Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

Economic implcactions of housing in Waterford

  • 21-07-2020 10:10pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 366 ✭✭ spaceCreated


    Starting this thread so posters can discuss the implications of housing, landlords and, renting, social housing to their hearts' content.


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Social housing in Waterford discourages hardwork.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    Social housing in Waterford discourages hardwork.


    Social housing is a critical need, as some are simply unable to gain access to the private market, is doesn't come down to hard work at all, with productivity levels at an all time high across most sectors, hard work has little or nothing to do with it. We now have a growing amount of younger generations, some well educated, also unable to get access to the private market, and this is ultimately down to high asset price inflation and low wage inflation, it's a common global problem with free market libertarianism or what's commonly called neoliberalism


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Social housing is a critical need, as some are simply unable to gain access to the private market, is doesn't come down to hard work at all, with productivity levels at an all time high across most sectors, hard work has little or nothing to do with it. We now have a growing amount of younger generations, some well educated, also unable to get access to the private market, and this is ultimately down to high asset price inflation and low wage inflation, it's a common global problem with free market libertarianism or what's commonly called neoliberalism

    Plenty of my generation have spent their 20s and many 30s gettings degrees, working 50 or 60 hour weeks, going abroad to get ahead to provide. Mostly we cant even buy and if we rent, we have to pay over a huge percent of our salaries, a far higher chunk than most social housing people who pay something like 40 euro a week and they are not even evicted if they don't pay.

    The council is able to offer to social houses because they are bought from builders and actually the state is largest buyer of housing in the country which is pushing up prices for people like me who work. The state is the real cucoo fund.

    Neoliberalism is about trade liberalism. Nothing to do with asset price inflation. You can blame the ECB and the Fed for that with their Keynesian bull. While wage stagnation is driven by automation and insane wates of immigration but we are forbidden from talking about that too. We dont have anything like a free market.


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,666 ✭✭✭✭ listermint


    Plenty of my generation have spent their 20s and many 30s gettings degrees, working 50 or 60 hour weeks, going abroad to get ahead to provide. Mostly we cant even buy and if we rent, we have to pay over a huge percent of our salaries, a far higher chunk than most social housing people who pay something like 40 euro a week and they even evicted if they dont pay.

    The council is able to offer to social houses because they are bought from builders and actually the state is largest buyer of housing in the country which is pushing up prices for people like me who work. The state is the real cucoo fund.

    Neoliberalism is about trade liberalism. Nothing to do with asset price inflation. You can blame the ECB and the Fed for that with their Keynesian bull. While wage stagnation is driven by automation and insane wates of immigration but we are forbidden from talking about that too. We dont have anything like a free market.

    Your exactly the person social housing was designed for . Working not able to afford their own home yet and at a stage where a leg up would set them on the path to getting their own home.


    The fact you don't understand that and went into isms demonstrates quite clearly you aren't nature enough to look after a home.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭ The J Stands for Jay


    listermint wrote: »
    Your exactly the person social housing was designed for . Working not able to afford their own home yet and at a stage where a leg up would set them on the path to getting their own home.


    The fact you don't understand that and went into isms demonstrates quite clearly you aren't nature enough to look after a home.

    This person earns too much to get social housing. The people on the file for there entire lives and in social housing often have more disposable income them the hard working young people because it all goes in rent.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 30,666 ✭✭✭✭ listermint


    McGaggs wrote: »
    This person earns too much to get social housing. The people on the file for there entire lives and in social housing often have more disposable income them the hard working young people because it all goes in rent.

    You their accountant ?


    This argument gets trotted out alot. It's not true. Yes there are thresholds but the the supports to get people social or onto the housing ladder are good. People who are against social housing are morons. There I said it.


    I grew up in my younger days in a social house. My parents were not get earning enough both working but went on to get better paying jobs. Got together a deposit and bought their own home. This is exactly what social housing is designed for.

    I'm firmly against selling off social housing and firmly for yearly means testing , guidance and financial advise for people in social housing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,256 ✭✭✭ The J Stands for Jay


    listermint wrote: »
    You their accountant ?


    This argument gets trotted out alot. It's not true. Yes there are thresholds but the the supports to get people social or onto the housing ladder are good. People who are against social housing are morons. There I said it.


