Whatever happened to the housing crisis ?

robinbird

beauf wrote: »

It's got nothing to do with supply. Landlords look for a payslip. The tenants you've made homeless can't provide a payslip. Makes no difference if you give the money to the tenant directly. In this hypothetical scenario private rentals are unavailable to you. How do you house them.

No one's interested in hap. They are doing exactly what you said they wouldn't. Leaving them empty rather than accept hap or super low rents. Or tenants without a payslip.

"Spike in rental properties available - but many remain 'unaffordable', warns homeless charity"https://jrnl.ie/5059459

Fundamental difference. You believe that landlords will leave properties empty indefinitely out of spite rather than take less than the rent that they feel that they are entitled.
A few may but most will swallow their pride and take the rent that renters can afford.

In relation to airbnb different dynamic. Eoghan Murphy has already persuaded Dublin City Council to pay to take a large number of them off the market. Maybe the others are waiting till FG forms govt on the assumption they will be next to ba bailed out. Or some may be waiting for travel to resume rather than accept a lower rent.

beauf

robinbird wrote: »

Fundamental difference. You believe that landlords will leave properties empty indefinitely out of spite rather than take less than the rent that they feel that they are entitled.
A few may but most will swallow their pride and take the rent that renters can afford.

...

I see you've given up the hypothetical scenario where you can't use private rentals. Because you couldn't think of a solution to that.

It's not spite. There's a business case for it. It's perceived as high risk. Also if you lower the rent you are locked into it and it devalues the property. People leave properties empty for long periods.

Don't my word for it. It's been widely reported.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/why-are-so-many-owners-leaving-their-houses-and-apartments-vacant-1.3431685

We've only been in this for what 6 weeks.

efanton

robinbird wrote: »

Fundamental difference. You believe that landlords will leave properties empty indefinitely out of spite rather than take less than the rent that they feel that they are entitled.
A few may but most will swallow their pride and take the rent that renters can afford.

In relation to airbnb different dynamic. Eoghan Murphy has already persuaded Dublin City Council to pay to take a large number of them off the market. Maybe the others are waiting till FG forms govt on the assumption they will be next to ba bailed out. Or some may be waiting for travel to resume rather than accept a lower rent.

Please read what people write,

If a landlord has bought a house on a buy to let mortgage and that mortgage is €1000 a month then they have to rent it out at €1000 a month in order to cover the cost of the mortgage. If the rent drops below that and they cant pay the mortgage then they will be forced to sell.

If removing HAP overnight resulted in a dramatic drop in rents as you claim, what do you think will happen for those landlord that have taken out mortgages on the buy to let schemes? If the drop in rent lowers the rent to below what they pay to the banks for their mortgage they will have absolutely no choice but to sell that home.

It has nothing to do with spite as you seem to think. It has nothing to do with what renters can afford either. It is simply a case that many landlords have mortgages to pay for, if they can not pay the mortgage they will sell up and stop being landlords. Its that simple.

I agreed with you that HAP has driven the cost of rent upwards, but the problem you cant get into your head is that without those HAP scheme many of the homes currently being rented will simply be sold reducing the number of homes that are being rented. If there are less homes being rented where are you going to house those people who lived in the homes that were sold?

FG feck'd up by getting rid of the bedsits and not providing for low cost alternative accommodation, now you want to feck up in in a similar way by reducing the number of available rental properties yet further.

If you get rid of HAP you either have to increase minimum wage so that people can afford to rent in the current market, or provide additional social housing so that those you made homeless with your ill thought out idea have somewhere to live.

ThunbergsAreGo

efanton wrote: »

Which is why we have a housing crisis.

If people do not earn enough to pay rents, or HAP is not sufficient to pay for rents what is the alternative?

But the minimum wage isn't just for Dublin or Cork or Galway, it's for everywhere.

We have a high min wage relative to most countries

efanton

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

But the minimum wage isn't just for Dublin or Cork or Galway, it's for everywhere.

We have a high min wage relative to most countries

Agreed.
Which is why cities like London and others have a wage weighting.

Relative how? If you are talking about simple currency exchange then probably yes. But how much does that minimum wage buy?

if the basic costs of living, (Rent, groceries, travel, utility bills) cannot be afforded on minimum wage, then your comparison with any other country is mute.

