Whatever happened to the housing crisis ?

Idbatterim

Class MayDresser wrote: »

Be a brave politician whoever would propose that.

they will potentially have another chance (after the last bust) to do what they should have done years ago. FG have been thrown a blessing in disguise, do well with this virus, look after those that lost their jobs etc by paying out higher welfare. Ive said it for years here, far far too much going to wasters and working poor are absolutely screwed, because of the sheer volume of resources directed at "the vulneable". Long term unemployed getting bonus, is a disgrace for a start! Its best to just scrap it entirely... In the uk, they get ten pounds and yes, you read that right...

And I am being dead serious here, there is no need, to send 300,000,000 into retailers, pubs and bookies. When we have boil water notices, appalling infrastructure, massive debt, endless other areas that actually are starved of funding!

Tea drinker

Class MayDresser wrote: »

Be a brave politician whoever would propose that.

Well we are all supportive of the caretaker government, they have taken many tough measures. if they are still in power come the autumn I'd imagine cutting the bonus would be on the cards. it's a measure of warped our thinking has become, that we would sooner make cuts to health or job supports than cut a completely optional christmas bonus to those on the dole.

efanton

Tea drinker wrote: »

Well we are all supportive of the caretaker government, they have taken many tough measures. if they are still in power come the autumn I'd imagine cutting the bonus would be on the cards. it's a measure of warped our thinking has become, that we would sooner make cuts to health or job supports than cut a completely optional christmas bonus to those on the dole.

You do realise that that Christmas bonus enables the elderly, the disabled, mentally handicapped and those with serious health conditions to buy a few small gifts and a few small small extras for Christmas.
They are unable to work but you would still deny them?

jimmyrustle

efanton wrote: »

You do realise that that Christmas bonus enables the elderly, the disabled, mentally handicapped and those with serious health conditions to buy a few small gifts and a few small small extras for Christmas.
They are unable to work but you would still deny them?

Reminds me of people who tried to lump this group outside of Leo's people who get up early in the morning, when it clearly wasn't who he referred to.

Moot point seeing as he didn't do a tap for working people, but still.

ELM327

efanton wrote: »

You do realise that that Christmas bonus enables the elderly, the disabled, mentally handicapped and those with serious health conditions to buy a few small gifts and a few small small extras for Christmas.
They are unable to work but you would still deny them?

Elderly - Pension
Disabled, mentally handicapped, serious health conditions - Disability Allowance


None of these are on JSA.

efanton

efanton wrote: »

You do realise that that Christmas bonus enables the elderly, the disabled, mentally handicapped and those with serious health conditions to buy a few small gifts and a few small small extras for Christmas.
They are unable to work but you would still deny them?

Nope, just the wasters who are unemployable because they've chosen to do fook all for years. Anyone from a working class backgrounds knows loads of them.

efanton

Idbatterim wrote: »

they will potentially have another chance (after the last bust) to do what they should have done years ago. FG have been thrown a blessing in disguise, do well with this virus, look after those that lost their jobs etc by paying out higher welfare. Ive said it for years here, far far too much going to wasters and working poor are absolutely screwed, because of the sheer volume of resources directed at "the vulneable". Long term unemployed getting bonus, is a disgrace for a start! Its best to just scrap it entirely... In the uk, they get ten pounds and yes, you read that right...

And I am being dead serious here, there is no need, to send 300,000,000 into retailers, pubs and bookies. When we have boil water notices, appalling infrastructure, massive debt, endless other areas that actually are starved of funding!

You want to help the working poor?
It seems every time FF or FG are challenged over raising the minium wage they balk and run away from it.

By not having a reasonable minimum wage, many will see there is no incentive to work. Those that do take minimum wage jobs often claim income supplements in order to be able to live and work in the cities.
The result is we have the state supplementing private businesses at best through income supplements an social housing, and actively encouraging people not to work at worst.

Would you not agree that the only way to stop long term unemployment or people claiming supplements is for all workers to earn a sufficient wage so that they do not have to rely on the state for housing, or top up their appallingly low income.

