Homelessness: The disgrace that is Varadkar and the Government

MayoSalmon · 15-11-2017 06:42PM

Actually been more impressed with his rhetoric than anything I have heard from any Taoiseach in the last 30 years. Keep it up I would say.

Wombatman · 15-11-2017 06:53PM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Erica Fleming got her forever home by making decisions that many other single people don't do such as having a child before they are in a position to provide a home for that child. While not a scam, it's certainly an example of where the crisis is self made.

Your sample size of 1 is an impressive statistic.

So you are saying children are homeless because of their bad behavior?

The state is literally forcing mothers to push them out. Surely we have an obligation to care for them then.

end of the road · 15-11-2017 06:54PM

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

When you take into account nearly half of the social houses offered are turned down because its not bedside me ma or the bookies im sure our "homeless" figures would probably be halfed.

Then the ones who deliberately go homeless to jump the list.

Its a scam that doesn't exist if people were realistic about their expectations.

again, these issues while issues, are over-exaggerated. the figure of refusals is a very small percentage and. half of council houses are not refused.

blanch152 wrote: »

The people of Dublin West elected Leo Varadkar.

Nothing shameful about pointing out that McVerry is unelected, has a vested interest in the subject, and may therefore be biased towards a certain view.

varadkar also has a vested interest. a vested interest in downplaying the issue and is byassed toards views that allow him to do that. certainly McVerry has a vested interest in solving the issue, or greatly reducing it, and he does know what he is talking about, as he has years of experience on the issue.

Idbatterim · 15-11-2017 07:10PM

the lpt was about screwing over the have nots to help the haves. it is a tax many can't afford.

right, is that the one set at .18 percent? thats the ones in more valuable homes? not given to them by the state, that will be paying in masses of income tax to subsidise all the "have nots"?

we must have the most generous welfare system and least contribution of tax all round in the world from low paid workers. What exactly do they want. The cost of putting a roof over your head in dublin is outrageous, but they (government) should be tackling the cost of living, not further removing huge numbers of people contributing as good as nothing in income tax from the tax net...

end of the road · 15-11-2017 07:15PM

Idbatterim wrote: »

right, is that the one set at .18 percent? thats the ones in more valuable homes? not given to them by the state, that will be paying in masses of income tax to subsidise all the "have nots"?

we must have the most generous welfare system and least contribution of tax all round in the world from low paid workers. What exactly do they want. The cost of putting a roof over your head in dublin is outrageous, but they (government) should be tackling the cost of living, not further removing huge numbers of people contributing as good as nothing in income tax from the tax net...

the vast majority of people are paying tax in some form and are contributing. the LPT wasn't viable and just added another tax to those who couldn't afford to pay out any more money. ireland does indeed have a good wellfare system but the amount on it is small and is getting smaller.

McMurphy · 15-11-2017 07:18PM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Erica Fleming got her forever home by making decisions that many other single people don't do such as having a child before they are in a position to provide a home for that child. While not a scam, it's certainly an example of where the crisis is self made.

Using one example to tar everyone with the same brush is disingenuous, and extreme.

I give you Michael Lowry as an example.

You can be sure that the figures in other countries have gone up since 2015, not down.

The same could be said for this country. Doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the point being made.

Idbatterim · 15-11-2017 07:36PM

the vast majority of people are paying tax in some form and are contributing. the LPT wasn't viable and just added another tax to those who couldn't afford to pay out any more money. ireland does indeed have a good welfare system but the amount on it is small and is getting smaller.

http://www.finfacts.ie/Irish_finance_news/articleDetail.php?Half-Ireland-s-population-recipients-of-public-welfare-in-2015-716

i imagine that there will be more people hitting pensionable age every year than coming of JSB or JSA too...

hatrickpatrick · 15-11-2017 08:06PM

I've said this repeatedly and I'll keep saying it - until the government embarks on a social housing program on the scale of the Herbert Simms projects of the 1930s and the tenement clearances of later decades, I will regard them as choosing to preside over this crisis rather than attempting to fix it. Simple as that.

blanch152 · 15-11-2017 10:07PM

end of the road wrote: »

the vast majority of people are paying tax in some form and are contributing. the LPT wasn't viable and just added another tax to those who couldn't afford to pay out any more money. ireland does indeed have a good wellfare system but the amount on it is small and is getting smaller.

Absolute rubbish. By being a tax on people who own houses, the LPT is a wealth tax. Those who are poor - cannot afford to own a house and are homeless or renting - don't pay the tax. Only those rich enough to afford a house pay the tax.

Absolutely ridiculous that the so-called left-wing parties oppose it.

hatrickpatrick · 15-11-2017 10:23PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Absolute rubbish. By being a tax on people who own houses, the LPT is a wealth tax. Those who are poor - cannot afford to own a house and are homeless or renting - don't pay the tax. Only those rich enough to afford a house pay the tax.

