"None of our children on the list are getting these houses"

Yurt2

Enter name here wrote: »

A nice socialist utopia. Absolute bollocks. not up to a LL to subsidise a tenants life style choices.
Are you happy for the government to regulate your share options?
People should live where the can afford not where they aspire to live. If you cant afford the rent move to a cheaper area and commute. It's called reality.
Social housing should be completely eradicated. Workhouses should be built and people housed there.

Rightwing angryman b*llocks.

And fyi, investments are regulated, from stamp duty on share purchases to conflict of interest rules.

Folks like you should be ignored.

Enter name here

Yurt! wrote: »

Rightwing angryman b*llocks.

And fyi, investments are regulated, from stamp duty on share purchases to conflict of interest rules.

Folks like you should be ignored.

Folks like you should be taxed double for the burden you create on society.

overkill602

Yurt! wrote: »

A basic point, the state can and should regulate the rental market as other cities and countries do worldwife to protect tenants from abusive landlords and investment funds bleeding them dry. Balance can and should be achieved with these regulations - but those arguing against regulation and are property rights maximalists are as big utopianists as any Marxist Leninist.

I deliberately used shares as an example. Shares are nice to have but not essential. A roof over one's head is not nice to have, it's essential.

Where the private rental market needs some regulation to protect tenants but also LLs, other wise bank don't lend to investors state provision is bankrupt.

Where rent caps and freezes have been in place they ALWAYS reduce supply and quality.
If we want private investment to provide secure and indefinite tenancies we will have to introduce measures to quickly evict for antisocial and non payment of rent.

Yurt2

overkill602 wrote: »

Where rent caps and freezes have been in place they ALWAYS reduce supply and quality.
If we want private investment to provide secure and indefinite tenancies we will have to introduce measures to quickly evict for antisocial and non payment of rent.

Disagree on the first point, which I'll get to, and agree on the second.

Rent freezes do constrain supply in markets where the state or local government adopt an almost complete hands off policy on housing provision, as is the case in Ireland at present. The evidence (from Ireland and the Bank of England is that supply alone in a low interest rate environment can actually have the effect of excaserbating unaffordability in both rental and purchase). What's the use in supply if funds treat new developments as a feeding ground, hoover them up and put them up on the rental market at crazy rates.

Several of the plans discussed on boards and party manifestos provide for public sector directed provision of affordable rental and purchase strategies. Note that I said affordable and not free gaffes.

The EIB is on hand with low interest rate loans to facilitate this. Done right (and it can be done right), affordable rental and purchase directed by public bodies can wash their own face and be more or less cost neutral to the state.

This can and does work extremely effectively in many housing markets, and rental freezes / pauses have their part to play in this as we transition. It takes a bit of imagination, the opening of the mind, and a move away from dogma. It's not a silver bullet solution that will work in a year, but it's not a shot in the dark. We know this has worked in other jurisdictions.

Yurt2

Enter name here wrote: »

Folks like you should be taxed double for the burden you create on society.

Let's start taxing nonsense. We'd have to take 90c out of every euro from your paycheck.

Which I'm sure would be a huge sum for the exchequer as you're so evidently clever and hard working.

Mic 1972

Yurt! wrote: »

A basic point, the state can and should regulate the rental market as other cities and countries do worldwife to protect tenants from abusive landlords and investment funds bleeding them dry. Balance can and should be achieved with these regulations - but those arguing against regulation and are property rights maximalists are as big utopianists as any Marxist Leninist.

I deliberately used shares as an example. Shares are nice to have but not essential. A roof over one's head is not nice to have, it's essential.

What about renting in a cheaper area? there is always an option

end of the road

GreeBo wrote: »

It's not the landlords job to provide cheap rentals to people who's live choices have gone wrong.

Seems they crib to SF.

Remember that whole entitlement thing?

plenty of people who are struggling to pay the high rents had their life choices go right, exactly the way they wanted them to go. a decent education and decent job.
however, they cannot afford the high rents, yet they can't afford to go elsewhere either.
tbh in my experience the self-entitlement comes from elements from all walks of society rather then just elements of the wellfare dependants as is often claimed.

