal, free market banks and right wing economic types which you are no doubt a member of.
    This thread is basically dismissing the homeless crisis in this country, which is utterly pathetic really.

    Whats our disability and long term illness rates looking like compared to other EU countries?
    Or a better way of looking at it- what's out labour force participation rate v's the general adult population?


  • Options
    #43
    bri007
    Registered Users Posts: 1,375 ✭✭✭bri007


    Giving a few extra quid to those on the dole would give more incentive for people to stay on the dole more than work. Already there is not much difference on someone on minimum wage say for example and paying costs to get to and from work, clothes, lunch extra compared to someone on the dole collecting their money. So no giving more money is not the answer.
    terrydel wrote: »
    We have virtual zero unemployment so what's wrong with giving a few extra quid to those on the dole? It won't bankrupt the country, we leave that job to the neoliberal, free market banks and right wing economic types which you are no doubt a member of.
    This thread is basically dismissing the homeless crisis in this country, which is utterly pathetic really.


  • Options
    #44
    terrydel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,881 ✭✭✭terrydel


    voluntary wrote: »
    Think about this as a price to pay for a relative peace and safety so the poor don't take it off you by force.

    What a moronic comment.


  • Options
    #45
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Mod Note

    terrydel, don't post in this thread again.


  • Options
    #46
    terrydel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,881 ✭✭✭terrydel


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    we already have the most overbloated welfare state in europe. Doesnt need more money, especially in 'full employment' any able bodied person who isnt employed at the moment should be having their welfare cut and a big kick up the backside to go join polite society.

    It would help the housing crisis a lot if everyone who could work actually did and didnt clog up lists .

    What it needs is social housing. Your neoliberal poster boys creates a situation wer those housed by the state next go into private rented accommodation. Again another problem caused by neoliberalism.


  • Options
    #47
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Do they tear down the house when it's refused or is another person or family housed in the unit?


  • Options
    #48
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Do they tear down the house when it's refused or is another person or family housed in the unit?

    they go back to their hotel being paid for by the state, a few employees who could have been working on future cases are now having their time wasted going down the list to fill this unit and the government gets consistently lambasted that theyre not housing people fast enough.


  • Options
    #49
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Eric Cartman wrote:
    they go back to their hotel being paid for by the state, a few employees who could have been working on future cases are now having their time wasted going down the list to fill this unit and the government gets consistently lambasted that theyre not housing people fast enough.


    You answered a question I didn't ask, I'll repeat is the dwelling that is refused tore down or another person or family housed in it? The end result is a needy family or person is housed.


  • Options
    #50
    punisher5112
    Registered Users Posts: 24,647 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    Should tell 20 to come exactly like the rest of us did or do to find a place to rent....

    You turn it down next are given refusal etc etc....

    You would see a big up turn in acceptance as they don't have time for that.....


  • Options
    #51
    mad m
    Registered Users Posts: 9,001 ✭✭✭mad m


    My uncle used to live in Ballymun flats (loved it). Eventually got a house in Tallaght. My cousins were a bit wild after a few years up there. He opted for a relocation incentive to Swindford in Mayo to build up the area.

    All I can say is the change in my cousins was profound. They are all grown up now with jobs and family etc. Moving out of the big smoke can be done.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    DubCount
    Registered Users Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭DubCount


    It seems that if you voice any concerns about the provision of social housing, you're a blueshirt. Social housing is paid for from our taxes, and its more than reasonable to question how we spend money. I have a problem with some left wing politicians and charities that promise we can all live for free in an area of our choice and we can pay for it by taxing a coupe of rich people - spinning fairy tales fixes nothing, and some of this type of thinking makes the problems worse not better.

    I have so many problems with the current system, its hard to know where to start to fix the problems.
    1) The term "homeless" really means "those in emergency accommodation". Ironically, it excludes people sleeping on the streets. It excludes those living with family and friends who may be more entitled to social housing than those termed "homeless".
    2) HAP works for the Local Authority, but it doesn't for landlords and doesn't work for social tenants. Its a lower tier of social housing because it comes with a chance of eviction into emergency accommodation. This creates an incentive for social tenants to dodge HAP and hold out for a council provided home.
    3) There is a problem with the expectations of social tenants. I would like a big house with a sea view in Howth - but I cant afford that, so I cant have that. The idea that you get to choose where you get to live, when you are not paying for it, while those who are paying for it don't get the same choice, is mad. Why should someone commuting 3 hours per day because they cant afford a home in Dublin, pay taxes for someone else to live in their choice of area in Dublin?
    4) Once someone gets a home from the council, that becomes their forever home, even if their circumstances change, and there doesn't seem to be any review process.
    5) We need a process for dealing with anti-social tenants, as the current system just seems to move these problems around, in stead of solving them.

    If all that makes me a blueshirt, sign me up !!


  • Options
    #53
    bri007
    Registered Users Posts: 1,375 ✭✭✭bri007


    Totally agree with everything you said and that doesn’t make you a blue shirt, in fact it makes you a realist as to what’s so wrong with the country. If you work you get no choices and pay for people that done work and have choices.
    DubCount wrote: »
    It seems that if you voice any concerns about the provision of social housing, you're a blueshirt. Social housing is paid for from our taxes, and its more than reasonable to question how we spend money. I have a problem with some left wing politicians and charities that promise we can all live for free in an area of our choice and we can pay for it by taxing a coupe of rich people - spinning fairy tales fixes nothing, and some of this type of thinking makes the problems worse not better.

