3,140 rooms to rent & 8,500 houses to rent -what 'homeless' crisis

ebbsy

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

So there was three opportunities for you to ask yesterday, did you?

I doubt if the bird in Dealz would know that .

Ush1

end of the road wrote: »

there is such thing as impossible to do. what is possible for me or you, may not always be possible for someone else. for some of those unemployed, it is not possible for them to better themselves to the high standards fussy employers expect these days.
jobs like mcdonalds don't pay a wage that is viable for one to live on in this high cost country. wages need to provide a good living and quality of life.
my attitude is enabling the worker. it is about enabling the quality of life for all to improve, insuring a happy healthy nation, which is good for all.

I think people would be surprised what they are capable of if the alternative is very unappealing.

SortingYouOut

SortingYouOut wrote: »

And our roads are still a joke.

I'd actually recommend anyone looking for accomodation to reside in one of the potholes out my direction, you'd be set for life.

I'm holding out for a pothole near me Ma, thanks

ELM327

Sleeper12 wrote: »

If we have no housing crisis why are rents at an all time high? Why do landlords have to look through over 100 applications for the room to rent they advertise? Why do people go to viewings with cash deposits in a desperate attempt to get somewhere to live?

Ridiculous government interference and 52% taxation on rental income.

Plumbthedepths

ebbsy wrote:

I doubt if the bird in Dealz would know that .

Unless you want to clarify all I can take from your response is you didn't ask any of the three individuals collecting for the homeless where the money goes. Instead you directed your question to a bunch of randomers on an internet forum.....ok.

Boggles

https://www.daft.ie/ireland/houses-for-rent/

Found 1,534 properties Houses to rent in Ireland

Any chance of a thread title change?

SusieBlue

n97 mini wrote: »

You really need to buy a car, or move. I used to have a 2 hour commute by public transport until i got a car, which made it a 20 minute commute. Seriously, help yourself. No-one else is goi6to solve your problems.

I can't afford a car. If I could I wouldn't be reliant on public transport.
What do you suggest I do, steal one??

I'm not expecting anyone to solve my problems either I'm just pointing out the reality of living and working in this country as a young single person, on a not so great income.

Boggles

The Specialist wrote: »

Name your closest family and friends and get them to provide an explanation why they can’t offer you a room for a few weeks until you get back on your feet.

So a "friend" of someone who has become homeless gets hauled in front of the county council and has to explain why they won't accommodate them?

You haven't really though that through, have you?

:pac:

JustAThought

Someone in a 2 or 3 bed council or state subsidised house who 'throws out' their son or daughter should be immeduately removed from that council house or flat and reallocated or relisted for a smaller.one as they have additional capacity they are not using and the house is no.longer suited for.their needs - highly subsidised by tye taxpayer. Or they can be told to share with a 'homeless' person and give the use of the.house and share - they have a state sponsored room free in their council house - they either use it or lose it.

Womens partners and husbands should be made by the state to.provide for their offspring/children - this nonsense of delarung yourself homeless and not knowing who the father is or.being paid for 3 or 4 children living abroad while.declaring yourself homeless here is utter abuse. They found a way to tax our houses and water overnight - no doubt they can use the same resources to.identifying deadbeat fathers and extracting payments from their salaries or benefits - the same way they did for house taxes. A fine gael/labour screw them twice initiative.

Nobody is talking about the 50% tax put on private rentals - draw your line there - wouodn't everyone prefer this to be reduced to about 5 or 7% . Houses are taxed multiple ways including caputal gains taxes on their appreciated value and inheritance tax when.the owner dies - all going to.the coffers of the government to ge squandered while joe average is crucified paying them and for them in increased rent etc

At tye same time not a single penny is offered in state support to someone paying a mortgage on their family home if they get cancer or lose their job - because even if they have paid up for q0 or 20 years and still owe money on the mortgage to e paid every month just the same as "rent" - they have nothing to hep them and no safety net until the final payment is made which could take 25 or 30 years. It seems some people who try and look after their families and children are crucified with penaltues,taxes and rates while being given nothing while others are taxed at 50% on their effort, while a wider majority are offered everything on the back of other peoples effort and investment and prudence. True abuse of communism in action.

Greyfox

end of the road wrote: »

there is such thing as impossible to do. what is possible for me or you, may not always be possible for someone else. for some of those unemployed, it is not possible for them to better themselves to the high standards fussy employers expect these days.
jobs like mcdonalds don't pay a wage that is viable for one to live on in this high cost country. wages need to provide a good living and quality of life.
my attitude is enabling the worker. it is about enabling the quality of life for all to improve, insuring a happy healthy nation, which is good for all.