Enter name here wrote: »

A nice socialist utopia. Absolute bollocks. not up to a LL to subsidise a tenants life style choices.
Are you happy for the government to regulate your share options?
People should live where the can afford not where they aspire to live. If you cant afford the rent move to a cheaper area and commute. It's called reality.
Social housing should be completely eradicated. Workhouses should be built and people housed there.

it's not the state's job to protect people's property value/investments.
land lords are not subsidizing people's lifestyle needs or choices.
moving to a cheaper area and commuting isn't always viable nor does it always reduce costs, + long distance commuting as the main option is becoming unsustainable for the country. not to mention that the more move to these cheaper areas, the likely hood of prices increasing which pushes people further out into even more unsustainable commutes.
as for your nonsense at the end, social housing is necessary and is going nowhere, the work house will not be returning, it failed, move along.
bluster and out of date views which didn't even work or deliver when they were in fassion, does not deliver for a modern nation and it's needs to operate effectively.

Gatling wrote: »

Close to 100 million owed across the country I believe about a quarter of all social housing tenants are in arrears (open to correction)
Actually councils are saying it's not a simple job working on a case by case basis but estate by estate basis (whole estates )

If local authorities aren't collecting rents or dealing with arrears they should have their housing stock given to a 3rd party to recover all rents owed and if rents arrears are not paid evictions should be rushed through and increase rents across the board rather than the measley €3 pw they want now

a quarter owing rent also does not translate to all.
allowing the councils to take owed rent at source would be way cheaper then giving their housing stock to a third party to collect which would probably end up costing serious money and the council seeing little of it as the third party will be presumably a profit making private company? or would you give it to revenue?
rushing through evictions i suspect would not be financially viable and is not important enough to be rushing through, also rent increases would be unviable in some cases.
the councils already have the ability to determine rents based on income and all else, so i trust the rates they are set at are the correct rates, whether someone likes the particular rate or not is ultimately their problem tbh.

Yurt2

Mic 1972 wrote: »

What about renting in a cheaper area? there is always an option

The hypothetical cheaper area in the Dublin area (and Galway, Cork etc) is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.

And many many people have been upping sticks and doing just that already every year or two. Perhaps a critical mass of people have had a gut full of it.

Ash.J.Williams

Mic 1972 wrote: »

What about renting in a cheaper area? there is always an option

in a normal country yes. In ireland 2020 it's just another excuse, how far can you move before other factors kick in?

BanditLuke

Mic 1972 wrote: »

What about renting in a cheaper area? there is always an option

I work in a Sandyford here in Dublin and luckily live a 10 minute cycle from my job to my front door but over the last while we have actually lost several members of staff who just can't do the commute anymore. One guy had a breakdown (mentally) in work before he left because of the stress. He spent more than 4 hours per day in his car travelling to and from work and it crushed him. Another chap spends over 6 per day 5 days a week in his car but is still doing it.

The point i am making is that it's just not viable for some people to look for cheaper rent in places that are hours from Dublin. I think we have reached a tipping point anyway so it's going to interesting if FFG get in again because i can't see people accepting it.

Diceicle

To borrow an expression from management-speak; I'm trying to get my arms around the 'foreigners v locals for social housing' scenario.

Who are these foreigners? Presumably they are all naturalized Irish citizens?
Are they all a result of the Direct Provision system? I can understand people in that category need housing.
Or are they something else - are we bringing over / allowing in a workforce that ultimately cannot survive without state support?

Insights appreciated.

Mic 1972

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

in a normal country yes. In ireland 2020 it's just another excuse, how far can you move before other factors kick in?

I rented a room for many years, 40 minutes by bus from city centre and saved until i had deposit to buy my own place. It's quite an affordable option

Harika

Harika wrote: »

Look,teenage pregnancy happens, if that happens and you have no place to stay maybe hold back or use contraception. What's missing in the story is the whereabouts of the father(s) . The social system is there for people in a hole, not people in a hole who dig themselves in deeper every day.
Btw a common theme in those stories are people in their 20s already 10 years on the housing list, like they never even tried.

They were interviewing teen mothers on the radio, and one yungwun said there should be weekly sex education in school. Seemingly she didn't know unprotected sex could lead to pregnancy.