Essentially you have two choices, you raise the minimum wage in areas where rents are significantly higher to a level so that they can afford to rent a modest home or you provide affordable accommodation for those workers on minimum wage.

What is the alternative?

hatrickpatrick

Chipping in here for a second, will reply to anyone who’s quoted me tomorrow, but with regard to landlords leaving properties empty for long periods due to lower rents, punitively tax the absolute bejaysus out of anyone who owns a viable residential property, doesn’t live in it, and doesn’t make it available for either rent or sale.

Hoarding of resources during a crisis shortage of those resources shouldn’t be tolerated.

And before anyone suggests this would somehow be unconstitutional, we already have a vacant land tax to penalize land hoarding. A vacant home tax would operate under the same principle, just with a different target.

robinbird

efanton wrote: »

I agreed with you that HAP has driven the cost of rent upwards, but the problem you cant get into your head is that without those HAP scheme many of the homes currently being rented will simply be sold reducing the number of homes that are being rented. If there are less homes being rented where are you going to house those people who lived in the homes that were sold?

I would see that as a positive. If it is not economically viable for certain landlords without the massive state subsidy that is HAP then let them sell. Because do you know who will buy the house. First time buyers that are renting. So the property goes from an investment vehicle for a speculator that requires large taxpayer subsidies to the landlord to remain viable to instead being someones home

My point remains the same. Withdrawing the billion euro a year subsidy to landlords will not fundamentally change supply. It just means landlords will either have to accept market rents or leave the market.

beauf

There isn't a shortage. Lots of places to rent now.

Eric Cartman

beauf wrote: »

There isn't a shortage. Lots of places to rent now.

College students gone home, workers returned to their home countries and counties, job losses, the only reason the demand is fixed is everythings shut. The problem will return shortly, we should not stop building

beauf

robinbird wrote: »

I would see that as a positive. If it is not economically viable for certain landlords without the massive state subsidy that is HAP then let them sell. Because do you know who will buy the house. First time buyers that are renting. So the property goes from an investment vehicle for a speculator that requires large taxpayer subsidies to the landlord to remain viable to instead being someones home

My point remains the same. Withdrawing the billion euro a year subsidy to landlords will not fundamentally change supply. It just means landlords will either have to accept market rents or leave the market.

Landlords quite happy to refuse the state subsidy.
That's why they changed the law so you couldn't refuse it.

What causing high rents is low supply vs demand.
So if this isn't changing either of those things it will have no effect for Landlords. Tenants might not be so happy.

beauf

Eric Cartman wrote: »

College students gone home, workers returned to their home countries and counties, job losses, the only reason the demand is fixed is everythings shut. The problem will return shortly, we should not stop building

If everyone is broke who are they building for? Who will buy them.

Govt only pays lip service to public housing.

robinbird

beauf wrote: »

What causing high rents is low supply vs demand.
So if this isn't changing either of those things it will have no effect for Landlords. Tenants might not be so happy.

What causing high rents is HAP
Withdraw it and rents will fall dramatically.
Landlords might not be so happy

Instead use the billion euro a year to build public housing
Providing employment and doing something productive with the money rather than lining speculators pockets.

markodaly

efanton wrote: »

Agreed, it is ideologically opposite to a free market.

But I challenge anyone on here to live on a take home pay of €1,300, pay their transport, groceries and utility bills and still have enough money to actually rent a home. The reality is in many locations this is nigh on impossible.
Yet this is what we expect those currently living on a minimum wage to do.

Why is it expected that people on the minimum wage should be allowed to rent a house?
Flatshares and room shares is what these people should do. Also, there is a tiny percentage of the workforce on the minimum wage, something like 2-3%

The government has chosen to keep the minimum wage low and that comes at a cost.

I have already pointed out, that the Irish minimum wage is the 3rd highest in the EU.
3rd out of 27
They are they 4th highest in the OECD out of 36 countries

Low it is not.

I know its a fact you like to avoid.

One of the biggest feck ups FG made was getting rid of the bedsits.

Another fact where you are wrong.
That legislation was actually phased in firstly by the Greens/FF government, in 2008. There was a 4 year grace period that ran out in 2013.

The Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland (SCSI) said today that the four year grace period for the implementation of the law has now expired and this means that rental properties must be upgraded to meet the new standards.

