Homelessness: The disgrace that is Varadkar and the Government

oscarBravo · 21-11-2017 10:57PM

Idbatterim wrote: »

You can raise more through increased tax...

Sure - as long as it's someone else's taxes that are raised.

blanch152 · 21-11-2017 11:14PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Is that were it gets the money for emergency accommodation? Must be a big sofa be god.

What did we cut for IW consultants? Did we do without water until we had metering in place?
No. It is that Social Housing would be a better plan than emergency accommodation and rent subsidies.

You are fudging to suit. Did I say we could re-use money spent?
My point was we found money for consultants at a time when, if Fine Gael are to be believed at all, the economy was way worse than it is now.

We all want to concentrate on Sinn Fein led LA's, (the blaggards).... However, my point, all along, was Varadkar downplayed the housing crisis and has not made any move to tackle it other than more of the same tack that has seen it get worse.

You want to discuss LPT. That's fine.
Seems we are in agreement. Social housing is the way to go and why aren't Fine Gael addressing it? We are debating how to fund it. That's progress. For a minute there I thought people were jumping on me for criticising Fine Gael.

I see Varadkar is now suggesting he misheard the question:

He's some chancer

More absolute nonsense.

You seem to believe that because the government found some money one time for one thing, that means they can just magic up some money anytime for your favourite project.

As for the Council reference, it isn't just Sinn Fein, it is a whole bunch of so-called left-wing councillors who are doing everything in their power from cutting LPT to bringing in development plans that don't allow for high-density housing in order to ensure that the homeless are left on the street. Absolutely disgusting hypocrisy from them.

Idbatterim · 21-11-2017 11:34PM

oscarBravo wrote: »

Sure - as long as it's someone else's taxes that are raised.

Laughable. You can't raise the the pathetic lpt. The minuscule joke that hundreds of thousands of low paid workers pay in direct taxes (which is far less than other countries). Have you noticed the hospitality industry are creaming it back in? I think adjusting it back to the old rate would raise 3 billlion odd. and if you fancy a dick measuring contest you can come back to me when your efforts contribute 50,000k a year or thereabouts to revenue! Is that enough for me to have an opinion ? I know exactly who is getting done here and who isn't. The highish and high earners here are bent over backwards to the benefit of everyone else! That's politics. Not about fairness, they just make up probably a single digit percentage of the electorate.

They should be working on reducing the cost of living particularly on housing. Taking more out of the tax net is madness. It also makes very little difference to people's income, they pay in virtually nothing anyway...

Also you'll probably find it hard to believe that someone running a business doesn't support fg. Or no longer does. They are a disgrace. I cannot believe how bad the housing crisis in Dublin is , a recent staff member who moved here recently , living on a couch for the last two months said he would never have moved here if he knew how bad it would be. I've mates on 45 k or thereabouts living at home as it's better than the alternatives. Ie paying e1500 ex bills a month to live on your own in an average area in an average apartment. They don't give a **** local and national government, because they themselves their family and cronies aren't dealing with the effects of it.

Third world transport system. Appalling planning practices. You could write a book on it. We are twenty years behind Europe minimum in certain areas.

Good loser · 22-11-2017 02:03AM

Idbatterim wrote: »

Laughable. You can't raise the the pathetic lpt. The minuscule joke that hundreds of thousands of low paid workers pay in direct taxes (which is far less than other countries). Have you noticed the hospitality industry are creaming it back in? I think adjusting it back to the old rate would raise 3 billlion odd. and if you fancy a dick measuring contest you can come back to me when your efforts contribute 50,000k a year or thereabouts to revenue! Is that enough for me to have an opinion ? I know exactly who is getting done here and who isn't. The highish and high earners here are bent over backwards to the benefit of everyone else! That's politics. Not about fairness, they just make up probably a single digit percentage of the electorate.

They should be working on reducing the cost of living particularly on housing. Taking more out of the tax net is madness. It also makes very little difference to people's income, they pay in virtually nothing anyway...