Absolutely ridiculous that the so-called left-wing parties oppose it.

What about people who bought a house when they could afford it, but no longer could due to changes in circumstances? A home should be something that is paid for once it's paid for. The idea of having to pay an ongoing, never-ending levy because you own your home is ridiculous. Should people who bought a home when they could afford it and have since lost jobs, had children, etc simply lose their home if they can't afford this ongoing charge?

A tax on one's home is like a mortgage that it's impossible to ever finish paying off. In my view it goes entirely against the principle of ownership of one's home.

I'm not opposed to property tax, by the way - far from it. I just do not believe that it should apply to the property one lives in.

end of the road · 15-11-2017 10:26PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Absolute rubbish. By being a tax on people who own houses, the LPT is a wealth tax. Those who are poor - cannot afford to own a house and are homeless or renting - don't pay the tax. Only those rich enough to afford a house pay the tax.

Absolutely ridiculous that the so-called left-wing parties oppose it.

it's not just a tax on those who own houses, but a tax on people who's houses are owned by the bank, for which they are paying back the bank for the loan they got to buy the house. this means people are paying an extra tax which they cannot afford, meaning they are in a number of cases, struggling to make those mortgage payments in full. a problem they may not have without having to pay this unjust tax.

blanch152 · 15-11-2017 10:32PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

What about people who bought a house when they could afford it, but no longer could due to changes in circumstances?
.

They own part of an asset, which by definition makes them richer than the homeless or the renter.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

A home should be something that is paid for once it's paid for. The idea of having to pay an ongoing, never-ending levy because you own your home is ridiculous. Should people who bought a home when they could afford it and have since lost jobs, had children, etc simply lose their home if they can't afford this ongoing charge?

A tax on one's home is like a mortgage that it's impossible to ever finish paying off. In my view it goes entirely against the principle of ownership of one's home.

I'm not opposed to property tax, by the way - far from it. I just do not believe that it should apply to the property one lives in.

So should J.P.McManus pay no tax on his 80-bed mansion or whatever size it is? He already avoids tax by being domiciled abroad so you want to let him off the LPT as well.

blanch152 · 15-11-2017 10:34PM

end of the road wrote: »

it's not just a tax on those who own houses, but a tax on people who's houses are owned by the bank, for which they are paying back the bank for the loan they got to buy the house. this means people are paying an extra tax which they cannot afford, meaning they are in a number of cases, struggling to make those mortgage payments in full. a problem they may not have without having to pay this unjust tax.

They are all wealthier than those who are homeless or renting. Therefore they have more wealth. A tax is fair.

LPT is infinitely more fair than income tax, capital gains tax is fairer than income tax and gift and inheritance tax are fairer than income tax.

end of the road · 15-11-2017 10:36PM

blanch152 wrote: »

They own part of an asset, which by definition makes them richer than the homeless or the renter.

So should J.P.McManus pay no tax on his 80-bed mansion or whatever size it is? He already avoids tax by being domiciled abroad so you want to let him off the LPT as well.

yes, it's his home. if he owns other properties that he isn't living in, then by all means they can be taxed. but the main home being taxed is unjust.

blanch152 wrote: »

They are all wealthier than those who are homeless or renting. Therefore they have more wealth. A tax is fair.

LPT is infinitely more fair than income tax, capital gains tax is fairer than income tax and gift and inheritance tax are fairer than income tax.

it doesn't matter that they are wealthier then someone who is unfortunately homeless. most of the people cannot afford the tax.

FrancieBrady · 15-11-2017 10:42PM

blanch152 wrote: »

They are all wealthier than those who are homeless or renting. Therefore they have more wealth. A tax is fair.

LPT is infinitely more fair than income tax, capital gains tax is fairer than income tax and gift and inheritance tax are fairer than income tax.

A tax is 'fair' just because you perceive it can be paid?

blanch152 · 15-11-2017 10:50PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A tax is 'fair' just because you perceive it can be paid?

Taxes that target stagnant wealth are fairer than taxes that target income. Such is the left-wing philosophy. You appear to favour the 1% who can avoid income tax and whose riches come from exploiting their inherited wealth.

FrancieBrady · 15-11-2017 11:06PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Taxes that target stagnant wealth are fairer than taxes that target income. Such is the left-wing philosophy. You appear to favour the 1% who can avoid income tax and whose riches come from exploiting their inherited wealth.

So my house is 'stagnant wealth'?

Why not come up with a specific tax to target the 1% instead of unfairly taxing everybody because you perceive them to have wealth?

blanch152 · 15-11-2017 11:24PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So my house is 'stagnant wealth'?