FG were actually talking about relaxing the rules in 2017, but the Greens, among others, were giving out about it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/bedsits-could-send-accommodation-back-to-before-1960s-1.3218776

Here is what Sinn Fein's master of houses has to say about bedsits.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/bedsits-to-return-as-housing-minister-eoghan-murphy-plans-raft-of-measures-458940.html

Sinn Féin housing spokesman Eoin Ó Broin said a return to the bedsit would be a retrograde step.

“The reality is that this type of accommodation is predominantly used by vulnerable families and individuals,” he said.

I agree though, banning bedsits was a poorly thought out idea, yet the Greens, SF and other left-wing parties held steadfast in their support for banning them.

Blueshoe

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Chipping in here for a second, will reply to anyone who’s quoted me tomorrow, but with regard to landlords leaving properties empty for long periods due to lower rents, punitively tax the absolute bejaysus out of anyone who owns a viable residential property, doesn’t live in it, and doesn’t make it available for either rent or sale.

Hoarding of resources during a crisis shortage of those resources shouldn’t be tolerated.

And before anyone suggests this would somehow be unconstitutional, we already have a vacant land tax to penalize land hoarding. A vacant home tax would operate under the same principle, just with a different target.

Why stop there. Just ban ownership of private property altogether. Stop the lights.

beauf

robinbird wrote: »

What causing high rents is HAP
Withdraw it and rents will fall dramatically.
Landlords might not be so happy

Instead use the billion euro a year to build public housing
Providing employment and doing something productive with the money rather than lining speculators pockets.

Like I said start a campaign with that as your manifesto. let us know how you get on.

robinbird

Blueshoe wrote: »

Why stop there. Just ban ownership of private property altogether. Stop the lights.

Nope. What we are calling for is the end of the subsidisation of the ownership of private property by the insidious HAP scheme. Let landlords rent their properties on the open market for whatever they can get and if thats not enough, let them leave the market.

But give us back the billion euro a year subsidy.

Eric Cartman

robinbird wrote: »

Nope. What we are calling for is the end of the subsidisation of the ownership of private property by the insidious HAP scheme. Let landlords rent their properties on the open market for whatever they can get and if thats not enough, let them leave the market.

But give us back the billion euro a year subsidy.

I have to agree that the government should cancel HAP, people should fund their own lives

Blueshoe

Blueshoe wrote: »

Why stop there. Just ban ownership of private property altogether. Stop the lights.

well, everyone is talking past each other so why not go reductio ad absurdum alright

the fundamental issue wont change and it isn't HAP

its that we declare the right to a home for all while allowing housing to be a hugely inflated trading asset

its leprechaunomics and the only real answer is to stymie private property rights and directly attack profiteering out of housing, or to admit that you get only the housing you can afford and if thats not where or what youd like, tough

both are obviously diametrically opposed but either in the medium to long run would be better than the current gangsterism transfer of taxpayers money to the propertied classes through HAP but also through concerted ongoing efforts to benchmark so much of the country's wealth through overinflated property assets

efanton

[ in reply to markodaly ]

Who said anything about the renting an entire house?

FG abolished bedsits and never thought of the consequences. Well if the government forced the removal of cheap affordable accommodation they should provide an alternative or deal with the consequences of their decision.

How high or low our minimum wage is compared to other countries is totally irrelevant.
What is relevant is how much that minimum wage will buy here in Ireland.

Of course they could go to the Czech republic and rent a flat for a quarter of the price here.
They could go to Germany where the minimum wage is very closes to the Irish minimum wage and rent a 1 bed flat, where the average rent for that would be around €700.
Minimum wage in the Netherlands €1,635, typical rent for small one bed studio in Amsterdam €730 to €1000 depending on area
Yet here in Dublin they could not afford the typical €1400 to €1800 for a 1 bed flat. Instead they are lucky to get a room in a shared house or flat for €550 to €650. Not quite but close to paying what those in these other countries you talk of for a flat to themselves.

In virtually every country you care to mention in Europe someone on the minimum wage after paying taxes and deductions, rent, groceries, transport and utilities is better off.

You simply cant say we have a high minimum wage without also considering how much of that wage is left after typical expenses for a modest lifestyle have been paid for. When they are considered Ireland quickly drops below any of the countries paying a roughly similar minimum wage and the reason for that is almost always the cost of accommodation.