    I grew up in my younger days in a social house. My parents were not get earning enough both working but went on to get better paying jobs. Got together a deposit and bought their own home. This is exactly what social housing is designed for.

    I'm firmly against selling off social housing and firmly for yearly means testing , guidance and financial advise for people in social housing.

    I'm not against social.housing, and how you describe it is exactly how it works, but the thresholds are often too low when compared to open market rents for a lot of people.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    listermint wrote: »
    Your exactly the person social housing was designed for . Working not able to afford their own home yet and at a stage where a leg up would set them on the path to getting their own home.


    The fact you don't understand that and went into isms demonstrates quite clearly you aren't nature enough to look after a home.
    Assuming I met the income rates, Id have to have kids to one. They dont house single working people. Dont insult me. I didnt insult you.
    listermint wrote: »
    I grew up in my younger days in a social house. My parents were not get earning enough both working but went on to get better paying jobs. Got together a deposit and bought their own home. This is exactly what social housing is designed for.

    I'm firmly against selling off social housing and firmly for yearly means testing , guidance and financial advise for people in social housing.

    Just because you grew up in social housing dosn't mean its the best system. Very few people see social housing as a transitional stage in their lives now. The situation is not as bad in Waterford as in Dublin where you have 600,000 luxury flats handed out as social housing. Imagine how unfair it is on the neighbours who made enormous sacrifices to live in those flats.


  • Registered Users Posts: 570 ✭✭✭ azimuth17




  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    Plenty of my generation have spent their 20s and many 30s gettings degrees, working 50 or 60 hour weeks, going abroad to get ahead to provide. Mostly we cant even buy and if we rent, we have to pay over a huge percent of our salaries, a far higher chunk than most social housing people who pay something like 40 euro a week and they are not even evicted if they don't pay.

    Funnily enough, if you're heavily indebted, or living in rented accommodation, you ll actually find more of your income actually goes towards the so called 'rentier class ' than alternative classes such as the 'welfare class', the main offenders here would be the fire sectors (finance, insurance, and real estate), who's main aim is to cause continual asset price inflation, because we all know, the wealth trickles down, particularly when the tide comes in!

    Comparing generations doesn't work here, as we now live in a much different world compared to previous generations, it is why younger generations in particular are voting radically, hence election outcomes such as trump, brexit, rise of the right and even our own recent election outcome.

    Younger generations are getting stuck in the rental sector, some are even getting stuck in the family home longer than they want to be, and some are finding themselves having to move back into the family home, particularly when they run out of options, and some of these aren't going home alone! This is occurring because of factors out of their control, as mentioned previously, you ll find the influx of foreigners and the welfare class have very little to do with these outcomes, even though they do influence them. There's plenty of evidence to support, younger generations are potentially working harder now than ever before, trying to increase their housing and accommodation securities
    The council is able to offer to social houses because they are bought from builders and actually the state is largest buyer of housing in the country which is pushing up prices for people like me who work. The state is the real cucoo fund.

    You ll actually find the biggest cause of house price inflation is mostly to do with the availability of credit, the more credit that is available, the higher the price of houses will be. this credit is in fact created by private sector financial institutions, to use your language, private sector financial institutions are the ultimate 'cucoo fund', as they can more or less create as much credit as they want.

    Neoliberalism is about trade liberalism. Nothing to do with asset price inflation. You can blame the ECB and the Fed for that with their Keynesian bull. While wage stagnation is driven by automation and insane wates of immigration but we are forbidden from talking about that too. We dont have anything like a free market.

    Neoliberalism is a complex beast, I personally think it could be the single most dangerous thing mankind has ever created, not only have critical financial institutions mentioned above played their part in this mess, we ve decided it's best to leave the potential bigger part of the problem, private sector financial institutions, almost completely off the hook, this probably won't end well for us all, including for the wealthy.

    I think Mr. Greenspan summed it up well, 'increasing worker insecurities is good for the economy', I ll let that sink in for a moment!


    There's no such thing as a free market anywhere on this planet, all markets have some sort of rules and regulations attached to them, and some sort of political governance, I do sometimes wonder, do humans actually want democracy or not, by reducing political integration into these markets, ultimately means de-democratising your society


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    azimuth17 wrote:
    I am sure that you have all seen this.