Also you'll probably find it hard to believe that someone running a business doesn't support fg. Or no longer does. They are a disgrace. I cannot believe how bad the housing crisis in Dublin is , a recent staff member who moved here recently , living on a couch for the last two months said he would never have moved here if he knew how bad it would be. I've mates on 45 k or thereabouts living at home as it's better than the alternatives. Ie paying e1500 ex bills a month to live on your own in an average area in an average apartment. They don't give a **** local and national government, because they themselves their family and cronies aren't dealing with the effects of it.

Third world transport system. Appalling planning practices. You could write a book on it. We are twenty years behind Europe minimum in certain areas.

There are plenty houses in Dublin to rent at 2k to 3k per annum.
Shared between 4 that's €500 to €750 per month each.

Good loser · 22-11-2017 02:15AM

blanch152 wrote: »

More absolute nonsense.

You seem to believe that because the government found some money one time for one thing, that means they can just magic up some money anytime for your favourite project.

As for the Council reference, it isn't just Sinn Fein, it is a whole bunch of so-called left-wing councillors who are doing everything in their power from cutting LPT to bringing in development plans that don't allow for high-density housing in order to ensure that the homeless are left on the street. Absolutely disgusting hypocrisy from them.

Excellent post.

Anybody who supports the abolition of water charges has no moral authority to criticise the spend on housing by the Govt.

As J Ganesh said in today's IT 'When easy sounding ideas (in politics) do not happen, it is because they are not easy'.

Paraphrasing him 'Varadkar's critics are not knaves, they are just wafflers'.

FreudianSlippers · 22-11-2017 02:10PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I don't follow the logic here.

What does the State not having money for social housing have to do with "Mr. O'Brien" or zero hour contracts?

You should read back for context.
The public were criticised for not supporting/being able to afford the double charge for water, which included a fat contract to a non-resident, who doesn't pay for his water at either the front or back end. Yet we are to take on board that the state which also spent millions on consultants for IW and Fine Gael crony appointments, 'we look after our own', in short we are to accept that the government 'can't pay, won't pay' for Social Housing and leave it at that.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Ok... where do we find the money?

The same place we fund emergency accommodation, where we got the money for Irish Water consultants? It can be found. They find it every day.

Just because there's less profit for private concerns in social housing than there is in the governments current practice, doesn't mean it's the best deal for the tax payer. With social Housing, we would build housing stock and not be so reliant on the private market, a market which is kept in profit by the tax payer.

As my question has gone unanswered and I've answered yours;
Let's not be distracted, what is so great about the current government, and previous government, overseeing a worsening record breaking homeless crisis that leads you to believe they are on the right track to tackling it?

But you haven't actually answered my question; you've engaged in vague whataboutery without actually addressing the issue that this money doesn't exist.

As an aside, I have seen no evidence to support that this is "record breaking" homeless crisis at all.

TheDoc · 22-11-2017 02:16PM

Don't know how people keep falling for it, I guess it's the desperation for an actual functioning leader or functioning government.

When he came on the scene, seemed to be pretty modern and I liked his directness and no bull**** on certain things, but then you quickly realise he's just another TD and politician that sounds great in opposition, where its easy, to then become a bit of a bluffer and spoof when it comes to actually taking action and making the hard decisions. Kenny was the same, as have so many.

Been a general sad state of affairs for so long now. I tend to just look after me and my own, and roll my eyes or just tut at the general state of our politics and politicians.

22-11-2017 02:23PM

TheDoc wrote: »

I tend to just look after me and my own, and roll my eyes or just tut at the general state of our politics and politicians.

Id say you are the average regular voter.

James Brown · 22-11-2017 02:38PM

blanch152 wrote: »

More absolute nonsense.

You seem to believe that because the government found some money one time for one thing, that means they can just magic up some money anytime for your favourite project.
....