Personally, I think the re introduction of bedsits with their own toilet, shower and wash basin should be considered. A toilet shower and sink doesnt take up much space and are reasonably easy to retrofit. Many would be happy to forgo on cooking facilities and fridges if it meant rents were significantly less and they actually had a place they could call home to themselves.
I suppose it would come down to cost. Ideally they should have basic cooking facilities but if that means rents increase by €200 a month then it would be cheaper to get a half decent meal in a pub or cafe.

it somewhat spoils the rest of yr lengthy post when you repeat the incorrect and already corrected assertion that FG abolished bedsits

but its true to say FG have worked hard to keep housing limited and expensive

FF, enough said

and SF as local authority reps have an abysmal record on housing

so making it a current party politics issue wont address the underlying contradictions

we want a govt to run a housing market that protects the structures built on the stated value of property (ie most of our structures!) but we also want housing to be affordable for middle income earners but we also want it provided to people whose income comes from social welfare

No govt nor proposed govt wants to devalue property, but that's what needs to happen

markodaly

efanton wrote: »

FG abolished bedsits and never thought of the consequences.

This is again, factually untrue. I told you it was, yet you persist in telling lies and spreading fake news.

The legalisation for 'New Minimum Standard Regulations' was enacted in 2008 and 2009. This was when there was a FF/Green government. This was pushed by the Greens more so.

http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Republic%20of%20Ireland/Housing%20Ireland/HousingIrelandIssue06.pdf
https://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1118/110597-rent/

How high or low our minimum wage is compared to other countries is totally irrelevant.

Irrelevant? Really? :pac:

Ireland does not exist in a vacuum. We cannot raise the minimum wage or even any wage without looking at the international consequence of such a move.

We are also one of the most export-oriented global economies in the world, so the cost of labour is a huge factor in this.

What is relevant is how much that minimum wage will buy here in Ireland.

So you go after the costs of things.

Of course they could go to the Czech republic and rent a flat for a quarter of the price here.
They could go to Germany where the minimum wage is very closes to the Irish minimum wage and rent a 1 bed flat, where the average rent for that would be around €700.
Minimum wage in the Netherlands €1,635, typical rent for small one bed studio in Amsterdam €730 to €1000 depending on area
Yet here in Dublin they could not afford the typical €1400 to €1800 for a 1 bed flat. Instead they are lucky to get a room in a shared house or flat for €550 to €650. Not quite but close to paying what those in these other countries you talk of for a flat to themselves.

Is Dublin expensive to rent. Yes, it is, and the reasons for this are multiple and varied and complex. Raising the minimum wage to unsustainable levels though is not the solution here unless you want to kill jobs.

Also, those Dutch and German who may get cheaper rent will pay a lot more in income tax and local rates, tax that goes toward the provisioning of social housing and those figures are low balling it by the way.

The rental issue in Ireland, is really a Dublin issue as one can rent a one bed in other Irish cities for half the price of Dublin. Local Authorities have a lot to answer for here, especially in not building up.

In virtually every country you care to mention in Europe someone on the minimum wage after paying taxes and deductions, rent, groceries, transport and utilities is better off.

No they are not. If so, why are 900 Bulgarians coming to Ireland to pick fruit, when Irish people won't?
*penny drops*

You simply cant say we have a high minimum wage without also considering how much of that wage is left after typical expenses for a modest lifestyle have been paid for. When they are considered Ireland quickly drops below any of the countries paying a roughly similar minimum wage and the reason for that is almost always the cost of accommodation.

I can, because its a fact.
Again, the issue is mostly a Dublin issue and its complex and varied.
However, since Covid-19 we will not hear much about it now, as rents are dropping like a stone.

Personally, I think the re introduction of bedsits with their own toilet, shower and wash basin should be considered. A toilet shower and sink doesnt take up much space and are reasonably easy to retrofit. Many would be happy to forgo on cooking facilities and fridges if it meant rents were significantly less and they actually had a place they could call home to themselves.
I suppose it would come down to cost. Ideally they should have basic cooking facilities but if that means rents increase by €200 a month then it would be cheaper to get a half decent meal in a pub or cafe.

I somewhat agree with you, as do FF and FG ironically.
Can you take a guess who disagrees with your position?