Yes there will always be a very small minority that will never work no matter what incentive is given to them. So do you honestly think cutting their dole is going to make a difference? Most would just continue as is with less to spend admittedly but for some that would not be incentive enough to get up of the ar$e and find a job. In the meantime you punish those that have lost their job through no fault of their own and are seeking work.

There will be thousands of people on the dole after this crisis that have never drawn dole before in their lives. Should be punish them too?

Cutting dole is never going to work. The alternative that they use in Europe where your unemployment is based on a ever decreasing percentage of the wage you previously earned, sound great in theory, but we simply could not afford such a scheme, it would actually cost the state more. It is also a system that is 'gamed'. People will work for a year or two, lose their job and then live of the state for 6 months, rinse and repeat.

Blueshoe

ELM327 wrote: »

Elderly - Pension
Disabled, mentally handicapped, serious health conditions - Disability Allowance


None of these are on JSA.

That was left out on purpose. Otherwise the dig would be pointless

I have a suggestion that might be agreeable to the other poster.
Cut the JSA Christmas double payment. With the money saved give the oaps, disabled mentally handicapped and people with serious conditions the double payment PLUS an extra 50% on top.

Iv yet to hear anyone complain that the elderly get too much money from the state. Why?
Because nobody begrudges helping out those who REALLY need it.

jimmyrustle

Kivaro wrote: »

Don't be a scrooge Alek.
It only costs the tax payer €279,000,000 every year for this bonus.

Looking at the 2020 budget and the social welfare cost of €21.2 billion, the €279 million that was allocated for the Christmas bonus this year will have to be greatly increased based on the recent pandemic unemployment numbers.

Or, we could just scrap the Christmas bonus and ask everyone in this country help pay the cost of this crisis, and not just the workers.

Something something targeting the most vulnerable in society something something.

I've already seen one or two Marxists who were forced back into the workforce complaining that the 350 for newly laid off workers creates an us and them, that people now laid off are seen as more important than the people who have been on circa 200 p/w for years on end.

That is because 99.9% of us who are now unemployed never wanted this and are bored senseless.

ELM327

ELM327 wrote: »

Yeah there will be no populist/lefty initiatives this year anyway, all available cash will go to supporting businesses and people who lost jobs/hours due to this virus.

Damn capitalists. Shur, they’re the cause of all our ills.

Kivaro

Blueshoe wrote: »

That was left out on purpose. Otherwise the dig would be pointless

I have a suggestion that might be agreeable to the other poster.
Cut the JSA Christmas double payment. With the money saved give the oaps, disabled mentally handicapped and people with serious conditions the double payment PLUS an extra 50% on top.

Iv yet to hear anyone complain that the elderly get too much money from the state. Why?
Because nobody begrudges helping out those who REALLY need it.

The vast majority of people generally would have no problem with that, plus include carers.

But unfortunately the Christmas bonus is a luxury that we cannot afford any longer due to the enormous bill that will have to be paid as a result of spending in the next few months (if we are lucky, many months if we are not). We can't have our kids and grandchildren paying extra taxes for the money spent in the pandemic year that included a Christmas bonus.

efanton

Blueshoe wrote: »

That was left out on purpose. Otherwise the dig would be pointless

I have a suggestion that might be agreeable to the other poster.
Cut the JSA Christmas double payment. With the money saved give the oaps, disabled mentally handicapped and people with serious conditions the double payment PLUS an extra 50% on top.

Iv yet to hear anyone complain that the elderly get too much money from the state. Why?
Because nobody begrudges helping out those who REALLY need it.

Would totally agree with your suggestion

Tea drinker

efanton wrote: »

You do realise that that Christmas bonus enables the elderly, the disabled, mentally handicapped and those with serious health conditions to buy a few small gifts and a few small small extras for Christmas.
They are unable to work but you would still deny them?

Yes.
If it meant and elderly / mentally handicapped /serious health condition got the treatment they needed.
Not sure what's controversial about stopping a few trinkets at Christmas. A card will do! How do UK manage on a £10 ?

end of the road

Tea drinker wrote: »

Yes.
If it meant and elderly / mentally handicapped /serious health condition got the treatment they needed.
Not sure what's controversial about stopping a few trinkets at Christmas. A card will do! How do UK manage on a £10 ?

they don't.
the uk have poverty and all of the other social issues that brings, unlike anything we will or even could ever possibly know.

