Homelessness: The disgrace that is Varadkar and the Government

Rick Shaw wrote: »

This is a classic deflection tactic.

When a crisis is being discussed, wheel out the "name a better alternative govt" line.

How's about just demanding better from the govt already there?

Did I read somewhere that the state is currently throwing €2m a week to the hotel/b&b and private landlords to try and solve the problem? I'm no quantity surveyor, but that's surely better put towards constructing social housing, than enriching private individuals, No?

Trying to downplay and normailse a homeless epidemic is a new low for the state.

Here's the thing

You gots to have some form of govt. There is literally no alternative other than "somebody runs things".

So no actually, in my opinion it's hacking at whomever is in power without any appreciation for the complexities of the issues or the mechanics and momentum of the inputs of governmental-scale activity that is the deflection tactic, because it is a fundamentally useless and childish approach to pretending to be interested in the solution to any given issue

Now, you reproach with an appeal towards the issue. Well then perhaps you and your identikit fellow poster there should do that without the infantile and repetitive attacks on Varadkar or FG.

Otherwise readers might think you had god forbid an agenda that wasn't it fact the issue at hand.

You didn't mention what party you advocated for yet, did you? Cards on the table etc.

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Look your just trolling now frankly. If states can provide services cheaper wonder why Bus Eireann, Irish Rail and Aer Lingus struggled so badly under there management. Wonder why RTE is looking for more license money why the water system is crumbling, the list goes on..theres a common denominator there but sure theres no debate to be had.

the government didn't want to fund the water system. the private sector wouldn't have funded it either. they would have ramped up costs to the user and taken huge profits though.
RTE is expected to be all things to everyone, and bring in commercial income, rather then simply targeting minority and good quality programing. the private sector, well just look at tv3.
bus eireann and irish rail operate non-profitible but vital and necessary public transport services, which allow people to commute to work and education, in turn contributing to the economy.

blanch152

Rick Shaw wrote: »

This is a classic deflection tactic.

When a crisis is being discussed, wheel out the "name a better alternative govt" line.

How's about just demanding better from the govt already there?

Did I read somewhere that the state is currently throwing €2m a week to the hotel/b&b and private landlords to try and solve the problem? I'm no quantity surveyor, but that's surely better put towards constructing social housing, than enriching private individuals, No?

Trying to downplay and normailse a homeless epidemic is a new low for the state.

No, they are throwing €100m a year to the likes of the Peter McVerry Trust and the other homeless charities who then scream even louder to get more money.

MayoSalmon

end of the road wrote:

anything can be provided by private enterprise. however, it won't be as it's not profitible, without an absolutely ridiculous cost to the user

Look your just trolling now frankly. If states can provide services cheaper wonder why Bus Eireann, Irish Rail and Aer Lingus struggled so badly under there management. Wonder why RTE is looking for more license money why the water system is crumbling, the list goes on..theres a common denominator there but sure theres no debate to be had.

Deleted User wrote: »

Would you rather they were left to themselves and not housed in B & Bs, hotels and the new hubs? The Government are doing something. They are taking people off the streets if they want. What type of home should be provided for a homeless person? A one, two or three bedroom house? An apartment? Where are these to be built? In the back end of beyond? In O’Connell Street?

it is not sustainible or cost effective to house people in hotels, b&bs or hostels, or rely on the private rental market to meet all accommodation needs. i'm aware it's not as simple as throw up houses but we have to make a start. families are living in 1 room of a hotel or b&b, that is not justifiable in modern ireland, we were supposed to have eradicated that issue with the tenaments. there is also a potential for an issue in terms of public health for those living in those hotels.

MayoSalmon wrote: »

Can all be provided by private enterprise but to be honest not interesting in getting into that debate.

anything can be provided by private enterprise. however, it won't be as it's not profitible, without an absolutely ridiculous cost to the user. so yes, it's not worth getting into a debate for as there is nothing to debate. the government have to provide services to keep the services availible to all to insure the health and wellbeing of the nation, which in turn means a healthy and fit nation, who can contribute.

MayoSalmon

Consonata wrote:

So why bother build roads, hospitals, schools, improving the quality of life in the state?

Can all be provided by private enterprise but to be honest not interesting in getting into that debate.

Merely responding to the point that many people look to the government to solve a myriad of issues and problem that they are not responsible for.

The government cannot and do not have any ability to create wealth, they merely take the peoples wealth sometimes 50% of it and spend it as they see fit.

BillyBobBS

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

This new homelessness narrative coming from the government spin doctors is a nasty turn of events and I am far from left wing

Real bang of the master race off FG at the moment tbh.