Your post relies on your assumption.
It can't be any more plain. We were in the throws of a financial crisis and the government had the money for consultants etc. and a dubious metering contract. The point is they seem to have access to money for projects that interest them.
'Can't pay, won't pay' doesn't cut it.

**************

The goal posts are spinning here. When the current policy of using 'emergency' accommodation, renaming it 'family hubs' in a PR effort to normalise it, six or seven years of the same policies towards the crisis, the crisis breaking records ongoing, Varadkar downplaying it with the answer to a question he wasn't asked to put a spin on it; it is quite obvious Fine Gael are not planning on changing direction anytime soon.
Suggesting Social housing is the way to go, is just that.
I believe it is the best option for the tax payer. I know on the surface it upsets some and looks like freebies etc. but we would have housing stock to show. Currently we are spending money to try stem an ever growing tide not to mention cost.
It is not genuine to suggest Fine Gael are obviously, any minute now, going to move away from dependence on emergency accommodation. Ramping up policies they've already been following, looking to the private market, will continue to allow them preside over a worsening crisis, but the right people will continue to make money until we see another crash. I say that because it's the only logic I can see in continuing as they seem set to do.

Idbatterim · 22-11-2017 04:49PM

Good loser wrote: »

Excellent post.

Anybody who supports the abolition of water charges has no moral authority to criticise the spend on housing by the Govt.

As J Ganesh said in today's IT 'When easy sounding ideas (in politics) do not happen, it is because they are not easy'.

Paraphrasing him 'Varadkar's critics are not knaves, they are just wafflers'.

First of all I agree about the water charges! I am not talking about radical reform of welfare or hauling hundreds of thousands back into the tax net! I am talking about what would actually be feasible politically to start making inroads into far more urgent and worthy areas. You are telling me that simply not hiking JSA or JSB each budget is drastic, that not taking more workers out is drastic? nothing should be tinkered with, regards LPT either, all they have to do there, is done nothing and it will generate hundreds of millions more, WOW how drastic! That allowing higher density in dublin for more hotel rooms etc to increase supply and reduce prices for tourists, so that the hospitality rate could be increased back to 13.5% or whatever it was to raise several billion? You dont think thats relatively easy?

The wafflers are in leinster house and the local authorities! But if they i.e. the government think they can solve things problems while doing virtually nothing to change the situation, as is the case. They are even bigger idiots than I already give them credit for!

Your post relies on your assumption.
It can't be any more plain. We were in the throws of a financial crisis and the government had the money for consultants etc. and a dubious metering contract. The point is they seem to have access to money for projects that interest them.
'Can't pay, won't pay' doesn't cut it.

100% look at the bank guarantee as just an example of what they can pull out of their ass when needs be, tens of billions guaranteed if I am not mistaken.The same every budget and particularly in election years. It is as you say Matt, a matter of will and priority for them... Actions speak louder than words!

I am assuming the people defending the clowns in leinster house own their own property or are not in Dublin, because you would feel very different if you were!

blanch152 · 22-11-2017 05:02PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Your post relies on your assumption.
It can't be any more plain. We were in the throws of a financial crisis and the government had the money for consultants etc. and a dubious metering contract. The point is they seem to have access to money for projects that interest them.
'Can't pay, won't pay' doesn't cut it.

**************

The goal posts are spinning here. When the current policy of using 'emergency' accommodation, renaming it 'family hubs' in a PR effort to normalise it, six or seven years of the same policies towards the crisis, the crisis breaking records ongoing, Varadkar downplaying it with the answer to a question he wasn't asked to put a spin on it; it is quite obvious Fine Gael are not planning on changing direction anytime soon.
Suggesting Social housing is the way to go, is just that.
I believe it is the best option for the tax payer. I know on the surface it upsets some and looks like freebies etc. but we would have housing stock to show. Currently we are spending money to try stem an ever growing tide not to mention cost.
It is not genuine to suggest Fine Gael are obviously, any minute now, going to move away from dependence on emergency accommodation. Ramping up policies they've already been following, looking to the private market, will continue to allow them preside over a worsening crisis, but the right people will continue to make money until we see another crash. I say that because it's the only logic I can see in continuing as they seem set to do.

