Homelessness

david75 · 20-01-2018 05:45PM

Turpentine wrote: »

That's a very disparaging way to speak about the homeless.

There’s nothing disparaging about homeless in there, you could say it’s dosparaging addicts but that wasn’t the intent though you’re interpreting it that way.

AudreyHepburn · 20-01-2018 06:31PM

I think the biggest stumbling block to dealing with homelessness in this country is the inability or refusal in some cases to understand the issues underlying why a person has ended up on the street.

Throwing more money at the problem and building more houses is not going to be enough to solve the problem and the sooner we all understand and accept that the better.

There’s also nothing to be gained from blaming the government for every misfortune.

An addict or and alcoholic living under their own roof is still an addict/alcoholic. They are still prey to the same problems that drove them onto the streets in the first place.

A person’s severe mental illness is not going to magically vanish because you give them home. They too are still vulnerable.

A person without work will not be able to keep a roof over the head without help.

I could go on here but I think my point is clear. If we really are serious about tackling homelessness then we need to start seeing it as a symptom of something else that needs to be dealt with and to then deal with that issue.

Encouraging people to take control of their lives and helping them deal with their problems would go a long to resolving the problem.

Handing out free houses willy nilly will not work.

Rezident · 20-01-2018 07:11PM

Incentives motivate people to behave in a certain way.

When you offer free houses and free hotel accommodation for people e.g. young women - as long as they have a kid - you incentivise these women to have children just to get the free house.

Homeless accommodation should be for the people who have catastrophically lost their job/health etc. of whom there are very few in Ireland at any time.

Ireland is so famous for giving out free houses, free medical care, free money etc. etc. that people are coming from abroad for it now. Why wouldn't they? It's free resources. They wouldn't get that in their own countries because it doesn't make economic sense. In Ireland, the narrative is that it is a social or a welfare issue, when many of these people would not be 'homeless' if there were no free houses and free hotel accommodation up for grabs.

The more you incentivise it, the more 'homeless' people will materialise to absorb the resources. It's not a welfare issue, it's economics.

Grayson · 20-01-2018 07:15PM

Oranage2 wrote: »

Go onto Facebook/social media and you'll see a real sense of entitlement, any problem these people face their first thought is to get the landlord or TD to fix it, while the average Joe soap will think about saving some money and getting it fixed.

These are only vulnerable because they're simple minded leeches.

I don't understand this bit. Since I've moved into my apt my water tank leaked and flooded the place and my washing machine broke. Are you suggesting that I should have paid for all the repairs myself?

You do realise how the landlord/tenant relationship works.

SEPT 23 1989 · 20-01-2018 07:30PM

I find it very sad the parents brothers sisters extended family would leave a member of their family living in hotel room with their children

Galwayguy35 · 20-01-2018 07:55PM

Malayalam wrote: »

Don't feel bad about being unemployed. The civilisation is no longer set up for full employment, it has to have a lower tier that can be scape-goated.

There are so many reasons that people can end up unemployed - ill-health, anxiety, the paucity of meaningful work, location, family troubles etc., and to be scape-goated by other people is so mean. Individuals suffer so much because of the stigma imposed upon them, but they should come out from under that shadow. If people who scape-goat the unemployed (or homeless) would only open their eyes and see truthfully who is actually ripping them off, and consuming the resources etc., then things would be very different. But then we might have societal revolt, and in order to avoid that punch bags are needed.

One only has to look at the incredible transfer of wealth up the pyramid that has been happening over the past decades to know that the poor are not the ones who are the root cause of societies troubles.

Much of the good that people do is not valued, as in given a monetary value (See Rene Guenon's Reign of Quantity - we live in times where quality is regarded far less than quantity)- but if you look at your life, the people you have given an ear to in troubled times, dependents you have cared for, the meals you have cooked for others with care, the smile to a stranger that might have lightened their heart, an infinite number of small but meaningful gestures during your time on this planet that have reached out to fellow beings - you will very likely see that you are very much a net benefactor to the good in the world, a different kind of balance sheet which makes the govt. handout look irrelevant by comparison.