Sinn Fein

TLDR:
Does the cost of rent in normal times for Dublin need to come down, sure!
The reasons are complex why they are high, but raising minimum wages will do NOTHING to fix this issue, well apart from tanking the economy and encouraging emigration.

markodaly

Deleted User wrote: »

No govt nor proposed govt wants to devalue property, but that's what needs to happen

The crux of housing in Ireland is that everyone wants it every which way, and will not accept any changes to the status quo.

One-off housing is a joke, but we still do it.
LPT is too low and should be raised but some parties want to abolish it. Crazy stuff.
We want to keep Dublin like some mid-sized town as if it's a Museum from a Yates novel, yet we also want to have cheap rents for people.
Land and property are seen as a right even if one does not own it.
High birth rates, the economy doing well, high wages which encourage more immigration..... yet we cant execute plans to deal with these issues because in Ireland, every Tom and his dog will object to anything and everything just because they can.

This is essentially a problem we brought onto ourselves and fixing this issue is like herding Irish cats.

efanton

markodaly wrote: »

This is again, factually untrue. I told you it was, yet you persist in telling lies and spreading fake news.

The legalisation for 'New Minimum Standard Regulations' was enacted in 2008 and 2009. This was when there was a FF/Green government. This was pushed by the Greens more so.

http://www.cih.org/resources/PDF/Republic%20of%20Ireland/Housing%20Ireland/HousingIrelandIssue06.pdf
https://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1118/110597-rent/



Irrelevant? Really? :pac:

Ireland does not exist in a vacuum. We cannot raise the minimum wage or even any wage without looking at the international consequence of such a move.

We are also one of the most export-oriented global economies in the world, so the cost of labour is a huge factor in this.



So you go after the costs of things.



Is Dublin expensive to rent. Yes, it is, and the reasons for this are multiple and varied and complex. Raising the minimum wage to unsustainable levels though is not the solution here unless you want to kill jobs.

Also, those Dutch and German who may get cheaper rent will pay a lot more in income tax and local rates, tax that goes toward the provisioning of social housing and those figures are low balling it by the way.

The rental issue in Ireland, is really a Dublin issue as one can rent a one bed in other Irish cities for half the price of Dublin. Local Authorities have a lot to answer for here, especially in not building up.



No they are not. If so, why are 900 Bulgarians coming to Ireland to pick fruit, when Irish people won't?
*penny drops*




I can, because its a fact.
Again, the issue is mostly a Dublin issue and its complex and varied.
However, since Covid-19 we will not hear much about it now, as rents are dropping like a stone.



I somewhat agree with you, as do FF and FG ironically.
Can you take a guess who disagrees with your position?

Sinn Fein

TLDR:
Does the cost of rent in normal times for Dublin need to come down, sure!
The reasons are complex why they are high, but raising minimum wages will do NOTHING to fix this issue, well apart from tanking the economy and encouraging emigration.

As I made clear in previous posts, I'm not stuck on a single solution to solving the housing crisis.

Getting rid of the bedsits in 2013 and the introduction of the HAP scheme in 2014 to fill the void has resulted in the housing crisis we have now. The HAP scheme was an even worse idea than getting rid of the bedsits. All it has done is drive up the cost of rents significantly and it seems each time they raise the upper threshold of the HAP payment, landlords increase their rents.

Its either a higher minimum wage so that those on it can afford to rent without government aid or supplementary benefits, or we simply build massive amounts of social housing. I believe the HAP scheme should be scrapped at some point when it is no longer essential. Unfortunately because of lack of investment in social housing HAP has not only become essential it has become absolutely critical.

With a significant raise in minimum wage you could get rid of HAP.
I have always advocated a weighting system so that the minimum wage in Dublin should be higher than a minimum wage in a remote rural area to take account of the increased rents and cost of living. HAP is absolutely terrible drain on the country's finances and each year the bill dramatically increases.
I would sooner see that money used to increase minimum wage so those on low wage could afford to rent without the assistance of state aid or benefits.
Without HAP the ridiculous demands by a small minority for the types of houses way beyond the affordability of most middle income workers would be got rid off.