"They seem to have access"

That is a load of rubbish. All of that money was budgeted for in the annual budget, taxes were designated to fund it, allocations were made to government departments to spend it, all part of the normal annual budgeting process.

If you want to spend money on building public housing (which I haven't opposed), then you need to raise that money from taxes or cut something else. You appear to think money can be conjured out of nowhere - the fabled magic money tree, while I prefer to focus on LPT and other measures.

Chips Lovell · 22-11-2017 05:33PM

It's probably worth looking at the numbers to get some perspective.

There's now 91,600 people on waiting lists for local authority housing. That's up 1,728 (around 2 percent form three years ago).

But the big issue is that there's now around 7,000 people officially classed as homeless, with around 4,500 of them in emergency accommodation. We're housing people at a rate of around 5,000 per annum but that means people are being made homeless faster than we can house them by around 2,000 per annum.

So the main priority is getting that number down to more acceptable levels.

According to the National Housing Agency we need a minimum of 81,118 homes to be built annually between 2016 – 2020.

The government's latest promise is that 25,000 houses would be built in both the public and private sector next year, 4,000 of which would be directly built by local authorities.

That's kind of in the ballpark, assuming the government is right in it's projections and the NHA is right in its estimates.

All of this stems from house building, both private and public, pretty much grinding to a halt after the property crash. Before the crash we were building around 5,000 local authority houses a year. Last year we built 638. It's a case of not only getting back up to speed but also making up years of non-activity.

Idbatterim · 22-11-2017 05:39PM

It's probably worth looking at the numbers to get some perspective.

There's now 91,600 people on waiting lists for local authority housing. That's up 1,728 (around 2 percent form three years ago).

the waiting list is one thing, people on ok to good incomes struggling to get anywhere in dublin is a bigger scandal in my opinion! The government can change this pretty quickly if they wanted too and it would cost nothing to change regulations, as they are allegedly going, in fact it will raise revenue! lets see what they come up with!

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/dubliners-spend-55-of-take-home-pay-on-rent-1.3267093

Chips Lovell · 22-11-2017 05:46PM

Every few years, the government is required to do a Housing Needs Assessment, which is basically a tally of all the local authority housing waiting lists. Here's all the recent ones:

1993 - 28,200
1996 - 27,427
1999 - 39,176
2002 - 48,413
2005 - 42,946
2008 - 56,249
2011 - 98,318
2013 - 89,872
2016 - 91,600

The real jump came in 2011 and you may have been able to predict a crisis would happen if the economy picked up but construction didn't.

James Brown · 22-11-2017 05:49PM

blanch152 wrote: »

"They seem to have access"

That is a load of rubbish. All of that money was budgeted for in the annual budget, taxes were designated to fund it, allocations were made to government departments to spend it, all part of the normal annual budgeting process.

If you want to spend money on building public housing (which I haven't opposed), then you need to raise that money from taxes or cut something else. You appear to think money can be conjured out of nowhere - the fabled magic money tree, while I prefer to focus on LPT and other measures.

I was attempting not to use the term 'they can find' again, lest we have more magic money tree, sofa analogies. Seems 'seems' won't cut it either.
They can appropriate? get? have access to? funds at will when it's of interest.
You are quite mistaken. I think Fine Gael/Labour would disagree that 86m for consultants was planned. If it were, they certainly kept that quiet. The inference that IW couldn't support itself financially even with 100% compliance aside.

The premise being put forward by some is that relying on the private market with emergency accommodation, tax payer subsidies and grants is a stop gap emergency footing. It certainly does not look that way.