Why not come up with a specific tax to target the 1% instead of unfairly taxing everybody because you perceive them to have wealth?

In a world context, you are the 1%

Let's get real here, houses are property, property is wealth. Anyone who owns a house in Ireland, even on a mortgage, is rich by global standards.

The homeless and the poor don't own houses, don't have property and aren't wealthy.

You are rich, pay the LPT.

seamus · 15-11-2017 11:24PM

Wombatman wrote: »

To suggest that homelessness is down to an individuals bad behaviour over the years is absolutely disgraceful.

Outrageous rents, an economic crash, mental illness, drug addiction, repossessions, abuse etc all lead to homelessness.

It's down to the "bad behaviour" of bankers, property developers and the government more like.

Fooking raging at that statement :mad::mad::mad:

Fat cats gonna fat cat under Leo for sure.

Forget for a second, your rhetoric about bankers. Forget about your hatred of Fine Gael and your bias against anything a civil servant might say. Bear in mind that I'm pretty lefty, I strongly support the government providing homes to the homeless.

Clear your mind, read what she actually said and answer truthfully - is she wrong? And if so, why?

Consider that all of those outraged by her comments have, in some respect, an interest in homelessness. CEOs and others who's salary is dependent on there being a charity to run. No homeless people = no charity = no paycheque.
She, on the other hand, is a director of an entity that exists whether there are 10 or 10,000 homeless people.

The "economic crash" cannot be blamed for all our woes. Our homeless rate during the crash was one of the lowest in history. Collapsed rents and an abundance of property meant homeless rates were on the floor. Repossessions have been, and still are, very low.

In any case, her statements were primarily in relation to rough sleepers - those who avail of the food and street shelter provided by homeless charities.

In a discussion on immigrants in the Med recently, someone pointed out to me that Australia starting saving boats, and then bringing their occupants home again rather than into Aus. And as a result, the number of people who attempted to migrate into Aus by illegals boats plummeted because you were no longer guaranteed to land there.
Now, I disagreed with it's relevance to that discussion, but the evidence remained - sometimes if you offer people a safety net, they will intentionally jump into it.

So applying the same thought to rough sleepers, it would seem likely that if someone knows that PMcV or SVP will be along later on with a sambo, a cup of coffee and maybe a dry sleeping bag, then they might be more inclined to go out on the street rather than stay in homeless accommodation. And if they've been at it a long time, then the actions of these charities are not helping that individual, and may in fact be hindering them from accepting longer-term help in getting off the street.

So, in all honesty - is she wrong?

aivilo · 15-11-2017 11:27PM

JupiterKid wrote: »

When Leo Varadkar assumed office of Taoiseach he did the obligatory lap of honour, with the international media fawning over his sexuality and mixed ethnicity, making out the Ireland was now such a modern, progressive society. He was photographed comparing socks (WTF??) with Canadian premier Justin Trudeau.

But look at his record. As Minister for Health, he slashed the already paltry budget for mental health services, an utterly reprehensible act in my view. Irish mental health services are among the worst in the developed world and need more funding, not less. Look at the suicide rates amongst our young. Also, as a gay man myself I found it a bit disingenious that Varadkar chose to come out shortly before the same sex marriage referendum, which if you may not recall he originally opposed.

But then again, our public health system is in a mess generally as a brief stint in A&E in a major Dublin hospital showed me. Very unwell people left on trolleys in corridors for hours, overworked nurses and doctors and taking 11 hours to be seen by a doctor over a heart complaint.

Then there is Varadkar's statement on the housing crisis being over-exaggerated by charities and housing agencies. The pure gall of him to make such a flippant statement. Dublin has a serious housing emergency, a major social housing building programme would go a long way to solving that situation but no, the private market and the banking sector must prevail at all costs. I honestly can't see the situation changing one iota unless a general election takes place.

IMO Leo is a neo-liberal Thatcherite who talks the talk, but can't walk the walk. He has zero interest in the most vulnerable in Irish society. Sadly, I don't see many votes in mental health issues or housing issues, except to ensure those in the know and with connections ensure their over-inflated dwellings continue to rise in price.

It's a sad spectacle and IMO Leo is no supporter in social justice or equality, in any shape or form. The current minority FG govt are a lame duck. They seem to have no ability to tackle serious pressing social problems, particularly with housing and health. Where is the sense of vision? Where is the sense of doing things for the good of Irish society as a whole? I sure don't see it.

Did you hear Erica Fleming on news talk today . She’s loving all of this .. the sense of entitlement is just sickening to listen to and the media drool over her

FrancieBrady · 15-11-2017 11:33PM

blanch152 wrote: »

In a world context, you are the 1%

Let's get real here, houses are property, property is wealth. Anyone who owns a house in Ireland, even on a mortgage, is rich by global standards.