Well they should be trying to get a job. The fact that some people think its ok for someone to choose the dole over working in Mcdonalds is one of the many things wrong with this country.

end of the road

Greyfox wrote: »

Well they should be trying to get a job.

those of them who can are doing exactly that.
for the few who aren't, the employment market has no space for them anyway. there are no jobs for them and employers do not want them.

Greyfox wrote: »

The fact that some people think its ok for someone to choose the dole over working in Mcdonalds is one of the many things wrong with this country.

not at all. it's just accepting reality. there will always be unemployed. that's just a fact of life.

GhostyMcGhost

Boggles wrote: »

https://www.daft.ie/ireland/houses-for-rent/

Any chance of a thread title change?

about as much a chance of an attitude change tbh.... I'd hope to god some here dont fall on hard times, how will they cope knowing they're now they're now part of the problem... but for them of course it will be completely different standards of judgement

Pawwed Rig

end of the road wrote: »

those of them who can are doing exactly that.
for the few who aren't, the employment market has no space for them anyway. there are no jobs for them and employers do not want them..

If you saw the volume of young fit men and women that hang around all day in Dublin 1 you would not make a statement like that. The only reason alot of them are not gainfully employed is that they are making more from selling prescription meds to the highest bidder. The place is awash with them.

end of the road

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

If you saw the volume of young fit men and women that hang around all day in Dublin 1 you would not make a statement like that. The only reason alot of them are not gainfully employed is that they are making more from selling prescription meds to the highest bidder. The place is awash with them.

which is exactly why IMO they probably won't be employed.
i think it's probably fair to say that there are very very few employers who would want a former drug seller/dealer on their pay roll, even if the drugs they were selling were proscription drugs.
is that fair? no if someone actually changes their ways and shows remorse for what they did, but it is how it is unfortunately

Pawwed Rig

end of the road wrote: »

which is exactly why IMO they probably won't be employed.
i think it's probably fair to say that there are very very few employers who would want a former drug seller/dealer on their pay roll, even if the drugs they were selling were proscription drugs.
is that fair? no if someone actually changes their ways and shows remorse for what they did, but it is how it is unfortunately

So why do they need to be housed 200metres from the IFSC?

Cyclical Apocalypse

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

So why do they need to be housed 200metres from the IFSC?

No one on here has argued those unfortunate enough to be unemployed should be housed near the IFSC only that people shouldn't be forcefully relocated outside of areas where they grew up and have family and social connections.

Doc07

Cyclical Apocalypse wrote: »

No one on here has argued those unfortunate enough to be unemployed should be housed near the IFSC only that people shouldn't be forcefully relocated outside of areas where they grew up and have family and social connections.

That’s fine but you could argue the ‘forcefully relocated’ remark applies more to private renters/homeowners who can’t afford to rent or buy where they grew up and live in commuter towns.

Pawwed Rig

Cyclical Apocalypse wrote: »

No one on here has argued those unfortunate enough to be unemployed should be housed near the IFSC only that people shouldn't be forcefully relocated outside of areas where they grew up and have family and social connections.

But it is ok that employed people are (due to economic necessity) forcefully relocated outside of areas where they grew up and have family and social connections?

What about when these families and social connections are the cause of the anti social issues?

end of the road

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

So why do they need to be housed 200metres from the IFSC?

the existence of and access to services. that goes for cities in general, there are plenty of other options in dublin rather then the specific location you mention but the same would still apply.

when we talk about housing people it's not just the bare housing cost that needs to be considered but all other possible costs as well.

Doc07 wrote: »

That’s fine but you could argue the ‘forcefully relocated’ remark applies more to private renters/homeowners who can’t afford to rent or buy where they grew up and live in commuter towns.

that is the case at the moment, yes .
however if there were forced locations of unemployed and wellfare dependents, then it would apply to both as people being forced to buy further out would still continue.

Graces7

end of the road wrote: »

which is exactly why IMO they probably won't be employed.
i think it's probably fair to say that there are very very few employers who would want a former drug seller/dealer on their pay roll, even if the drugs they were selling were proscription drugs.
is that fair? no if someone actually changes their ways and shows remorse for what they did, but it is how it is unfortunately

There is a thread over on long term illness re rehabilitation that makes interesting reading

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin//showthread.php?t=2057989689

end of the road

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

But it is ok that employed people are (due to economic necessity) forcefully relocated outside of areas where they grew up and have family and social connections?

personally no IMO as i don't think people moving further and further out will be sustainable in the long run, even though we have and may even get more, decent infrastructure out of it. however all of that will need to be paid for.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

What about when these families and social connections are the cause of the anti social issues?

lock them up and employ enough gardai to be able to engage in tactical disruption of their activities. won't happen but i think it is what needs to be done and it will benefit us all.