As regards LPT, I've already said I'm against it. On second homes or investment properties I believe in this crisis, people should be hammered with tax. Property speculators should be discouraged until the crisis lessens.

You appear to think money can be conjured out of nowhere - the fabled magic money tree, while I prefer to focus on LPT and other measures.

Can you quit this repeated codology? The state has money we don't have to feed the growing crises. We can put some of that financial MacGyverism towards Social Housing. The point is, the government like things as is, IMO.

If I were to suggest to you, put all the homeless families up in B&B's and Hotels, you might ask, 'where would we find the money?' A fair question.
It seems when benefiting private concerns we have all the money in the world, but when looking to assist the public, because there's little private profit in it, some talk of sofa's and magic money trees.

Let's not forget, Fine Gael aren't even talking or seemingly planning Social housing builds on any meaningful effective level, let alone taking the homeless crisis seriously.

oscarBravo · 22-11-2017 06:22PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The point is, the government like things as is, IMO.

That's a bizarre charge. What evidence do you have that the government likes having a homelessness crisis?

Or is this one of those "I don't need evidence, I have an opinion" posts?

22-11-2017 06:28PM

There’s a housing crisis in the UK too. One contributor to a debate on BBC says that the Government can promise any number of homes, but delivering them is a different story. It’s the same here. A proposed development in Dublin met with massive opposition from residents. Even the Socialist party (or whatever they’re calling themselves today) voted against another development recently because it wasn’t big enough! Planning is a minefield. Whatever about finding the money and land.

Obvious Otter · 22-11-2017 06:30PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

It's probably worth looking at the numbers to get some perspective.

There's now 91,600 people on waiting lists for local authority housing. That's up 1,728 (around 2 percent form three years ago).

But the big issue is that there's now around 7,000 people officially classed as homeless, with around 4,500 of them in emergency accommodation. We're housing people at a rate of around 5,000 per annum but that means people are being made homeless faster than we can house them by around 2,000 per annum.

So the main priority is getting that number down to more acceptable levels.

According to the National Housing Agency we need a minimum of 81,118 homes to be built annually between 2016 – 2020.

The government's latest promise is that 25,000 houses would be built in both the public and private sector next year, 4,000 of which would be directly built by local authorities.

That's kind of in the ballpark, assuming the government is right in it's projections and the NHA is right in its estimates.

All of this stems from house building, both private and public, pretty much grinding to a halt after the property crash. Before the crash we were building around 5,000 local authority houses a year. Last year we built 638. It's a case of not only getting back up to speed but also making up years of non-activity.

The government can’t just build all these social houses. We just couldn’t pay for it. The government isn’t going to increase income tax or corporation tax so how exactly can the government afford to subsidise housing for so many people on a massive scale? The housing problem was caused by really poor regulation and still the government expects the private sector to build houses that people can’t afford to buy to an extremely high standard. The Irish electorate need to get real if we are to deal with this crisis.

James Brown · 22-11-2017 06:35PM

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's a bizarre charge. What evidence do you have that the government likes having a homelessness crisis?

No, same sentiment as before. What's bizzare is you adding your own spin.
The record breaking emergency accommodation / homeless crisis and Varadkar ramping up on the same policies of Kenny's time. Either they like things as is or they are incompetent.

Or is this one of those "I don't need evidence, I have an opinion" posts?

Great input.

blanch152 · 22-11-2017 07:08PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I was attempting not to use the term 'they can find' again, lest we have more magic money tree, sofa analogies. Seems 'seems' won't cut it either.
They can appropriate? get? have access to? funds at will when it's of interest.
You are quite mistaken. I think Fine Gael/Labour would disagree that 86m for consultants was planned. If it were, they certainly kept that quiet. The inference that IW couldn't support itself financially even with 100% compliance aside.

I don't want to go over and over this again. However, the simple fact of the matter is that the relevant budget set aside money for the setting up of Irish Water. That included the cost of the consultants. It was voted through by the Dail.

