Tell me how wrote: » Once again, your being misleading in suggesting its only occasional. You should read the EPA report on it. Of course, the solution is more money and thanks to abandonment of water charges, that might be slow in coming. Of course perfectly operating public schemes should be better. We don't have them.
Luka Lemon Town wrote: » I assume you are both very very strongly against all forms of social housing, given that it esentially means a free or subsidised to almsot nothing cost to fairly significant number of people. Rural people do pay for their homes and while the actual building itself naturally costs less due to alreading owning the land or land costs being lower they do pay more to run the house in having water charges, paying to manage their own sewage, higher electricty costs, most likley BB costs will be higher also. Nobody in this country pays the "actual" cost for their services, that's not how a functioning society works and the sooner people raelise this and that they can't impose their way of living on other people the better. Postal services, roads, homecare, fibre BB and schools are required regardless as there is always a decent proportion of people who have to live rurally be they farmers, farm businesses or providing various different services to the area. So depopulating rural areas just makes the provision of these services more expensive. Also just so you know the road to our house was improved quite a few years ago with a significant proportion of the costs being coverd by the people living there. Aside from the surfacing all other works were also done by ourselves and the other locals such as making corners safer and widening some sections. Its 5 mins drive to a thriving school which has been more than doubled in size with a massive extension in the last 5 years so I'm safe enough there. 25km from a city centre, 5km from a town (with a very busy bank branch) and 15km from a big county town. I think I'm safe enough there for both hospital and banking - not that I even need to go to the bank except on very very rare occasions. I never said I wanted shops or pubs within walking disance, in fact I very much wouldn't want them. Due to having a farm at home I (and a lot of other people from rural areas) would always get "needs planning" even if (and its very big if) something was brought in to stop people from building in rural areas.
Zebra3 wrote: » I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of posters on here who live in Dublin agree that there is far too many cars crawling around Dublin spewing out pollution. And most want improved public transport and cycling networks. So I’ve no idea what your point is.
cgcsb wrote: » Cars in Dublin are 3 or 4 weeks from being seriously curtailed. ASide from that Car usage in Central Dublin has fallen by over a third in 20 years. Car usage per person is low, and a lot lower than it is in rural areas, but you know that.
cgcsb wrote: » Young single people don't want to share semi-Ds with 4 other young single people in the burbs, they want small personal spaces in central locations. By forcing them into the semi-Ds the price of the family home goes higher.
cgcsb wrote: » Urban schemes have primary, secondary and some have tertiary treatment and effluent is typically of high quality. There are occasionally spills, sometimes during storm events for example but many urban schemes now have overflow tanks to account for that and more overflow tanks are being built. Even after a spill from an urban scheme typically that water will have at least completed primary treatment and much of it's secondary treatment. So to answer your question, yes even if one takes into account the occasional overspill due to storms effluent from water treatment schemes is ALWAYS better than primary-only septic tanks.
jmayo wrote: » My point is that a poster was trying to put it that all the car pollution and car emitted carbon was done to people living in rural areas when a huge chunk of it is down to people in urban areas, particularly when stuck in traffic. But I would guess you could have got that inference anyway.
bk wrote: BTW interestingly rural Ireland has significantly worse air quality then urban Ireland, happy to pull up the stats for you if you need.
Tell me how wrote: » Please do.
cgcsb wrote: » There is no social benefit to subsidisng your one man ship in the middle of nowhere in fact it's a social negative given you'll be driving your, quite large I'm sure, vehicle to your nearest out of town retail park to buy frozen fare from a german retailer then come home home and pollute the water table with your untreated effluent.
pilly wrote: » You don't "have" a farm, mammy and daddy do Nox.
Luka Lemon Town wrote: » What about the social benefit of keeping families living beside each other and maintaining the community spirit in an area by having the next generation still living there. Not only is it desirable to have family love close to each other but there are also massive advantages such as the childcare provided, looking after elderly relatives etc etc. Rural Ireland is such a great place because of the people that live there, take them away and yiu having nothing really.
bk wrote: Mostly caused by the lack of smokey coal ban in rural areas, versus it banned in cities.