    I'm hearing great things about public housing and coop housing, I'm currently living in a coop built house


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Funnily enough, if you're heavily indebted, or living in rented accommodation, you ll actually find more of your income actually goes towards the so called 'rentier class ' than alternative classes such as the 'welfare class', the main offenders here would be the fire sectors (finance, insurance, and real estate), who's main aim is to cause continual asset price inflation, because we all know, the wealth trickles down, particularly when the tide comes in!
    I am not arguing that people in social housing receive most of the what is taken from middle but I would argue an unfair amount is given to them.


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    You ll actually find the biggest cause of house price inflation is mostly to do with the availability of credit, the more credit that is available, the higher the price of houses will be. this credit is in fact created by private sector financial institutions, to use your language, private sector financial institutions are the ultimate 'cucoo fund', as they can more or less create as much credit as they want.

    I dont know why you say this. The Irish banks are stagnating. Dying hulks really.
    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Younger generations are getting stuck in the rental sector, some are even getting stuck in the family home longer than they want to be, and some are finding themselves having to move back into the family home, particularly when they run out of options, and some of these aren't going home alone! This is occurring because of factors out of their control, as mentioned previously, you ll find the influx of foreigners and the welfare class have very little to do with these outcomes, even though they do influence them. There's plenty of evidence to support, younger generations are potentially working harder now than ever before, trying to increase their housing and accommodation securities
    There is a lot of social factors. Far more under 24s once lived with their parents and we now have far more single parents and divorcees and this all impacts the crisis further.

    Neoliberalism is great. It is the reason we have a booming and efficient freight into Ireland, cheap flights and Ryanair, and top notch private hospitals like the Whitfield that were able to bail us all out during Covid. Also cheap buses. Neoliberalism is a wonderful thing.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 534 ✭✭✭ Stopitwillya


    We have far too many council housing in Waterford city. Ghettos like larchville, lisduggan, ballybeg, carrickpherish and many others have been allowed to develop and a culture of not having to better yourself as it might prevent you from getting a council house has been created. This is far better things our council could be doing with taxpayers money than waisting it on council houses.
    Some of us have had to work bloody hard, save like mad and make huge sacrifices to get to buy our houses. Should be the same for everyone.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 587 Dum_Dum


    We have far too many council housing in Waterford city. Ghettos like larchville, lisduggan, ballybeg, carrickpherish and many others have been allowed to develop and a culture of not having to better yourself as it might prevent you from getting a council house has been created. This is far better things our council could be doing with taxpayers money than waisting it on council houses.
    Some of us have had to work bloody hard, save like mad and make huge sacrifices to get to buy our houses. Should be the same for everyone.


    Plenty of people work hard but are poorly paid.


    Just because some people have overpaid shouldn't mean you wish it upon others. Cheap housing is the foundation of prosperity e.g. Singapore.



    I'd favour a behaviour based system for public housing. For bad neighbours and those with criminal records automatic eviction and lifetime bans.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    Dum_Dum wrote: »
    Plenty of people work hard but are poorly paid.


    Just because some people have overpaid shouldn't mean you wish it upon others. Cheap housing is the foundation of prosperity e.g. Singapore.



    I'd favour a behaviour based system for public housing. For bad neighbours and those with criminal records automatic eviction and lifetime bans.

    even though i would partially agree with your thinking, i.e. Singapore, id have to disagree about your last statement, complex behavioral issues and criminality is exactly that, complex, having some sort of stability in the access of housing or accommodation, is critical to trying to adequately dealing with such complex issues, not having so, would more than likely lead to even more complex and dysfunctional behavior, if you ban people, you ll more than likely just move the problem somewhere else, and potentially cause an even bigger problem


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Dum_Dum wrote: »
    Plenty of people work hard but are poorly paid.


    Just because some people have overpaid shouldn't mean you wish it upon others. Cheap housing is the foundation of prosperity e.g. Singapore.



    I'd favour a behaviour based system for public housing. For bad neighbours and those with criminal records automatic eviction and lifetime bans.

