Deleted User wrote: » I suppose you're right. I'm comparing Dublin to a city with higher wages and higher building standards and better transport. Yet Dublin is far more expensive.
Pure tashte wrote: » You'd be hoping no one would use the Ballymun flats as an argument against building high rise! The circumstances are completely different. Any high rise flats built now would be to accommodate young professionals working in the city centre, which would free up more houses in the suburbs for young families.
Arcade_Tryer wrote: » Probably why Coveney is in charge of policy and you're posting on boards.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » Good public transport keeps the cost of housing down, which is probably why we don't have any and won't get any. That and the fact we're governed by a succession of ignorant rural anti-Dublin landlord gombeens.
Wheeliebin30 wrote: » Yeah but here they would throw in 20% council and it would lead to problems no doubt.
Mongfinder General wrote: » There are apartments beside me with mixed social and private ownership. It's hell. And it's getting worse and more pervasive from what I can see. Both demographics resent each other. It doesn't work and just results in the private owners moving on.
Rumpy Pumpy wrote: » There's something wrong with a society where educated folks who have skills needed for a modern economy are forced to commute from places like Mullingar and Enfield into Dublin each day, while a rump of society who feel the State owe them a gaff and the means to bring up a heap of children can still find a place to live right between the canals. I'm all for social democracy. It ain't great when the people paying for it are getting fúcked over though.
pangbang wrote: » There is something decidedly smelly about all this, youre right. And its across the entire developed world. I know people in Toronto complaining about the exorbitant price of living (housing, child costs, the whole shebang), texas, berlin, sydney........you name it. This problem is not unique to our country, it is, quite worryingly, similar everywhere. But I think people have to start looking in different directions for answers. Its far too easy to blame poor and ill-educated people for trying to get a "gaff" off the government. Where else are they going to get 3 and 4 and 5 hundred thousand quid? What do you expect them to do? You push them out of Dublin and you get to move closer to your job. Then what? You have a large section of the country that is absolutely destitute, and probably no-go. Nah, this line of thinking has to end. Have to think bigger. My crazy "big picture" is that we are, globally, on the cusp of a massive change. And I wouldn't be too surprised if we're heading backwards big time.....less and less people able to afford a home, cant raise children, "need" to import immigrants, less and less people owning more and more of everything. The good old days of fiefdom on the return, landed gentry, people working all day every day to pay their landlords never to progress in life...hmm! We didn't need the English to screw us, we just needed more time to do it to ourselves
ChikiChiki wrote: » In all them cities you mentioned there is much more of a rental supply close to the cities. In Ireland there is no rental supply or housing supply.
Ulysses Gaze wrote: » I've said this to people I know that it is all heading for a Neo-Feudal economy. Work your guts out to rent, or if you are (un)lucky own, a poorly soundproofed two bedroom shoebox where you can hear your neighbours upstairs taking a piss, hear them sneeze or turn on the kettle. Who wants to buy into that "dream"?
Deleted User wrote: » The sad fact is that for every generation that has learned the hard way, is followed by another that is yet to learn! They are destined to make the same mistakes.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » The entitlement classes will never accept that, so social housing will have to be built to a higher standard. Meanwhile the working stiffs will have to put up with whatever they can get. This is never going to change unless we start asking very hard questions of candidates on the doorstep at election time. But given teh yoot's love-in with SF, anti everything alliance and the rest, it's just not going to happen - until the magic money tree of the middle aged middle class working hard to pay for the leisure of others dries up.
NIMAN wrote: » If you were on the dole when the crash came, did you really help bail out the banks? Benefits did not suffer much, and if you aren't a taxpayer, then how did they contribute to the bailout?
NIMAN wrote: » If you were on the dole cut when the crash came, did you really help bail out the banks? Benefits did not suffer much, and if you aren't a taxpayer, then how did they contribute to the bailout?
catbear wrote: » We all pay taxes indirectly like VAT or user charges so what goes out recirculates.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » We used to be 'decent' and 'liberal' people but the extent to which we are being screwed, looking at the children of generational dolers having better prospects than our own, has turned us.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » We've heard this all before. And it doesn't wash. The fact is that half of this country is basically living off the other half. We (the people who actually work for a living) a're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more (use your favourite search engine for the reference.) We used to be 'decent' and 'liberal' people but the extent to which we are being screwed, looking at the children of generational dolers having better prospects than our own, has turned us. An Irish Thatcher, or worse, will come, and the graspers will only have themselves to blame.
catbear wrote: » We had technical zero unemployment so this generational dolers is a false argument
It appears far easier to cut the welfare for some family in negative equity in bally go backwards where there's no jobs post building boom than actually turn on the political establishment that's kept seanie fitz out of the clink.
noodler wrote: » But if we let every bank go (which was never feasible in the case of BoI and AIB) we still would have had almost identical austerity.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » Which is why I said the developers' bank should have been let go - instead FF decided unilaterally (before EU or ECB got involved) that us taxpayers would pay out on the gambling debts of shysters. The party that did this looks likely to be the most popular in the next election.