The faux outrage came later.

So the same applies here, you either have to cut some other expenditure or raise some other tax, the budget has been agreed out to end-2018. There is a certain amount of fiscal space uncommitted for 2019.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The premise being put forward by some is that relying on the private market with emergency accommodation, tax payer subsidies and grants is a stop gap emergency footing. It certainly does not look that way.

I don't get what you are saying here. Emergency accommodation will always be needed because we don't have (and we will never have) a supply of empty houses sitting waiting for the next person that becomes homeless.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

As regards LPT, I've already said I'm against it. On second homes or investment properties I believe in this crisis, people should be hammered with tax. Property speculators should be discouraged until the crisis lessens.

Fine, you are a right-wing conservative, opposing taxes on property. I can accept that.

I happen to be a traditional European left-of-centre social democrat with a green tinge who favours taxes on property and usage charges over income tax and would like more done on climate change.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Can you quit this repeated codology? The state has money we don't have to feed the growing crises. We can put some of that financial MacGyverism towards Social Housing. The point is, the government like things as is, IMO.

If I were to suggest to you, put all the homeless families up in B&B's and Hotels, you might ask, 'where would we find the money?' A fair question.
It seems when benefiting private concerns we have all the money in the world, but when looking to assist the public, because there's little private profit in it, some talk of sofa's and magic money trees.

Let's not forget, Fine Gael aren't even talking or seemingly planning Social housing builds on any meaningful effective level, let alone taking the homeless crisis seriously.

The repeated codology is that the state just has money lying around waiting to be spent. Do you think they can just print new Euro notes?

James Brown · 22-11-2017 07:19PM

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't want to go over and over this again. However, the simple fact of the matter is that the relevant budget set aside money for the setting up of Irish Water. That included the cost of the consultants. It was voted through by the Dail.

The faux outrage came later.

So the same applies here, you either have to cut some other expenditure or raise some other tax, the budget has been agreed out to end-2018. There is a certain amount of fiscal space uncommitted for 2019.

I don't get what you are saying here. Emergency accommodation will always be needed because we don't have (and we will never have) a supply of empty houses sitting waiting for the next person that becomes homeless.

Fine, you are a right-wing conservative, opposing taxes on property. I can accept that.

I happen to be a traditional European left-of-centre social democrat with a green tinge who favours taxes on property and usage charges over income tax and would like more done on climate change.

The repeated codology is that the state just has money lying around waiting to be spent. Do you think they can just print new Euro notes?

Your belief people pretended to be outraged is risible.
They generated money for a project. They can do so when it suits.

Emergency accommodation, like homelessness will always be with us. Fine Gael are not effectively working towards making society less reliant on it. That's what I am saying.

You keep inferring I think money is etc. etc. I don't know where Noonan found the money to cut O'Brien a good deal on Siteserv, (sorry Noonan's department, Noonan said he knew nothing). I don't know where the money came from to 'look after our own' by appointing a car driver to the board of IW. Again, they can put the money together if they want to. They don't seem to want to. Money is not the problem, will is.

They would rather play down the crisis than lose profits for the homeless industry, (Hotels/B&B's/grants etc.).

oscarBravo · 22-11-2017 07:24PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No, same sentiment as before. What's bizzare is you adding your own spin.

I don't think you know what "spin" means.

The record breaking emergency accommodation / homeless crisis and Varadkar ramping up on the same policies of Kenny's time. Either they like things as is or they are incompetent.

Well, we'll allow for incompetence as a real possibility. But it's awfully easy to sit behind a keyboard and bitch about what a terrible job other people are doing when there's no pressure on you to solve the same problems.

But the two explanations you've offered are not the only possibilities. I suppose I should be grateful that you've opened your mind to a possibility other than the single ridiculous one you started off with, but why not keep going? Is it possible that the government is trying its best to address an extremely complicated problem with limited resources? Or does that veer too far from your narrative?

Great input.