    A huge percentage of social housing tenants are in arrears. That would not happen in Singapore. Abolishing tariffs is one of the big reasons why Singapore is prosperous, unfortunately we live in a EU trading block which is viciously protectionist. Anyway housing in Singapore is very expensive.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    A huge percentage of social housing tenants are in arrears. That would not happen in Singapore. Abolishing tariffs is one of the big reasons why Singapore is prosperous, unfortunately we live in a EU trading block which is viciously protectionist. Anyway housing in Singapore is very expensive.


    Maintaining public ownership of most land and housing has prevented speculative behaviour from occuring in Singapore, which in turn has prevented housing issues such as ours, protectionism is a critical component of free markets such as ours.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,515 ✭✭✭ robtri


    should be the same for everyone.....

    and what is the same?
    unless you have a good job you shouldnt be entitled to a house? does that also go for Health care for example?
    unless u have a good job that pays well you shouldn't get medical help?

    it is the same for everyone, people on the lower scale are been given access to housing the same way people who are paid better have access to housing. (its generally not a free house, the tenant has to pay some rent, which is dependent on their income).
    and usually people have to wait years to get on the list for social housing.
    while you as a good paid worker can get access to a house much quicker


    Ghettos? there are a lot of hardworking people in these areas as well. who are just low paid and need help getting by.


  • Registered Users Posts: 451 ✭✭ Flow Motion


    Housing is a basic human right.

    How is it that our parents/grandparents were able to purchase and own their houses regardless of how much they earned?

    Blame the neo-liberal right for allowing capitalism to hold sway. I speak of FG-FF here. FG especially. Looking after their buds in construction. The rich continue to fill their boots whilst the rest of us are thrown to the mercy of the markets.

    There is no such thing as social housing in Ireland any more. Local authorities do not build. Sure its okay to fund a family to "live" in a hotel for circa 2k a week (150k p.a.) just to swell the coffers of the hotel owners rather that investing that 150k in housing itself. Ditto the health service. Dismantle the service to bare bones and force everyone to go private.

    Money, money, money.... the root of all evil.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Housing is a basic human right.

    How is it that our parents/grandparents were able to purchase and own their houses regardless of how much they earned?

    Blame the neo-liberal right for allowing capitalism to hold sway. I speak of FG-FF here. FG especially. Looking after their buds in construction. The rich continue to fill their boots whilst the rest of us are thrown to the mercy of the markets.

    There is no such thing as social housing in Ireland any more. Local authorities do not build. Sure its okay to fund a family to "live" in a hotel for circa 2k a week (150k p.a.) just to swell the coffers of the hotel owners rather that investing that 150k in housing itself. Ditto the health service. Dismantle the service to bare bones and force everyone to go private.

    Money, money, money.... the root of all evil.
    Property ownership has been in decline since 1991. So FF, FG, Greens, Labour and the Prog Dem all contributed. The key question is what has changed in Ireland since then? What ever that is the cause.Don't be misinformed. Social housing hasn't gone away. Housing completions are way up since the recession so there are is a lot of developers providing social housing and in additions councils are buying many houses too.
    Regarding hotels, its mad to say that homeless are put in hotels to generate hotel profits. Same with the HSE. Its funding is raised year after year.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Maintaining public ownership of most land and housing has prevented speculative behaviour from occuring in Singapore, which in turn has prevented housing issues such as ours, protectionism is a critical component of free markets such as ours.

    One of the reasons why Singaporeans seem to have so high ownership is because they typically have 99 year leases so its an intrinsically less valuable thing than true ownership like here but they are allowed to sell and rent so it is not like Irish social housing.

    They also have a much more predictable population growth rate by brutalling refusing any asylum seekers. They also exclude foreigners from social housing. Even with these measures social housing isn't free and it is a lot expensive than Irish social housing. It is cheap for working couples though because income taxes are incredibly low.


  • Registered Users Posts: 451 ✭✭ Flow Motion


    Property ownership has been in decline since 1991. So FF, FG, Greens, Labour and the Prog Dem all contributed. The key question is what has changed in Ireland since then? What ever that is the cause.Don't be misinformed. Social housing hasn't gone away. Housing completions are way up since the recession so there are is a lot of developers providing social housing and in additions councils are buying many houses too.
    Regarding hotels, its mad to say that homeless are put in hotels to generate hotel profits. Same with the HSE. Its funding is raised year after year.