There is approximately 137,000 people earning minimum wage. We spend approx €650 million on HAP. If you were to scrap HAP and transfer that funding to raising the minimum wage you would be able to increase minimum wage to at least €20,500 per year. I'm not suggesting we do that,that sort of increase is not required. But it clearly shows that raising the minimum wage is far more affordable that the current set up.
If you were to increase minimum wage to 1800 per month take-home while at the same time removing access to HAP for those working it would be a massive step in the right direction. The issue there would be how to negate much of the additional cost to employers, but Im sure that could easy be done through reduced employer contributions etc to the tax or PRSI system.
Not only would you have raised to standard of living for those currently on minimum wage and enabled them to rent in the private rental market without assistance from the state, but you would have saved the country significant amounts of money at the same time by not having to fund a HAP system that appears to only inflate rents year on year.


If we dont increase the minimum wage then we only have building massive amounts of social housing as a solution.



The problem is you appear to be against either solution and will criticise anyone who suggests them , but at the same time refuse to put forward any viable solution yourself.

markodaly

efanton wrote: »

Getting rid of the bedsits in 2013 and the introduction of the HAP scheme in 2014 to fill the void has resulted in the housing crisis we have now. The HAP scheme was an even worse idea than getting rid of the bedsits. All it has done is drive up the cost of rents significantly and it seems each time they raise the upper threshold of the HAP payment, landlords increase their rents.

HAP was not something 'new' per say, it was just something more centralised that was already happening among other government departments and local authorities. HAP just centralised this process under one name.

Its either a higher minimum wage so that those on it can afford to rent without government aid or supplementary benefits, or we simply build massive amounts of social housing. I believe the HAP scheme should be scrapped at some point when it is no longer essential. Unfortunately because of lack of investment in social housing HAP has not only become essential it has become absolutely critical.

I am not against the building of social houses by the way, but there has been massive political interference in the process from all sides looking for the perfect solution. Also, the decline of building social housing can be seen across most western nations. Its a well-known trend.
Increasing the minimum wage, is a dumb idea.

With a significant raise in minimum wage you could get rid of HAP.

Eh, no you would not because only a tiny amount of the workforce is actually on the minimum wage.
What about part-time workers?
What about people who don't work at all?

Again, I would like to see HAP reduce and curtailed myself, but raising the minimum wage is a stupid way to do it.

I have always advocated a weighting system so that the minimum wage in Dublin should be higher than a minimum wage in a remote rural area to take account of the increased rents and cost of living. HAP is absolutely terrible drain on the country's finances and each year the bill dramatically increases.
I would sooner see that money used to increase minimum wage so those on low wage could afford to rent without the assistance of state aid or benefits.
Without HAP the ridiculous demands by a small minority for the types of houses way beyond the affordability of most middle income workers would be got rid off.

Get people off benefits by giving them a benefit...

So you end up spending the same amount of taxpayers money, to pay rent to private landlords, while also killing jobs because of higher labour costs.
Yeap... makes total sense.

The Dublin weighting system I could agree on though.

There is approximately 137,000 people earning minimum wage. We spend approx €650 million on HAP.

That is a total figure of the scheme, not a yearly figure by the way.
Less than 6% of the workforce are on the minimum wage. What do we do with the other 94% of people who may or may not be able to afford rent?

If you were to scrap HAP and transfer that funding to raising the minimum wage you would be able to increase minimum wage to at least €20,500 per year. I'm not suggesting we do that,that sort of increase is not required. But it clearly shows that raising the minimum wage is far more affordable that the current set up.

Why would this reduce rents at all? You are just driving more credit to the problem because there would still be the same amount of rental properties to rent tomorrow.
If Ireland did that by the way, it would have by far, the highest minimum wage in the world! At a time where we have over 22% unemployed what you are suggesting is downright mad and dangerous

If you were to increase minimum wage to 1800 per month take-home while at the same time removing access to HAP for those working it would be a massive step in the right direction. The issue there would be how to negate much of the additional cost to employers, but Im sure that could easy be done through reduced employer contributions etc to the tax or PRSI system.
Not only would you have raised to standard of living for those currently on minimum wage and enabled them to rent in the private rental market without assistance from the state, but you would have saved the country significant amounts of money at the same time by not having to fund a HAP system that appears to only inflate rents year on year.

Nothing you suggest would raise the standard of living for anyone, in fact it would make it worse as it would kill jobs.