Consonata

MayoSalmon wrote:

No they don't. Why would they?! The role of government is to ensure the individual rights of its citizens as written into the constitution.

So why bother build roads, hospitals, schools, improving the quality of life in the state?

Is the governments exclusive function to police the individual rights of people, and aside from that theyre on their own.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Varadkar's attitude about those worse off is unbecoming of a national leader.
With Welfare, we saw him concentrate on fraud, with homelessness we see him use bad data to downplay the crisis.
Then we have apologists within his own party and in daily life vetting and judging people like they may or may not be less worthy of concern based on their bad luck or illness. It's all very despicable.
Yes we'll always have a homeless element, but presiding over many years as it gets worse, likely heavily linked to your own policies, to come along and down play it with spin, is a disgrace. Based on the government policy of using tax payer money for hostels/hotels/B&B's and rent subsidies as a quick costly fix, shows an inability or unwillingness to manage the states finances in that regard.
Varadkar and all levels of government have a duty not to add to or dismiss the problem.

Would you rather they were left to themselves and not housed in B & Bs, hotels and the new hubs? The Government are doing something. They are taking people off the streets if they want. What type of home should be provided for a homeless person? A one, two or three bedroom house? An apartment? Where are these to be built? In the back end of beyond? In O’Connell Street?

ZeroThreat

Consonata wrote: »

Some of these people cannot help themselves, due to a variety of social circumstances such as mental health, addiction etc.

Does the state not have a duty of care to these people?

If we say it does, then the usual neo liberal suspects start whinging about the 'nanny state'.

Wheeliebin30

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Varadkar's attitude about those worse off is unbecoming of a national leader.
With Welfare, we saw him concentrate on fraud, with homelessness we see him use bad data to downplay the crisis.
Then we have apologists within his own party and in daily life vetting and judging people like they may or may not be less worthy of concern based on their bad luck or illness. It's all very despicable.
Yes we'll always have a homeless element, but presiding over many years as it gets worse, likely heavily linked to your own policies, to come along and down play it with spin, is a disgrace. Based on the government policy of using tax payer money for hostels/hotels/B&B's and rent subsidies as a quick costly fix, shows an inability or unwillingness to manage the states finances in that regard.
Varadkar and all levels of government have a duty not to add to or dismiss the problem.

For the tenth time, I think we get your point.

Varadkar's attitude about those worse off is unbecoming of a national leader.
With Welfare, we saw him concentrate on fraud, with homelessness we see him use bad data to downplay the crisis.
Then we have apologists within his own party and in daily life vetting and judging people like they may or may not be less worthy of concern based on their bad luck or illness. It's all very despicable.
Yes we'll always have a homeless element, but presiding over many years as it gets worse, likely heavily linked to your own policies, to come along and down play it with spin, is a disgrace. Based on the government policy of using tax payer money for hostels/hotels/B&B's and rent subsidies as a quick costly fix, shows an inability or unwillingness to manage the states finances in that regard.
Varadkar and all levels of government have a duty not to add to or dismiss the problem.

markodaly

The issue of housing will be arguably the biggest domestic issue to beset the nation for the next few years. Supply is the biggest issue here. Also, though is planning. Irish people want lots of houses but don't want high rise, so what do we do?

MayoSalmon wrote: »

No they don't. Why would they?! The role of government is to ensure the individual rights of its citizens as written into the constitution.

It's up to society as a whole to look after it's citizen's that may not be as well of as some. We can do that how we have been doing that for years through private and voluntary charity.

It is not the role of the state to provide that.

it is the job of the state to provide that. private and voluntary charity is not enough

Consonata wrote: »

Some of these people cannot help themselves, due to a variety of social circumstances such as mental health, addiction etc.

Does the state not have a duty of care to these people?

I agree that they are victims of circumstance but the Government cannot be blamed totally. One now deceased homeless person went through a couple of properties before dying on the street. He’d gotten help from all quarters but it was all in vain. One can lead a horse to water....

MayoSalmon

Consonata wrote:

Does the state not have a duty of care to these people?

No they don't. Why would they?! The role of government is to ensure the individual rights of its citizens as written into the constitution.

It's up to society as a whole to look after it's citizen's that may not be as well of as some. We can do that how we have been doing that for years through private and voluntary charity.

It is not the role of the state to provide that.

Consonata

Deleted User wrote:

Not if it means taking responsibility for themselves by refraining from drinking or taking drugs.

Some of these people cannot help themselves, due to a variety of social circumstances such as mental health, addiction etc.

Does the state not have a duty of care to these people?

McMurphy

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Have to laugh at the suggestions that landlords are fgs pals or some other rabble.