    I have so many problems with the current system, its hard to know where to start to fix the problems.
    1) The term "homeless" really means "those in emergency accommodation". Ironically, it excludes people sleeping on the streets. It excludes those living with family and friends who may be more entitled to social housing than those termed "homeless".
    2) HAP works for the Local Authority, but it doesn't for landlords and doesn't work for social tenants. Its a lower tier of social housing because it comes with a chance of eviction into emergency accommodation. This creates an incentive for social tenants to dodge HAP and hold out for a council provided home.
    3) There is a problem with the expectations of social tenants. I would like a big house with a sea view in Howth - but I cant afford that, so I cant have that. The idea that you get to choose where you get to live, when you are not paying for it, while those who are paying for it don't get the same choice, is mad. Why should someone commuting 3 hours per day because they cant afford a home in Dublin, pay taxes for someone else to live in their choice of area in Dublin?
    4) Once someone gets a home from the council, that becomes their forever home, even if their circumstances change, and there doesn't seem to be any review process.
    5) We need a process for dealing with anti-social tenants, as the current system just seems to move these problems around, in stead of solving them.

    If all that makes me a blueshirt, sign me up !!


  • Options
    #54
    Interested Observer
    Registered Users Posts: 13,004 ✭✭✭✭Interested Observer


    terrydel wrote: »
    We have virtual zero unemployment so what's wrong with giving a few extra quid to those on the dole? It won't bankrupt the country, we leave that job to the neoliberal, free market banks and right wing economic types which you are no doubt a member of.
    This thread is basically dismissing the homeless crisis in this country, which is utterly pathetic really.

    If these people want a few extra quid they should get a job. End of story.


  • Options
    #55
    metricspaces
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭metricspaces


    terrydel wrote: »
    This thread is basically dismissing the homeless crisis in this country, which is utterly pathetic really.

    There will always be "homeless" people. When does the situation become a crisis? At what % of the population is it a crises?

    What's the definition of being homeless? i.e. what is the criteria all these homeless people met to be classed as homeless. Is it the same criteria used in other European countries?

    How does Irelands figure of homelessness compare to other European countries (assuming Ireland uses same criteria as other Euro countries to allow meaningful comparison)?

    I remember seeing a breakdown of people on the housing waiting list, very few were without a roof over their head or were living in hotels.

    It's very easy to dramatise a situation by highlighting the extremes.


  • Options
    #56
    NasserShammaz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 886 ✭✭✭NasserShammaz


    Interested Observer wrote: »
    If these people want a few extra quid they should get a job. End of story.

    What a novel idea but would it have to be a job close to their ma's


  • Options
    #57
    NIMAN
    Registered Users Posts: 32,999 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    metricspaces wrote: »
    There will always be "homeless" people. When does the situation become a crisis? At what % of the population is it a crises?

    What's the definition of being homeless? i.e. what is the criteria all these homeless people met to be classed as homeless. Is it the same criteria used in other European countries?

    How does Irelands figure of homelessness compare to other European countries (assuming Ireland uses same criteria as other Euro countries to allow meaningful comparison)?

    I remember seeing a breakdown of people on the housing waiting list, very few were without a roof over their head or were living in hotels.

    It's very easy to dramatise a situation by highlighting the extremes.

    Some figures for Europe :

    Czech Rep 0.65%
    Germany 0.50%
    UK 0.46%
    Sweden 0.36%
    Luxembourg 0.28%
    Ireland 0.21%
    France 0.21%
    Greece 0.18%
    Austria 0.17%
    Holland 0.17%
    Finland 0.13%

    I can only imagine the air time it must get on the Czech, German or UK news outlets, when our rate is less than half of the UKs, and a third of the Czech Republics.


  • Options
    #58
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    voluntary wrote: »
    Instead of blaming people for not wanting to leave in drug battled areas, just address the root cause here - target the crime.


    The cause of the crime in these areas is the fact that people are being given free houses. They don't appreciate the value of what they have because they have not worked for it. It would take a couple of generations to fix the problems but we have got to stop giving people free houses!


  • Options
    #59
    IAmTheReign
    Registered Users Posts: 339 ✭✭IAmTheReign


    NIMAN wrote: »
    Some figures for Europe :

    Czech Rep 0.65%
    Germany 0.50%
    UK 0.46%
    Sweden 0.36%
    Luxembourg 0.28%
    Ireland 0.21%
    France 0.21%
    Greece 0.18%
    Austria 0.17%
    Holland 0.17%
    Finland 0.13%

    I can only imagine the air time it must get on the Czech, German or UK news outlets, when our rate is less than half of the UKs, and a third of the Czech Republics.

    If this is correct it puts some serious perspective on our homeless 'crisis'. Have you a source for this?


  • Options
    #60
    Sheeps
    Registered Users Posts: 2,762 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    What difference does the homeless figures in different countries make? It's no more acceptable to people homeless. The homeless figures could be next to zero if they just built some houses.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    splinter65
    Registered Users Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    Sheeps wrote: »
    What difference does the homeless figures in different countries make? It's no more acceptable to people homeless. The homeless figures could be next to zero if they just built some houses.

    The country is full of empty houses, so why do we need to build more houses?


Advertisement