Idbatterim

Yes there will always be a very small minority that will never work no matter what incentive is given to them. So do you honestly think cutting their dole is going to make a difference? Most would just continue as is with less to spend admittedly but for some that would not be incentive enough to get up of the ar$e and find a job. In the meantime you punish those that have lost their job through no fault of their own and are seeking work.

There will be thousands of people on the dole after this crisis that have never drawn dole before in their lives. Should be punish them too?

Cutting dole is never going to work. The alternative that they use in Europe where your unemployment is based on a ever decreasing percentage of the wage you previously earned, sound great in theory, but we simply could not afford such a scheme, it would actually cost the state more. It is also a system that is 'gamed'. People will work for a year or two, lose their job and then live of the state for 6 months, rinse and repeat.

look we go around in circles with this. In the Uk, Germany etc, you can forget this "I am not arsed working" bit... You say there isnt enough to fund what I propose, how do the other countries do it? I propose a several billion euro swing, from the wasters, to those paying for the **** show!

Abolish LPT and implement a council tax, every adult pays, E20 gp visits for medical card holders, end free travel, end free tv license. Address the outrageous rate of marginal tax. The people struggling here are working people, the last to be given any recognition by RTE etc :rolleyes:

I also can see another issue, when you are being ripped off on childcare, transport etc. Marginal rate of tax. I would say home working now, will be greatly increased, even when things go back to semi normal! Then you have all the others, let go, who might think , its not even worth my while working, for the quality of life balanace, with the current set up here i.e. one set break their necks paying for everything, so that others can sit on the h*le! Interesting times ahead...

Tea drinker

end of the road wrote: »

they don't.
the uk have poverty and all of the other social issues that brings, unlike anything we will or even could ever possibly know.

The UK has poverty because they only give a 10 bob Christmas bonus, I don't think so.

efanton wrote: »

Yes there will always be a very small minority that will never work no matter what incentive is given to them. So do you honestly think cutting their dole is going to make a difference? Most would just continue as is with less to spend admittedly but for some that would not be incentive enough to get up of the ar$e and find a job. In the meantime you punish those that have lost their job through no fault of their own and are seeking work.
.

You've made a few good points, but I differ on this one. If people won't work no matter what then this is a mental health issue, one of many that run as an undercurrent through homelessness and drug abuse, anti social behaviour etc.
Can it be dealt with as a mental health issue? How much would this cost? Outside of counselling I would say everyone should have to work 2 - 3 full days a week. This could act to break the mental blocks people have about work, and with parents working would reduce the silent abuse of children where their own work ethic is ruined. Giving handouts doesn't help people out of their situation. Giving the skill to work - to have to work to get paid - Helps social cohesion and would mean a hand up not a handout.

Idbatterim

any one in the uk dying of hunger? didnt think so :rolleyes:

end of the road

Idbatterim wrote: »

look we go around in circles with this. In the Uk, Germany etc, you can forget this "I am not arsed working" bit... You say there isnt enough to fund what I propose, how do the other countries do it? I propose a several billion euro swing, from the wasters, to those paying for the **** show!

Abolish LPT and implement a council tax, every adult pays, E20 gp visits for medical card holders, end free travel, end free tv license. Address the outrageous rate of marginal tax. The people struggling here are working people, the last to be given any recognition by RTE etc

I also can see another issue, when you are being ripped off on childcare, transport etc. Marginal rate of tax. I would say home working now, will be greatly increased, even when things go back to semi normal! Then you have all the others, let go, who might think , its not even worth my while working, for the quality of life balanace, with the current set up here i.e. one set break their necks paying for everything, so that others can sit on the h*le! Interesting times ahead...

a council tax where every adult pays would likely bring undue hardship upon those who cannot afford it. absolutely lpt should be abolished however.
a 20 euro charge for medical card holders could potentially effect vulnerable people who could not afford to pay the charge, and who in turn may avoid seeking medical help from a gp, or would clog up A&E because it's the last option for them because they will have nothing else, and presumably because they are genuinely vulnerable they would be helped there.
abolishing free travel would highly likely effect local economies, make public transport services that little bit less viable, and would mean people being unable to get out and about which in turn could potentially increase the amount of people having to be helped by mental health services.
the uk have people who refuse to work, i would expect the same of germany and others.