You'd have to wonder where people get such crazy ideas to be honest.

One in four TDs is a landlord, the latest Dail register of interests has revealed. Of 158 deputies, 42 (26.5%) have declared themselves as landlords, with Fine Gael having the highest proportion — 18 of its 50 TDs (36%) have an income from renting out property or land.

One-third of Fianna Fail’s 45 TDs are landlords, including Stephen Donnelly, the party’s newest recruit. Only two of Sinn Fein’s 23 TDs have that status, while former environment minister Alan Kelly is the only one of seven Labour TDs to register as such.

source

SEPT 23 1989

This new homelessness narrative coming from the government spin doctors is a nasty turn of events and I am far from left wing

Consonata

FreudianSlippers wrote:

People may dislike the fact that homelessness exists, but when viewed comparatively we're no worse than any other nations. Nobody on the "society" side seems to be aware of the fact that building massive amounts of social housing isn't going to solve homelessness in the slightest.

Its disingenous to compare statistics on homeless as different countries have hugely varied definitions on what it is to be homeless.

Take Japan for example. Statistically, it is stated by their government that they have low levels of homelessness, however many in japan do not own a home and instead book into internet Cafes and hostels for near nothing and aren't recognised on the homelessness figures.

Varadker knew what he was saying was misleading, and fundamentally dishonest. It was just fodder for his base. Nothing more.

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Have to laugh at the suggestions that landlords are fgs pals or some other rabble.

FG have basically made thousands of landlords actually sell up because of all the new rules.

Landlords are pissed at them.

if one wishes to rent out their property they must conform to a high standard and abide by the rules. if they don't wish to do any of that then they don't get to rent their property.
the private rental market and the hotel and hostel market has benefeted hugely from tax payer support in the form of subsidies to house social tenants.

Wanderer78

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Have to laugh at the suggestions that landlords are fgs pals or some other rabble.

FG have basically made thousands of landlords actually sell up because of all the new rules.

Landlords are pissed at them.

rarely agree with you but i will on this one, its an absolute mess, and its not gonna improve

Wheeliebin30

Have to laugh at the suggestions that landlords are fgs pals or some other rabble.

FG have basically made thousands of landlords actually sell up because of all the new rules.

Landlords are pissed at them.

johnnyskeleton

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Agreed, taking one example from a commonly agreed, very complex issue, just because it suits your narrative is a little disingenuous. Sorry.

Mod note:

This is not the place for point scoring or oneupmanship.

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you honestly think having a home would have made any difference to Jack Watson? His issues were very complex and building or buying a house for him wouldn't have been the solution.

Deleted User wrote: »

...
Then you have the likes of Erica Fleming, who refused to leave hotel accommodation until she got what she wanted.

Agreed, taking one example from a commonly agreed, very complex issue, just because it suits your narrative is a little disingenuous. Sorry.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Grand, or;

A big problem with the homeless crises is the number of vested interests, ie Fine Gael. How many of them are paying their "landlords/Hotels/B&B's". This money could be better spent - on the public by helping to provide affordable accommodation owned by the state.
Then you have the likes of Jack Watson, who died sleeping outside a shop.
Homelessness is an industry in itself. It will always be with us. Screaming for more homes to be built is futile, as there is money to be made by landlords/hotels and B&B's keeping things as is.

Do you honestly think having a home would have made any difference to Jack Watson? His issues were very complex and building or buying a house for him wouldn't have been the solution.

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry there boss I missed your nom for govt

We all know you have one let's hear it

Social housing rather than dead money on hotels/B&B's/rent subsidies, buying from the market etc. I don't care which government, preferably the current.

What's yours?

McMurphy

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry there boss I missed your nom for govt

We all know you have one let's hear it

This is a classic deflection tactic.

When a crisis is being discussed, wheel out the "name a better alternative govt" line.

How's about just demanding better from the govt already there?

Did I read somewhere that the state is currently throwing €2m a week to the hotel/b&b and private landlords to try and solve the problem? I'm no quantity surveyor, but that's surely better put towards constructing social housing, than enriching private individuals, No?

Trying to downplay and normailse a homeless epidemic is a new low for the state.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It absolutely does. McVerry explained the fact that Varadkar used figures derived from a different measuring method to our own.
What do you read as up for debate in that factual reality?

It's a case of flinging the government's muck back at it.
There is a lot of value in calling out fudged figures on a national crisis, used to downplay a national crisis by the political leader of the country. Most certainly. If some are content to let false narratives be spun to deflect and downplay real serious issues, that's sad and has us with the caliber of politician we have.

Sorry there boss I missed your nom for govt

We all know you have one let's hear it