Again, you need to get on the supply problem. Build more, not increase wages so people can magically afford to rent the same number of houses/units that were available yesterday. It doesn't work like that, because if you raise the minimum wage for everyone, then everyone has more money chasing the same number of rentals. Guess what happens... rents go up more.

Its all frankly gibberish.

If we dont increase the minimum wage then we only have building massive amounts of social housing as a solution.

Why is that a bad thing? Build more, don't touch the min wage.

The problem is you appear to be against either solution and will criticise anyone who suggests them , but at the same time refuse to put forward any viable solution yourself.

No, I am against hair-brained solutions that are pie in the sky.
Simple silver bullets and the like.

My solutions would be thus:

• Build high-density social housing units in urban areas
• Increase LPT
• Change planning laws to make building high-density units more cost effective
• Change the laws on land prices, do whatever it takes to get it down
• Offer/Make people take social housing units in other counties instead of Dublin.
• Stop selling council houses to people for a song.
• Offer VAT/PRSI rebates for developers who provide social housing units.
• Give FTB tax credits for 10 years when they buy a house.
• Create urban corridors in the main citys where housing units of 20+ levels are build, next to transport systems. CPO land and houses on these corridors
• No new house should be built inside the M50, apartments only
• Encourage apartment living for families

Tea drinker

markodaly wrote: »

My solutions would be thus:

• Build high-density social housing units in urban areas
• Increase LPT
• Change planning laws to make building high-density units more cost effective
• Change the laws on land prices, do whatever it takes to get it down
• Offer/Make people take social housing units in other counties instead of Dublin.
  
• Stop selling council houses to people for a song.
• Offer VAT/PRSI rebates for developers who provide social housing units.
• Give FTB tax credits for 10 years when they buy a house.
• Create urban corridors in the main citys where housing units of 20+ levels are build, next to transport systems. CPO land and houses on these corridors
• No new house should be built inside the M50, apartments only
• Encourage apartment living for families

one minor thing- I thought selling council houses cheap was done away with already?

Blaze420

markodaly wrote: »

HAP was not something 'new' per say, it was just something more centralised that was already happening among other government departments and local authorities. HAP just centralised this process under one name.




I am not against the building of social houses by the way, but there has been massive political interference in the process from all sides looking for the perfect solution. Also, the decline of building social housing can be seen across most western nations. Its a well-known trend.
Increasing the minimum wage, is a dumb idea.



Eh, no you would not because only a tiny amount of the workforce is actually on the minimum wage.
What about part-time workers?
What about people who don't work at all?

Again, I would like to see HAP reduce and curtailed myself, but raising the minimum wage is a stupid way to do it.



Get people off benefits by giving them a benefit...

So you end up spending the same amount of taxpayers money, to pay rent to private landlords, while also killing jobs because of higher labour costs.
Yeap... makes total sense.

The Dublin weighting system I could agree on though.



That is a total figure of the scheme, not a yearly figure by the way.
Less than 6% of the workforce are on the minimum wage. What do we do with the other 94% of people who may or may not be able to afford rent?



Why would this reduce rents at all? You are just driving more credit to the problem because there would still be the same amount of rental properties to rent tomorrow.
If Ireland did that by the way, it would have by far, the highest minimum wage in the world! At a time where we have over 22% unemployed what you are suggesting is downright mad and dangerous



Nothing you suggest would raise the standard of living for anyone, in fact it would make it worse as it would kill jobs.

Again, you need to get on the supply problem. Build more, not increase wages so people can magically afford to rent the same number of houses/units that were available yesterday. It doesn't work like that, because if you raise the minimum wage for everyone, then everyone has more money chasing the same number of rentals. Guess what happens... rents go up more.

Its all frankly gibberish.



Why is that a bad thing? Build more, don't touch the min wage.




No, I am against hair-brained solutions that are pie in the sky.
Simple silver bullets and the like.