Idbatterim wrote: »

any one in the uk dying of hunger? didnt think so

i would certainly hope nobody is dying of hunger in the uk, but i certainly wouldn't be surprised or shocked if sadly they were.
as i said, it's issues are off the scale unlike anything we would or could ever know.

Tea drinker wrote: »

The UK has poverty because they only give a 10 bob Christmas bonus, I don't think so.

You've made a few good points, but I differ on this one. If people won't work no matter what then this is a mental health issue, one of many that run as an undercurrent through homelessness and drug abuse, anti social behaviour etc.
Can it be dealt with as a mental health issue? How much would this cost? Outside of counselling I would say everyone should have to work 2 - 3 full days a week. This could act to break the mental blocks people have about work, and with parents working would reduce the silent abuse of children where their own work ethic is ruined. Giving handouts doesn't help people out of their situation. Giving the skill to work - to have to work to get paid - Helps social cohesion and would mean a hand up not a handout.

correct. but they do have such poverty because they don't insure the necessary supports for those who need them because they do not wish to fund them, and yet dispite that there are people who think wellfare dependants are all rich and having a great old time.
i would imagine that to get the won't work few to work would cost serious money and would require serious manpower.

efanton

Tea drinker wrote: »

You've made a few good points, but I differ on this one. If people won't work no matter what then this is a mental health issue, one of many that run as an undercurrent through homelessness and drug abuse, anti social behaviour etc.
Can it be dealt with as a mental health issue? How much would this cost? Outside of counselling I would say everyone should have to work 2 - 3 full days a week. This could act to break the mental blocks people have about work, and with parents working would reduce the silent abuse of children where their own work ethic is ruined. Giving handouts doesn't help people out of their situation. Giving the skill to work - to have to work to get paid - Helps social cohesion and would mean a hand up not a handout.

I would actually agree with you. What you suggest would be good. A cycle builds up in some families where generation after generation fall into a trap of not realising that work and a decent wage packet would change their lives for the better, rather than living on benefits.

The issue is our mental health service is a disaster and how would it be at all possible for this counselling to take place, and we will not talk about how long these people will be on a waiting list for such counselling. Besides that the cost would be exorbitant.
.
The problem as always is under funding invariable prevents any sensible solution.

Idbatterim

do you care about the people who dont have a medical card EOTR, that dont go to gp even if they should, because they cant afford it?

end of the road

Idbatterim wrote: »

do you care about the people who dont have a medical card EOTR, that dont go to gp even if they should, because they cant afford it?

i do yes .

making vulnerable people suffer because of a few wasters won't change the reality and situation of those people however. it will just mean more people suffering.

hatrickpatrick

The housing crisis hasn't ended, it's merely been eclipsed by a bigger crisis. People locked out of the housing market because of obscenely high rents are still locked out, but everyone's obviously had to put all that on hold while the lockdown is in situ. How is this a difficult concept to grasp?

Wanderer19

end of the road wrote: »

a 20 euro charge for medical card holders could potentially effect vulnerable people who could not afford to pay the charge, and who in turn may avoid seeking medical help from a gp, or would clog up A&E because it's the last option for them because they will have nothing else, and presumably because they are genuinely vulnerable they would be helped there.

Yes, they will be seen, but it'll cost €100? That's what I was charged and that was a few years ago.

If you're going to implement a charge, even with a medical card, A&E will also have to charge it, and no doubt they'll charge extra.

AlekSmart

Wanderer19 wrote: »

Yes, they will be seen, but it'll cost €100? That's what I was charged and that was a few years ago.

If you're going to implement a charge, even with a medical card, A&E will also have to charge it, and no doubt they'll charge extra.