The homeless and the poor don't own houses, don't have property and aren't wealthy.

You are rich, pay the LPT.

Unless you sell the house it is just a place to live and costs you to maintain it.

I am not rich even by Irish standards.

end of the road · 15-11-2017 11:41PM

blanch152 wrote: »

In a world context, you are the 1%

Let's get real here, houses are property, property is wealth. Anyone who owns a house in Ireland, even on a mortgage, is rich by global standards.

The homeless and the poor don't own houses, don't have property and aren't wealthy.

You are rich, pay the LPT.

many of us are not rich. the lpt must be abolished. the only reason most people pay it is because revenue are involved. if they weren't, we wouldn't be paying it, i can assure you.

jimmycrackcorm · 15-11-2017 11:52PM

hatrickpatrick wrote:

I've said this repeatedly and I'll keep saying it - until the government embarks on a social housing program on the scale of the Herbert Simms projects of the 1930s and the tenement clearances of later decades, I will regard them as choosing to preside over this crisis rather than attempting to fix it. Simple as that.

The left don't want that because they don't want to create ghettos. The noose around their neck is that while it could provide the key solution to social housing, their mantra prevents then from dealing with the linked anti social behavior because they can't make problem tenants homeless.

hatrickpatrick wrote:

I'm not opposed to property tax, by the way - far from it. I just do not believe that it should apply to the property one lives in.

Taxing hard work is unfair in comparison to taxing an unproductive asset. Even more so in the case when you inherit it. But the most pursuing argument is that wealthy people cannot avoid it.

MayoSalmon · 16-11-2017 12:03AM

end of the road wrote:

many of us are not rich. the lpt must be abolished. the only reason most people pay it is because revenue are involved. if they weren't, we wouldn't be paying it, i can assure you.

Yeah I think you can say that for most taxes. Taxation is theft and is taken by force and intimidation. Government will literally put you in prison if you don't pay.

LPT is one of the fairest taxes we have in this country and taxes people's home according to its value. If you own a property especially in Ireland you have wealth and the government as always wants some of that wealth. The more wealth you have in your property the more you will pay and vice versa. It's a progressive tax and the fact the left don't like it just confirms their populist lunacy.

end of the road · 16-11-2017 12:14AM

i disagree, it's a regressive tax that takes money from people who cannot afford to pay. it doesn't just target the genuinely wealthy.

The Rape of Lucretia · 16-11-2017 12:18AM

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Yeah I think you can say that for most taxes. Taxation is theft and is taken by force and intimidation. Government will literally put you in prison if you don't pay.

LPT is one of the fairest taxes we have in this country and taxes people's home according to its value. If you own a property especially in Ireland you have wealth and the government as always wants some of that wealth. The more wealth you have in your property the more you will pay and vice versa. It's a progressive tax and the fact the left don't like it just confirms their populist lunacy.

So is this the theory :
- you earn money, and so pay tax on that income
- if you spend it on a consumable (food, holiday, cinema ticket, etc) you pay no more tax on it
- if you spend it on something that could resold, it is termed wealth, and so you must pay tax, for ever, for not having spent it on a consumable
- if you spend the after tax income on a house, then you will be taxed on it : the consequence being that either :

+ your income is effectively being double taxed to fund you staying in your house and maintaining your wealth at a steady level
or
+ you pay the wealth tax by trading down your house standard every few years to free wealth from it to hand back to the govt : so double taxing the income you earned in the first place to buy it.

So the government's policy is basically incentivising people to go to McDonalds and the cinema rather than buy homes for themselves ?

Wanderer78 · 16-11-2017 12:20AM

Thankfully our homeless problem isn't really that bad, compared to other countries!

markodaly · 16-11-2017 12:26AM

end of the road wrote: »

i disagree, it's a regressive tax that takes money from people who cannot afford to pay. it doesn't just target the genuinely wealthy.

Property tax is actually one of the easiest and best way to target the wealthy. It should be increased in theory, but no one wants to go near that.

FrancieBrady · 16-11-2017 12:26AM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Thankfully our homeless problem isn't really that bad, compared to other countries!

It doesn't augur well for the future of Leo when he downplayed such a serious and tragic crisis with old and bogus figures. Either by clumsy research or design.

Idbatterim · 16-11-2017 12:27AM

Could the trolling be stopped. 51% thieved on labour which is discretionary to an extent and .18% on lpt. It's pathetic. The rate of tax generated here on income tax is a joke. Lpt water charges should have been in operation on far higher levels than they were at. Reduce marginal rates. Stop taking people out of tax net. They are contributing nothing in direct taxes anyway ...

Homelessness: The disgrace that is Varadkar and the Government

Comments