Working class heroes

Deleted User wrote: »

They were interviewing teen mothers on the radio, and one yungwun said there should be weekly sex education in school. Seemingly she didn't know unprotected sex could lead to pregnancy.

I don’t believe that.

Suckit

GreeBo wrote: »

It's not the landlords job to provide cheap rentals to people who's live choices have gone wrong.

Seems they crib to SF.

Remember that whole entitlement thing?

Did you live in your folks until you could afford to buy, or were you lucky enough to have cash waiting for you when you came of age?
Many of the people renting didn't have 'life choices go wrong', they are likely to be working just out of school or college, maybe have been working a few years and they are trying to save to buy a house. Even with a decent job, the rate that rent has been going up means that they will be saving for much longer than has been previous.
Not everybody lives in the same timeframe as you.

Maybe you were one of the lucky ones who availed of rental properties when they were in line with the wages and more affordable.
The rental market is ridiculously overpriced at the minute, there is no point arguing otherwise, nor saying that one political party are the only people that are being 'cribbed' to.
It is a well established fact.

Also, that attitude that 'the landlords aren't there to provide cheap rentals' is fine, until things get worse, and the government are forced to act.
As it is, there are people living in garden sheds just to save money, in decent jobs, and that's considered illegal as opposed to ludicrously high rent.

What a f**ing joke.

James Brown

GreeBo wrote: »

It's not the landlords job to provide cheap rentals to people who's live choices have gone wrong.

Seems they crib to SF.

Remember that whole entitlement thing?

By 'gone wrong', do you mean attending university/college and/or getting a job and trying to make something of themselves?

Sorry, any scandalous or salacious 'foreva home' story you can cite or recall would have been under FF/FG.

Idbatterim

BanditLuke wrote: »

I work in a Sandyford here in Dublin and luckily live a 10 minute cycle from my job to my front door but over the last while we have actually lost several members of staff who just can't do the commute anymore. One guy had a breakdown (mentally) in work before he left because of the stress. He spent more than 4 hours per day in his car travelling to and from work and it crushed him. Another chap spends over 6 per day 5 days a week in his car but is still doing it.

The point i am making is that it's just not viable for some people to look for cheaper rent in places that are hours from Dublin. I think we have reached a tipping point anyway so it's going to interesting if FFG get in again because i can't see people accepting it.

yeah! look, this whole thing is INSANITY! the government take is too high in terms of tax on new builds and the "standards" just result in something brought to market, that is way out of reach for average salaries. Build single aspect apartments and possibly reduce the floor size (look people cant have their cake and eat it), I think people would run you over, to get a nice , modern and contemporary, well located, near zero energy apartment, even if it was slightly smaller. I dont know the value of cutting size down too much though. You'd need to check the savings and maybe offer a multitude of different options in one apartment block. I remember the head of IRES reit here said before, that the dual aspect requirement, adds significantly to the cost... If that is the case, it simply cant be justified any more in my opinion and they are going to have to increase the minimum densities significantly...

Abolish stamp duty for FTB of new property at least, possibly all first time buyers. Make it easier to get the deposit...

Idbatterim

the luxury apartment in wherever was what was available at short notice, because we haven't been building.
they are paying what the council have determined is a suitable rent based on their income, it doesn't matter whether you like it or not, it's just tough on your part. it doesn't matter what you think they should be paying, it's what the council, based on the evidence, thinks they should be paying is what matters.
people paying 60% of their income on rent is ridiculous but again that is because we have not been building and that means little competition in terms of housing options. that is down to government policy, not council tenants.

all that was available at short notice? is this housing crisis a new thing? those morons in the councils have done nothing for years, thats why there is nothing available! The councils are single handedly the biggest culprit for me, in this crisis!

Mic 1972

Talking about wrong choices, blaming others instead of taking responsibility is the type of attitude that leaves people with no control over their lives

Mic 1972

BanditLuke wrote:

work in a Sandyford here in Dublin and luckily live a 10 minute cycle from my job to my front door but over the last while we have actually lost several members of staff who just can't do the commute anymore. One guy had a breakdown (mentally) in work before he left because of the stress. He spent more than 4 hours per day in his car travelling to and from work and it crushed him. Another chap spends over 6 per day 5 days a week in his car but is still doing it.