My solutions would be thus:

• Build high-density social housing units in urban areas
• Increase LPT
• Change planning laws to make building high-density units more cost effective
• Change the laws on land prices, do whatever it takes to get it down
  [*]Offer/Make people take social housing units in other counties instead of Dublin.
• Stop selling council houses to people for a song.
• Offer VAT/PRSI rebates for developers who provide social housing units.
• Give FTB tax credits for 10 years when they buy a house.
• Create urban corridors in the main citys where housing units of 20+ levels are build, next to transport systems. CPO land and houses on these corridors
• No new house should be built inside the M50, apartments only
• Encourage apartment living for families

This is one of the biggest IMO - beggars can't be choosers. If you have your hands out to the state for housing then you can damn well accept what is offered to you. No waiting for houses beside or near mammy or any of that ****, you get an offer then you can take it or go **** yourself. A mandatory removal from the housing list for a period of 2 years for anybody who refuses a valid offer.

rightmove

robinbird wrote: »

Nope. What we are calling for is the end of the subsidisation of the ownership of private property by the insidious HAP scheme. Let landlords rent their properties on the open market for whatever they can get and if thats not enough, let them leave the market.

But give us back the billion euro a year subsidy.

"Let landlords rent their properties on the open market for whatever they can get" -> np lets get rid of rpz and the rtb and get full market rate and not be stuck below it

LL have been running out of the market for years ...thats why its a mess.

Blaze420

robinbird wrote: »

Nope. What we are calling for is the end of the subsidisation of the ownership of private property by the insidious HAP scheme. Let landlords rent their properties on the open market for whatever they can get and if thats not enough, let them leave the market.

But give us back the billion euro a year subsidy.

You do realise without HAP there'a a whole class of lazy bastards people who won't have anywhere to rent? Take your commie hat off there and get in the real world. Landlords aren't jumping up and down for HAP tenants so reducing it or removing it is a win win.

efanton

markodaly wrote: »

My solutions would be thus:

• Build high-density social housing units in urban areas
• Increase LPT
• Change planning laws to make building high-density units more cost effective
• Change the laws on land prices, do whatever it takes to get it down
• Offer/Make people take social housing units in other counties instead of Dublin.
• Stop selling council houses to people for a song.
• Offer VAT/PRSI rebates for developers who provide social housing units.
• Give FTB tax credits for 10 years when they buy a house.
• Create urban corridors in the main citys where housing units of 20+ levels are build, next to transport systems. CPO land and houses on these corridors
• No new house should be built inside the M50, apartments only
• Encourage apartment living for families

Actually I could live with most of that.

I am ambivalent as to how we solve the housing crisis as long as it is solved. Sadly the last 4 or 5 governments have let it get to this stage.

Whether that means rent reduction through rent controls (not my favourite solution), increasing minimum wage so that everyone can actually afford to rent their own home without state aid or assistance, or building additional social housing to me doesn't mater, as long as something is done in a meaningful way and not the token effort that has been the hallmark of recent governments. If additional housing is what you agree with then it has to be o a massive scale.

The problem you have with moving people to another county is that we do not have a centralised housing waiting list.
Also the risk there would be that Dublin county councils who refuse to build sufficient numbers of homes themselves suddenly start taking capacity away from other county councils and the people on waiting lists in those counties suffer. I cant see that particular policy working at all, unless county councils were forced to build X number or X percentage of housing units every year

markodaly

efanton wrote: »

Actually I could live with most of that.

I am ambivalent as to how we solve the housing crisis as long as it is solved. Sadly the last 4 or 5 governments have let it get to this stage.

Whether that means rent reduction through rent controls (not my favourite solution), increasing minimum wage so that everyone can actually afford to rent their own home without state aid or assistance, or building additional social housing to me doesn't mater, as long as something is done in a meaningful way and not the token effort that has been the hallmark of recent governments. If additional housing is what you agree with then it has to be o a massive scale.

The problem you have with moving people to another county is that we do not have a centralised housing waiting list.
Also the risk there would be that Dublin county councils who refuse to build sufficient numbers of homes themselves suddenly start taking capacity away from other county councils and the people on waiting lists in those counties suffer. I cant see that particular policy working at all, unless county councils were forced to build X number or X percentage of housing units every year

I am not going to debate the minimum wage again, as you know my views on that.

As to having a more centralised approach to social housing. Yes, you may be right that there would be a lot of political fighting and people going on Joe Duffy stating they cannot take that 4-bed house in Westmeath because their mammy lives in Tallaght.

Dublin has massive pressure on its housing supply, so to ease it there should be incentives to get those who do not want to work and contribute to the economy there somewhere else.
To be honest, we are too soft as a nation when it comes to social housing and trying to always please everyone.