Everyone should be able to aspire towards meaningful work, but in the absence of a place in the official ''labour force'' it is worth keeping the following in mind....
“We should do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian Darwinian theory he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living.”

― R. Buckminster Fuller

Buckminister Fuller sounds like a lazy gobsh1te who wants to live off the backs of working people.

Quite a few seem to have taken his advice in this country.

corner of hells · 20-01-2018 08:01PM

Rezident wrote: »

Incentives motivate people to behave in a certain way.

When you offer free houses and free hotel accommodation for people e.g. young women - as long as they have a kid - you incentivise these women to have children just to get the free house.

Homeless accommodation should be for the people who have catastrophically lost their job/health etc. of whom there are very few in Ireland at any time.

Ireland is so famous for giving out free houses, free medical care, free money etc. etc. that people are coming from abroad for it now. Why wouldn't they? It's free resources. They wouldn't get that in their own countries because it doesn't make economic sense. In Ireland, the narrative is that it is a social or a welfare issue, when many of these people would not be 'homeless' if there were no free houses and free hotel accommodation up for grabs.

The more you incentivise it, the more 'homeless' people will materialise to absorb the resources. It's not a welfare issue, it's economics.

Have you heard of Habitual Residence Condition?
You can't just turn up in Ireland and claim welfare .

hawkelady · 20-01-2018 08:06PM

Is it true that anyone can add their name to this " housing list"?? I mean what's the criteria ... people saying they are on this list years waiting for a house , what if they land a good job or win the lotto in the meantime.

corner of hells · 20-01-2018 08:10PM

hawkelady wrote: »

Is it true that anyone can add their name to this " housing list"?? I mean what's the criteria ... people saying they are on this list years waiting for a house , what if they land a good job or win the lotto in the meantime.

You can apply for social housing , you will have an assessment done.
You may be assessed as with or without priority. For example you could get a medical priority.
You also if homeless will be registered as homeless and advised of your options.
The assessment is to determine whether or not you can afford to provide your own housing.

fattymuatty · 20-01-2018 08:16PM

hawkelady wrote: »

Is it true that anyone can add their name to this " housing list"?? I mean what's the criteria ... people saying they are on this list years waiting for a house , what if they land a good job or win the lotto in the meantime.

Here are the income limits. http://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/migrated-files/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/Housing/table_with_2016_income_limits.pdf

A single person in Dublin for instance can stay on the housing list until they earn 35k net a year.

professore · 20-01-2018 08:55PM

Oranage2 wrote: »

I wrote this in another thread.

There are approx. 8857 recorded homeless people in Ireland, out of these 8857, 150 approximately are sleeping rough though reports have it between
(120-180). So that means that the government is housing 8700 homeless people, and out of the 150 odd people,well there are enough beds for them but they refuse to use them for a variety of reasons, mental health, drugs, safety etc.

These unfortunate people are being helped, of course facilities and education should be forever improving, but what else are you expecting the government to do?

The government already houses them temporarily (while also offering them a more permanent home), gives them money for food and clothes for themselves and their family, educates their children and also provides free medical care.

Go onto Facebook/social media and you'll see a real sense of entitlement, any problem these people face their first thought is to get the landlord or TD to fix it, while the average Joe soap will think about saving some money and getting it fixed.

These are only vulnerable because they're simple minded leeches.

I pass more than 50 people sleeping rough in Cork city in a 10 minute walk through a few streets from the bus stop to the office in the morning so I'd say 150 in the whole country is way off.

ThunbergsAreGo · 20-01-2018 09:05PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I find it very sad the parents brothers sisters extended family would leave a member of their family living in hotel room with their children

100% but it's never ever asked

"so your parents must be pretty heartless to let you live like that"

Pero_Bueno · 20-01-2018 09:19PM

Delaney Plain Sledgehammer wrote: »

I think more should be done to help homelessness as in address the reason they're homeless. Why are people having children when they have nowhere to live? There's absolutely no sense of personal responsibility just a sheer sense of entitlement. By all means have a family but it's only fair you can provide the basic nessessities such as shelter food and clothing.