The point i am making is that it's just not viable for some people to look for cheaper rent in places that are hours from Dublin. I think we have reached a tipping point anyway so it's going to interesting if FFG get in again because i can't see people accepting it.[/I]

Rents are not that high just outside of Sandyford, even Bray is not too expensive. I wonder what type of houses are people renting that are 2 hours away from Sandyford

PeasantHater

I'm fed up at the sense of entitlement in this swamp, finally, after many years saving I'm 8 days out from purchasing the home I've dreamed of.

This has been done through relentless saving while paying rent ,all my other overheads and laughable amounts of tax.

The untermensch over here really don't know how good they have it, paying a pittance in "rent" and numbers of them not even paying anything, going into arrears and still being able to stay in what is essentially a free gaf.

The recent joke that has pissed me right off is that after renovations to me new purchase the cost of my house will be close to the 700k mark (not including loan interest) then after finalising everything I find out there's a luxury ballymun 1km down the road with €3000 p/m apartments entirely let out by the council for probably about €30 a week, gonna have to start saving again for a cctv system to try and protect my wheelie bins from being sacrificed to the weekend field fires.

BanditLuke

PeasantHater wrote: »

I'm fed up at the sense of entitlement in this swamp, finally, after many years saving I'm 8 days out from purchasing the home I've dreamed of.

This has been done through relentless saving while paying rent ,all my other overheads and laughable amounts of tax.

The untermensch over here really don't know how good they have it, paying a pittance in "rent" and numbers of them not even paying anything, going into arrears and still being able to stay in what is essentially a free gaf.

The recent joke that has pissed me right off is that after renovations to me new purchase the cost of my house will be close to the 700k mark (not including loan interest) then after finalising everything I find out there's a luxury ballymun 1km down the road with €3000 p/m apartments entirely let out by the council for probably about €30 a week, gonna have to start saving again for a cctv system to try and protect my wheelie bins from being sacrificed to the weekend field fires.

User name is valid

Mic 1972

PeasantHater wrote: »

I'm fed up at the sense of entitlement in this swamp, finally, after many years saving I'm 8 days out from purchasing the home I've dreamed of.

This has been done through relentless saving while paying rent ,all my other overheads and laughable amounts of tax.

The untermensch over here really don't know how good they have it, paying a pittance in "rent" and numbers of them not even paying anything, going into arrears and still being able to stay in what is essentially a free gaf.

The recent joke that has pissed me right off is that after renovations to me new purchase the cost of my house will be close to the 700k mark (not including loan interest) then after finalising everything I find out there's a luxury ballymun 1km down the road with €3000 p/m apartments entirely let out by the council for probably about €30 a week, gonna have to start saving again for a cctv system to try and protect my wheelie bins from being sacrificed to the weekend field fires.

Totally agree with you

GreeBo

Suckit wrote: »

Did you live in your folks until you could afford to buy, or were you lucky enough to have cash waiting for you when you came of age?
Many of the people renting didn't have 'life choices go wrong', they are likely to be working just out of school or college, maybe have been working a few years and they are trying to save to buy a house. Even with a decent job, the rate that rent has been going up means that they will be saving for much longer than has been previous.
Not everybody lives in the same timeframe as you.

Maybe you were one of the lucky ones who availed of rental properties when they were in line with the wages and more affordable.
The rental market is ridiculously overpriced at the minute, there is no point arguing otherwise, nor saying that one political party are the only people that are being 'cribbed' to.
It is a well established fact.

Also, that attitude that 'the landlords aren't there to provide cheap rentals' is fine, until things get worse, and the government are forced to act.
As it is, there are people living in garden sheds just to save money, in decent jobs, and that's considered illegal as opposed to ludicrously high rent.

What a f**ing joke.

I lived at home (in my late twenties, early thirties) until I could afford to buy a run down house house outside of the area I grew up in.
15 odd years later I am now living in the area I grew up in.

The people with "good jobs" are complaining that they cant afford to buy or rent in the areas they *want* to.
I couldnt either, so I saved and bought where I could.

Yurt2

Strong username. You've made the transition to rabid hatred of the povs remarkably quickly for someone not on the property ladder just yet. That must be a doozie of a mortgage you're taking on to have such displaced hatred for others coursing through your veins.