It could be worse. I could have said something ridiculous about how the government enjoys having a homelessness crisis.

blanch152 · 22-11-2017 07:24PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Your belief people pretended to be outraged is risible.
They generated money for a project. They can do so when it suits.

Emergency accommodation, like homelessness will always be with us. Fine Gael are not effectively working towards making society less reliant on it. That's what I am saying.

You keep inferring I think money is etc. etc. I don't know where Noonan found the money to cut O'Brien a good deal on Siteserv, (sorry Noonan's department, Noonan said he knew nothing). I don't know where the money came from to 'look after our own' by appointing a car driver to the board of IW. Again, they can put the money together if they want to. They don't seem to want to. Money is not the problem, will is.

They would rather play down the crisis than lose profits for the homeless industry, (Hotels/B&B's/grants etc.).

Noonan didn't cut a deal on Siteserv, NAMA did!!! Nama was financed and budgeted for in a particular way and will make a profit by the time it is wound up.

There was a vacancy on the board of IW, who fills it is immaterial, it was funded already!!!!!

You really have no grasp of how government finances work.

James Brown · 22-11-2017 07:36PM

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't think you know what "spin" means. Well, we'll allow for incompetence as a real possibility. But it's awfully easy to sit behind a keyboard and bitch about what a terrible job other people are doing when there's no pressure on you to solve the same problems.

But the two explanations you've offered are not the only possibilities. I suppose I should be grateful that you've opened your mind to a possibility other than the single ridiculous one you started off with, but why not keep going? Is it possible that the government is trying its best to address an extremely complicated problem with limited resources? Or does that veer too far from your narrative? It could be worse. I could have said something ridiculous about how the government enjoys having a homelessness crisis.

I didn't stand for political office.
It is my right to complain if I believe the government are doing a piss poor job at governing. I know FG don't take criticism well, but that's the job they chose. Trying to silence criticism from behind a keyboard is pitiful.
As regards spin, like Varadkar, you are constantly attempting to take the discussion off road. It is not believable that the government is trying it's best. I do not believe they are that stupid. I do however believe private profit is more of a driving force for them. Hence their willing reliance on the private market.

If you truly believe they might be trying their best, (difficult to pin you to a position) you must be very disappointed with them.
Have you an idea as to how we might proceed, or is that me being all Machiavellian by posing a direct question?

I'll give you 'bizarre'; criticising without taking a stand of your own or adding any input. Neither supporting nor criticising the government. Fancy footwork.

However it's spun, the crisis gets worse and emergency accommodation requirements grow and Varadkar is content to downplay.

oscarBravo · 22-11-2017 08:08PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It is my right to complain if I believe the government are doing a piss poor job at governing. I know FG don't take criticism well, but that's the job they chose. Trying to silence criticism from behind a keyboard is pitiful.

Who's trying to silence you? I'm taking issue with some of your dafter claims. You have a right to complain, but you don't have a right to have your complaints uncritically accepted.

It is not believable that the government is trying it's best. I do not believe they are that stupid. I do however believe private profit is more of a driving force for them. Hence their willing reliance on the private market.

The claim of yours that I took issue with is that the government is happy with the current situation. You can try to wriggle away from that one to your heart's content, but it's like the other claim that Revenue couldn't be bothered to collect taxes: far-fetched.

If you truly believe they might be trying their best, (difficult to pin you to a position) you must be very disappointed with them.
Have you an idea as to how we might proceed, or is that me being all Machiavellian by posing a direct question?

I think the government is doing what it thinks is best while balancing competing interests. I think the balance that's found will always be open to criticism, because different people will perceive the balance differently.

I'll give you 'bizarre'; criticising without taking a stand of your own or adding any input. Neither supporting nor criticising the government. Fancy footwork.

I have no problem with criticising the government. I just think that criticism should rise above the level of what's muttered into your eighth pint, and "the government likes the homelessness crisis" falls short of even that level of coherence.