Pawwed Rig

end of the road wrote: »

personally no IMO as i don't think people moving further and further out will be sustainable in the long run, even though we have and may even get more, decent infrastructure out of it. however all of that will need to be paid for.

What you are advocating for whether knowingly or not is that people should be allowed live wherever they like regardless of means.
This is far to the left of where almost any country in the world currently sits.

Re locking whole communities up? That is craziness to be fair. We would need 50 more prisons which would bring us close to US rates of per capita imprisonments.

end of the road

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

What you are advocating for whether knowingly or not is that people should be allowed live wherever they like regardless of means.
This is far to the left of where almost any country in the world currently sits.

that may be but i believe that over all it is sustainable and means the population is concentrated so services can be delivered easier and cheaper over all.
people can of course live rurally if they want, that is their choice.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Re locking whole communities up? That is craziness to be fair. We would need 50 more prisons which would bring us close to US rates of per capita imprisonments.

of course we aren't locking whole communities up. i would be the first to come out against anyone who would suggest such.
what we are doing is locking up people who have engaged in sustained criminality, who have been given chances and refused to reform. we are locking up violent criminals for longer, etc.
for the low level stuff, we employ enough gardai so that there are resources to go around and disrupt those activities and hassle and annoy those people.

James Brown

Doc07 wrote: »

That’s fine but you could argue the ‘forcefully relocated’ remark applies more to private renters/homeowners who can’t afford to rent or buy where they grew up and live in commuter towns.

That's true but nobody is taking entire privately owned housing estates, moving the inhabitants to Tallaght and selling off the land to private contractors for a short sighted profit. Look around Cork street in Dublin, if ever you are passing that way. Apartment block, Spar, Apartment block, Spar....

Pawwed Rig

end of the road wrote: »

that may be but i believe that over all it is sustainable and means the population is concentrated so services can be delivered easier and cheaper over all.
people can of course live rurally if they want, that is their choice.

It would ultimately lead to stagnation as noone would be able to move anywhere as all the accomodation would be taken by locals. You would end up in situations where people would be travelling huge distances to access work and services rather than moving to where they need to be.
The capitalist system serves us well in this regard whereby the most productive members of society (in general) will have more means to buy closer to the workplace with the less productive living further away. This allows the 'wasted' time be the cheapest. This is skewed badly though by the amount of social housing in premium spots.

A high rise redevelopment of the North Inner City for example would have multiple benefits. The communities could be housed elsewhere is a more suitable location allowing the productive members of society short commute times in an out of work thereby being more productive and growing the economy.
Additional benefits would be the removal of the scourge of the walking dead and drug dealing from the area thereby making the capital city a more attractive place to visit.
Such a high rise development given the amount of space there is could house 10s of thousands of people. Rents would fall. Property prices would fall. Homelessness would fall. Crime would fall.

Plumbthedepths

Pawwed Rig wrote:

A high rise redevelopment of the North Inner City for example would have multiple benefits. The communities could be housed elsewhere is a more suitable location allowing the productive members of society short commute times in an out of work thereby being more productive and growing the economy. Additional benefits would be the removal of the scourge of the walking dead and drug dealing from the area thereby making the capital city a more attractive place to visit. Such a high rise development given the amount of space there is could house 10s of thousands of people. Rents would fall. Property prices would fall. Homelessness would fall. Crime would fall.

So you want Ballymun style ghettoes? Didn't work then not going to work now.

James Brown

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

So you want Ballymun style ghettoes? Didn't work then not going to work now.

None of the low/no income high rises panned out. Often little to no amenities or greenery, Garda no go areas, rife with drugs, joy riders and vigilantism.

n97 mini

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

But it is ok that employed people are (due to economic necessity) forcefully relocated outside of areas where they grew up and have family and social connections?

What about when these families and social connections are the cause of the anti social issues?

That's the same argument as Jacinta who wants to live near her mammy in Dublin 1 with her babbies.

Can they not establish new networks? My father was born in Offaly, my mother in Galway, I grew up in Leitrim, and now live in Kildare. My wife is from Waterford, and her parents were from Cork and Tipperary. People can adapt without problems.

Pawwed Rig

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

So you want Ballymun style ghettoes? Didn't work then not going to work now.

If you can quote my post where I said that that'd be great:rolleyes:

Pawwed Rig

n97 mini wrote: »

That's the same argument as Jacinta who wants to live near her mammy in Dublin 1 with her babbies.

Can they not establish new networks? My father was born in Offaly, my mother in Galway, I grew up in Leitrim, and now live in Kildare. My wife is from Waterford, and her parents were from Cork and Tipperary. People can adapt without problems.

Agreed but why do we accept the inequality? Social welfare tenants live where they want whereas the people who pay live where they can afford.