That's exactly it, entitlement culture.
People have no personal responsibility , child benefit should be cut after the second child too, if you can't afford to support having small football teams than don't do so and expect the rest of society to foot the bill.

anewme · 20-01-2018 09:22PM

Homeless to me are rough sleepers. These people need help and but have complex issues and there are no easy solutions.

The crowd like Apollo House and those camping out in Hotels to get a free house and Erica Fleming are grab all’s that take away from genuine people.

Don’t have five kids if you can’t pay for them.

Too many ppl looking for handouts.

It’s not genuine.

corner of hells · 20-01-2018 09:38PM

Pero_Bueno wrote: »

Delaney Plain Sledgehammer wrote: »

I think more should be done to help homelessness as in address the reason they're homeless. Why are people having children when they have nowhere to live? There's absolutely no sense of personal responsibility just a sheer sense of entitlement. By all means have a family but it's only fair you can provide the basic nessessities such as shelter food and clothing.

That's exactly it, entitlement culture.
People have no personal responsibility , child benefit should be cut after the second child too, if you can't afford to support having small football teams than don't do so and expect the rest of society to foot the bill.

That escalated pretty fast ,just cut child benefit after the second child ?
How bouts we assess people's means and see do they actually need child benefit rather than targeting vulnerable groups in society.

david75 · 20-01-2018 09:42PM

corner of hells wrote: »

That escalated pretty fast ,just cut child benefit after the second child ?
How bouts we assess people's means and see do they actually need child benefit rather than targeting vulnerable groups in society.

Doesn’t every mother with a child in the state get children’s allowance?
Even those considered well to do and don’t actually need it?
Did they review that? Seem to remember it being a thing a few years ago.
Did anything happen?

splinter65 · 20-01-2018 09:43PM

Oranage2 wrote: »

Must be true so...

I would definitley take the word of two people living in tents in the park over a poster who has consistently truthfully and believably told of hiscexperiences work ing in hostels.....

hawkelady · 20-01-2018 09:49PM

david75 wrote: »

corner of hells wrote: »

That escalated pretty fast ,just cut child benefit after the second child ?
How bouts we assess people's means and see do they actually need child benefit rather than targeting vulnerable groups in society.

Doesn’t every mother with a child in the state get children’s allowance?
Even those considered well to do and don’t actually need it?
Did they review that? Seem to remember it being a thing a few years ago.
Did anything happen?

AFAIK only one person in the state has written to the dept to say they do not need the children's allowance and won't be accepting it any more. No it's not bono !!

Micheal o Leary wrote the letter

corner of hells · 20-01-2018 09:49PM

splinter65 wrote: »

Oranage2 wrote: »

Must be true so...

I would definitley take the word of two people living in tents in the park over a poster who has consistently truthfully and believably told of hiscexperiences work ing in hostels.....

No I wouldnt trust me either.

david75 · 20-01-2018 09:59PM

hawkelady wrote: »

AFAIK only one person in the state has written to the dept to say they do not need the children's allowance and won't be accepting it any more. No it's not bono !!

Micheal o Leary wrote the letter

That makes sense. He probably charges his kids for rent. And everything else

Just a shame to see everyone getting tarred with the same brush. Sure there are chancers in every situation but when you see every single homeless person getting tarnished because of them few chancers it’s a kicker.
We seem to focus on the chancers rather than the vast majority who do need help and some understanding. We’re shutting down and branding them all scam artists. It’s crap

Mrs OBumble · 20-01-2018 10:22PM

naughtb4 wrote: »

100% but it's never ever asked

"so your parents must be pretty heartless to let you live like that"

Being in the hotel room makes them higher priority to get a "forever home". Also in many cases extended family will already be in social housing and so not allowed to have more people move in than the house can adequately house.