James Brown · 22-11-2017 08:38PM

oscarBravo wrote: »

I have no problem with criticising the government. I just think that criticism should rise above the level of what's muttered into your eighth pint, and "the government likes the homelessness crisis" falls short of even that level of coherence.

Good.

Emergency accommodation figures continue to break records.
The states reliance on the private market to attempt to quell the rise grows.
I think this is an unfortunate state of affairs.
I do not believe reliance on the private market is the way to go. We've been at that for years and the crises simply worsen.
The only reason I can see for this is, at this stage, they have no problem or real concern past lip service, for the crises.
The fact that this takes money from the tax payer and puts it in the pocket of those profiting from the crises is deplorable. FG measures to continue in this vein are foolish.
Varadkar downplaying the homeless crisis by answering a question he wasn't asked, is spin and despicable.

Idbatterim · 22-11-2017 09:26PM

The repeated codology is that the state just has money lying around waiting to be spent. Do you think they can just print new Euro notes?

they decide how 60,000,000,000 a year odd is spent! a spectacular amount of money! of course matt, like you say, sure they have no control over anything :rolleyes: Their lack of urgency on anything has my jaw on the floor. The third world public transport in Dublin is another disgrace, a bit of rain today and the city shuts down!

I do not believe reliance on the private market is the way to go. We've been at that for years and the crises simply worsen.
The only reason I can see for this is, at this stage, they have no problem or real concern past lip service, for the crises.

you absolutely cant blame the private companies for doing what is in their interests. You and I do the same, anyone who says they dont is a hypocrite. That is why the government are 100% responsible for this entire housing scandal. Nobody other than local and national government is reponsible!!!

Also notice how I point out very easy routes to raise more revenue and the other posters here simply ignore them!

22-11-2017 09:44PM

Idbatterim wrote: »

Also notice how I point out very easy routes to raise more revenue and the other posters here simply ignore them!

Like people paying for services they use? Like water? Oh, no, someone else will pay for that. Just let other services suffer. Like housing.

Good loser · 23-11-2017 02:50AM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Good.

Emergency accommodation figures continue to break records.
The states reliance on the private market to attempt to quell the rise grows.
I think this is an unfortunate state of affairs.
I do not believe reliance on the private market is the way to go. We've been at that for years and the crises simply worsen.
The only reason I can see for this is, at this stage, they have no problem or real concern past lip service, for the crises.
The fact that this takes money from the tax payer and puts it in the pocket of those profiting from the crises is deplorable. FG measures to continue in this vein are foolish.
Varadkar downplaying the homeless crisis by answering a question he wasn't asked, is spin and despicable.

Funny in all your confused and confusing posts you rarely resort to numbers. Why is this?

Could you tell us rationalists how much money the Govt should spend directly on social housing in 2018/2019/2020? In millions or billions?

Do you know that in Dublin the average LA house generates €3,000 per year in rent and maintenance on average costs €2,000 per annum. So the net rent to the Council is €1,000 per annum. So every property built by the State in Dublin at a minimum cost of €300,000 a pop is effectively given away to the recipients for free.

And you, who won't pay water charges or LPT, want them to build more and more.

That's either waffling or hypocrisy or both.

Chips Lovell · 23-11-2017 10:53AM

Obvious Otter wrote: »

The government can’t just build all these social houses. We just couldn’t pay for it. The government isn’t going to increase income tax or corporation tax so how exactly can the government afford to subsidise housing for so many people on a massive scale?

No, I'm not suggesting that we can build 91,000 local authority houses straight away. But there's a difference between that and building enough to ease homelessness levels.

Homelessness and affordability are two separate (albeit related issues). And the former takes priority over the latter.

On a separate point, arguing about paying money to private landlords for emergency accommodation is a red herring. We can't turf these people out on the street. We have to keep paying it until more accommodation is built.

Homelessness: The disgrace that is Varadkar and the Government

Comments