It's worth bearing in mind that,for an employed person,that €100 is in addition to the full prsi contributions already made over the working life.

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The housing crisis hasn't ended, it's merely been eclipsed by a bigger crisis. People locked out of the housing market because of obscenely high rents are still locked out, but everyone's obviously had to put all that on hold while the lockdown is in situ. How is this a difficult concept to grasp?

Well the situation is changing as of late for some.......
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/dublin-homeless-services-airbnb-renting-21757575

"A total of 357 properties - 160 self-contained apartments and 197 ensuite hotel rooms - are being designated to families and individuals in need of shelter.

Eileen Gleeson, Director of the Dublin Region Homeless Executive (DRHE), and Brendan Kenny, Assistant Chief Executive of Dublin City Council made the announcement to Dublin city councillors, saying the new accommodation was the result of "very significant changes in the private property market.""

Tea drinker

end of the road wrote: »

i would imagine that to get the won't work few to work would cost serious money and would require serious manpower.

I think tackling the mental health issues in Ireland would require "moonshot" type investment. That's not to say it isn't worthwhile - the gain to the sate in having more people producing could be large, having less crime and other mental health related costs that we have to deal with anyway could really offset the costs.
We have to admit the scale of mental health issues first, and I think we are some way even from that.

Idbatterim

Augeo wrote: »

Well the situation is changing as of late for some.......
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/dublin-homeless-services-airbnb-renting-21757575

"A total of 357 properties - 160 self-contained apartments and 197 ensuite hotel rooms - are being designated to families and individuals in need of shelter.

Eileen Gleeson, Director of the Dublin Region Homeless Executive (DRHE), and Brendan Kenny, Assistant Chief Executive of Dublin City Council made the announcement to Dublin city councillors, saying the new accommodation was the result of "very significant changes in the private property market.""

I have total faith in these absolute morons, to secure fantastic value for the tax payer, like they have with the luxury apartment block they have rented in dundrum! :rolleyes:

Wanderer19

AlekSmart wrote: »

It's worth bearing in mind that,for an employed person,that €100 is in addition to the full prsi contributions already made over the working life.

I know, I'm one of them working people that contributes to the PRSI system ...

ijohhj

Long_Wave wrote: »

You had Dick Boyd Barrett out calling for all building sites to be closed last week. What ever happened to the housing shortage emergency? Not a word about it since early February.

It's no longer story of the month. There's no time to report on it. We have to check in on how Kim Kardashian is coping with self-isolation, and do that quiz journal.ie just put up on which Tiger King character you are.

Having said that unfortunately it is advised to have builders off for the moment too. No use to us dead or in bits.

Kivaro wrote: »

The reality for the 10,000 "homeless" is that many moved back with family and to their previous lodgings after they realised that this pandemic might halt their notions of a free home for life.
The genuine homeless out there remain homeless, and these are the vulnerable in society that we do need to protect.

Ain't that the truth. And the genuine hidden homeless are also suffering, they would typically live out of tourist hostels and all but three or four have shut. NOt to mention the risk to their health being there. There must be murder in the tourist hostels still open.

Wanderer19

Augeo wrote: »

Well the situation is changing as of late for some.......
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/dublin-homeless-services-airbnb-renting-21757575

"A total of 357 properties - 160 self-contained apartments and 197 ensuite hotel rooms - are being designated to families and individuals in need of shelter.

Eileen Gleeson, Director of the Dublin Region Homeless Executive (DRHE), and Brendan Kenny, Assistant Chief Executive of Dublin City Council made the announcement to Dublin city councillors, saying the new accommodation was the result of "very significant changes in the private property market.""

Some, if not all, is only a temporary measure, the homeless will be back on the streets when the crisis is over.

The HSE has taken over the Citywest Hotel, and other places, to put those at risk. This is being one in conjunction with DCC.

If the rental sector was regulated properly then there wouldn't be so many new properties suddenly available to rent. Nevermind Airbnb, booking.com have a rake of places advertised that they shouldn't. Doesn't take much investigating to find out what property's should be available on the open rental market.