Re child benefit: yes its paid for every kid in fhe state, regardless of the parents means. Tje argument for this is that if you try targetted, the kids who most need it are the ones who miss out because their parents are less likelyto apply (due to low literacy, chaotic lives, etc).

Assetbacked · 21-01-2018 01:51AM

corner of hells wrote: »

That escalated pretty fast ,just cut child benefit after the second child ?
How bouts we assess people's means and see do they actually need child benefit rather than targeting vulnerable groups in society.

So having a second child makes someone automatically vulnerable? Your starting point should be skepticism.

corner of hells · 21-01-2018 01:55AM

Assetbacked wrote: »

corner of hells wrote: »

That escalated pretty fast ,just cut child benefit after the second child ?
How bouts we assess people's means and see do they actually need child benefit rather than targeting vulnerable groups in society.

So having a second child makes someone automatically vulnerable? Your starting point should be skepticism.

The child is vulnerable. Not the parent.

ThunbergsAreGo · 21-01-2018 09:03AM

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

naughtb4 wrote: »

100% but it's never ever asked

"so your parents must be pretty heartless to let you live like that"

Being in the hotel room makes them higher priority to get a "forever home".

So a homeless by choice?

NIMAN · 21-01-2018 09:05AM

There's been a few stories recently about how houses in Dublin are now out of reach of the average family, and how the commuting circle is widening to 100km from Dublin.

I think about all these people working, struggling to get by and having to drive big distances to work, while all the non-contributors to society are getting housed in and around Dublin.

21-01-2018 10:22AM

david75 wrote: »

Doesn’t every mother with a child in the state get children’s allowance?
Even those considered well to do and don’t actually need it?
Did they review that? Seem to remember it being a thing a few years ago.
Did anything happen?

Children's allowance is one of the few things working people get back for the truck load of taxes they pay which supports those who don't, won't or can't work. If someone is a multimillionaire they should get the children's allowance just as much as a person who has nothing, they are the ones paying for it after all.

Assetbacked · 21-01-2018 10:31AM

corner of hells wrote: »

The child is vulnerable. Not the parent.

In a system that creates incentives to having kids, in a society where we do not need more kids, there should be a limit on State assistance. The education is there so the having of children can be planned very easily. People should not be paid for being irresponsible, regardless of the indirect consequence of the children suffering. It’s not a nanny state.

corner of hells · 21-01-2018 10:51AM

Assetbacked wrote: »

corner of hells wrote: »

The child is vulnerable. Not the parent.

In a system that creates incentives to having kids, in a society where we do not need more kids, there should be a limit on State assistance. The education is there so the having of children can be planned very easily. People should not be paid for being irresponsible, regardless of the indirect consequence of the children suffering. It’s not a nanny state.

You missed my point.

suicide_circus · 21-01-2018 10:56AM

NIMAN wrote: »

There's been a few stories recently about how houses in Dublin are now out of reach of the average family, and how the commuting circle is widening to 100km from Dublin.

I think about all these people working, struggling to get by and having to drive big distances to work, while all the non-contributors to society are getting housed in and around Dublin.

We do not reward or incentivise effort in this country.
Some how the human right of "adequate shelter" has morphed into "free house or apartment within the area of your choice near your family and open to refusal if it doesn't suit you and you can stay in a hotel for free until then". If youre a young working person (the economic engine of the entire economy for the next few decades) however you get no assistance whatsoever with little of no prospect of living where you want and certainly no prospect of buying where you want. It's all backwards and deeply deeply wrong.

Galwayguy35 · 21-01-2018 11:04AM

NIMAN wrote: »

There's been a few stories recently about how houses in Dublin are now out of reach of the average family, and how the commuting circle is widening to 100km from Dublin.

I think about all these people working, struggling to get by and having to drive big distances to work, while all the non-contributors to society are getting housed in and around Dublin.

And these are the folks who keep the country going through their taxes but never seem to get anything back in any budget.

Yet work shy parasites are looking to be housed in Dublin city centre.

Homelessness

Comments