Idbatterim

Yurt! wrote: »

Strong username. You've made the transition to rabid hatred of the povs remarkably quickly for someone not on the property ladder just yet. That must be a doozie of a mortgage you're taking on to have such displaced hatred for others coursing through your veins.

Yurt, I agree with a lot of your posts. But I agree with peasanthater too. He is paying a marginal tax rate of FIFTY percent, to fund what? virtually free social housing for the occupants, an obscene welfare state, government value for money? we wont even go there. This struggle to save, is way more difficult than it needs to be. The piss taking going on here, is at the top and "bottom", I do appreciate though, that its the government that facililtates in at the "bottom", these people arent even gaming the system, the system is just a farce! This situation here is going to get far worse! People have reached the end of their tether a long time ago, what will FFG do? commission a few reports into it? Run from government, unless you plan on sorting this out property, and that is apply and affordability, and it will involve drastic change! So I cant see FFG doing it

PeasantHater

Yurt! wrote: »

Strong username. You've made the transition to rabid hatred of the povs remarkably quickly for someone not on the property ladder just yet. That must be a doozie of a mortgage you're taking on to have such displaced hatred for others coursing through your veins.

I do believe being taxed at the marginal rate at everything about 35k and having to work and save tirelessly gives me justification to dislike generations of people not lifting a damn finger and expecting everything handed out to them perpetually, some people fall on hard times which I can understand and empathise with, It's the cradle to grave pondlife that I have contempt for.

Yurt2

The peasants aren't responsible for your 700k mortgage. Knock yourself out trying to put it on them, but it ain't them.

end of the road

Mic 1972 wrote: »

I rented a room for many years, 40 minutes by bus from city centre and saved until i had deposit to buy my own place. It's quite an affordable option

i suspect it isn't so much now days.
how long ago did you do it?

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Talking about wrong choices, blaming others instead of taking responsibility is the type of attitude that leaves people with no control over their lives

agreed but taking responsibility is only ever going to get someone so far in a situations where there is an issue due to governmental policy and other factors.
there is a housing issue in the country, no amount of one taking responsibility will make houses affordable or cause much needed housing stock to be built.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Rents are not that high just outside of Sandyford, even Bray is not too expensive. I wonder what type of houses are people renting that are 2 hours away from Sandyford

in some areas sure, however once more people move to those areas prices will in all likely hood rise.
also

the other threshold is the commuting costs verses rent money saved, if the commuting cost end up being similar to the amount of money no longer being spent on rent then any move may actually be pointless.

PeasantHater wrote: »

I'm fed up at the sense of entitlement in this swamp, finally, after many years saving I'm 8 days out from purchasing the home I've dreamed of.

This has been done through relentless saving while paying rent ,all my other overheads and laughable amounts of tax.

The untermensch over here really don't know how good they have it, paying a pittance in "rent" and numbers of them not even paying anything, going into arrears and still being able to stay in what is essentially a free gaf.

The recent joke that has pissed me right off is that after renovations to me new purchase the cost of my house will be close to the 700k mark (not including loan interest) then after finalising everything I find out there's a luxury ballymun 1km down the road with €3000 p/m apartments entirely let out by the council for probably about €30 a week, gonna have to start saving again for a cctv system to try and protect my wheelie bins from being sacrificed to the weekend field fires.

being honest, you have just as much of a sense of entitlement as the people you complain about, and it's a sense of entitlement that actually isn't justified.
the fact you

are going to buy a house is just a choice which only entitles you to ownership of it once you pay back the loan in full, it doesn't give you any more of a standing in society.
remember, until you pay back the loan the house you will be buying is actually the bank's house.

Idbatterim

GreeBo wrote: »

I lived at home (in my late twenties, early thirties) until I could afford to buy a run down house house outside of the area I grew up in.
15 odd years later I am now living in the area I grew up in.

The people with "good jobs" are complaining that they cant afford to buy or rent in the areas they *want* to.
I couldnt either, so I saved and bought where I could.

you didnt ever question the insanity of this ? Why shouldnt I be able to live where I want (within reason) How much time do you have? I can send you endless links of why vested interests, just want to keep development and supply to a minimum and live in their own bubbles. You think that is acceptable or tolerable any more? it isnt...