    You are obviously oblivious to the real world here in Ireland or either way too focused on how Singapore operates. FYI 19 Dublin hotels each received Eur 1 million each last year, ie 19 x 1mil = e19 million. And this figure is just for Dublin alone! So my comment was "mad" eh? :rolleyes:
    https://www.thejournal.ie/homeless-dublin-hotels-cost-5017050-Feb2020/


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    You are obviously oblivious to the real world here in Ireland or either way too focused on how Singapore operates. FYI 19 Dublin hotels each received Eur 1 million each last year, ie 19 x 1mil = e19 million. And this figure is just for Dublin alone! So my comment was "mad" eh? :rolleyes:
    https://www.thejournal.ie/homeless-dublin-hotels-cost-5017050-Feb2020/

    These hotels do make a lot of money from it. But its not to do them a favour. Nowhere else to put them. If you had evidence that the the decision makers in the dept of social protection official had ownership of hotels that would be deeply corrupt and you should tell a newspaper.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    These hotels do make a lot of money from it. But its not to do them a favour. Nowhere else to put them. If you had evidence that the the decision makers in the dept of social protection official had ownership of hotels that would be deeply corrupt and you should tell a newspaper.

    so why dont we just build houses and other relevant accommodation?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    so why dont we just build houses and other relevant accommodation?

    They are, all the time, 19 million sounds like a huge sum but it would only build 54 houses in Dublin or half that in some parts of the city. Long social housing lists are something that can never be ended in the current system.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    They are, all the time, 19 million sounds like a huge sum but it would only build 54 houses in Dublin or half that in some parts of the city. Long social housing lists are something that can never be ended in the current system.

    we re obviously not building them fast enough, or enough in total, housing and accommodation shortages were know, particularly in the dublin region, over ten years ago, we decided the best thing to do to address this was, do nothing


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    we re obviously not building them fast enough, or enough in total, housing and accommodation shortages were know, particularly in the dublin region, over ten years ago, we decided the best thing to do to address this was, do nothing

    Years ago social housing was paid for by general taxation. Now it is paid for by general taxation and by home buyers who subsidise it through development fees and requirements on developers to build a % of them. This combined with ever tighter building regulations (eg. a 2020 build is required to be 80% more efficient than a 1991 build), population growth, inward migration (families can fly into Dublin and demand emergency accommodation the same night), increases in family breakdowns, and urbanisation mean houses prices were always guaranteed to increase. There is no wonder home ownership has dropped hugely since 1991. If private buyers can not afford to buy, then neither will councils. However please only blame Fianna Fail and Fine Gael if you believe they are also to blame for those five factors.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    Years ago social housing was paid for by general taxation. Now it is paid for by general taxation and by home buyers who subsidise it through development fees and requirements on developers to build a % of them. This combined with ever tighter building regulations (eg. a 2020 build is required to be 80% more efficient than a 1991 build), population growth, inward migration (families can fly into Dublin and demand emergency accommodation the same night), increases in family breakdowns, and urbanisation mean houses prices were always guaranteed to increase. There is no wonder home ownership has dropped hugely since 1991. If private buyers can not afford to buy, then neither will councils. However please only blame Fianna Fail and Fine Gael if you believe they are also to blame for those five factors.

    you ll actually find, one of the main reasons for the rapid increase in the price of housing has in fact been the increase in the availability of credit, but you re economic texts books wont tell you this, because econ 101 does not believe banks can simply create this form of money, which in fact, is the most common form of money in our modern economies. the result of this commonly ends in people blaming foreigners, the long term unemployed, those that fail to engage in 'personal responsibility'........


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,571 ✭✭✭ vriesmays


    Waterford is full of foreigners and long term unemployed. What's kicking up prices are the housing charities buying for these people.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 26,210 ✭✭✭✭ Wanderer78


    vriesmays wrote:
    Waterford is full of foreigners and long term unemployed. What kicking up prices are the housing charities buying for these people.


    What?


Advertisement