Luka Lemon Town wrote: » What about the social benefit of keeping families living beside each other and maintaining the community spirit in an area by having the next generation still living there. Not only is it desirable to have family love close to each other but there are also massive advantages such as the childcare provided, looking after elderly relatives etc etc. Rural Ireland is such a great place because of the people that live there, take them away and yiu having nothing really. As for septic tank pollution, the water in our area is excellent there is absolutely no pollution from septic tanks and we have a very high water table in our area so is a very good example to use also. Not the most well though out response ever, where are you assuming the farm is going to "disappear" to?
Tell me how wrote: » You're reading the data incorrectly. It applies a scale of 1-10, good to bad. Most rural western areas fall into category 1, all other areas category 3. Even in the west urban areas still are level 3.
bk wrote: You are looking at a current snapshot of the data. You need to dig into the raw data over time to get the results.
John_Rambo wrote: » 99% of Nox’s posts are irrelevant on this thread, in fact most seem to be boastful posts about his imaginary ostentatious house, the rest of his posts seem to be sneering and looking down at people the dwell in more modest homes that actually exist. Either way, he's to inherit the family farm in Galway, so he’s a food producer with a connection to the land and therefore needs and should live rural.
Tell me how wrote: » Agreed. But that doesn't mean some element of rural living is reasonable. Or else we just take the population of Ireland, put everyone into a space the size of Kildare and abandon the rest of the country. It is achievable, population of country is smaller than London and Kildare is bigger than London's footprint.
pilly wrote: I don't see anyone suggesting that people shouldn't live rurally. They're suggesting that one off houses scattered all over the country doesn't work, which it doesn't. Simple.
Tell me how wrote: » Obviously it's not that simple though is it Pilly. Of course it is, if you agree with it. Like any argument.
John_Rambo wrote: » pilly wrote: » You don't "have" a farm, mammy and daddy do Nox. 99% of Nox’s posts are irrelevant on this thread, in fact most seem to be boastful posts about his imaginary ostentatious house, the rest of his posts seem to be sneering and looking down at people the dwell in more modest homes that actually exist. Either way, he's to inherit the family farm in Galway, so he’s a food producer with a connection to the land and therefore needs and should live rural.
Topgear on Dave wrote: » John_Rambo wrote: » 99% of Nox’s posts are irrelevant on this thread, in fact most seem to be boastful posts about his imaginary ostentatious house, the rest of his posts seem to be sneering and looking down at people the dwell in more modest homes that actually exist. Either way, he's to inherit the family farm in Galway, so he’s a food producer with a connection to the land and therefore needs and should live rural. If this is like some family farms I know, there will be some row if the brother inherits it. :pac::D
Mick ah wrote: » Full disclosure. I'm against one of houses (most of the time). I'm pro town/village/city. Whatever helps create communities and car dependency. However you are right. If the man is actually going to farm then he should be allowed build on the land to facilitate doing business. However, why not make it so that one has to build right beside your parents house, or else attach to it. The object here is to facilitate individuals running a farm etc. Not to allow them to abuse local needs planning.
Sam Russell wrote: If the resale of the new dwelling was restricted for 25 years, say, or only with the permission of the planning authority, it would make 'valuable road frontage' and selling sites a thing of the past.
pilly wrote: » I thought there already was rules around that no?
Deleted User wrote: » This from Dev Jr.http://connachttribune.ie/planning-framework-will-squeeze-life-rural-ireland-487/ Makes me think there is going to be something along the lines of restrictions on how far one off builds can be done outside of towns/villages. What baffles me though, is this type of restriction would serve to grow rural towns and villages, not wipe them out
pilly wrote: » Oh look, the fact that the second line in that article is about the GAA makes me disinclined to read any further.
pilly wrote: Oh look, the fact that the second line in that article is about the GAA makes me disinclined to read any further.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b1975299c8e5d4897a60061c4f145b7.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/23af546224513cf852af4d456d68d01c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
