Tiny number of social units being built:

Cyrus · 17-06-2018 07:20AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

hehe.

What’s the joke ?

erica74 · 17-06-2018 07:55AM

The easiest solution to the problem is to stop allowing any tenant stay in social housing long term. These houses are supposedly for people down on their luck, in need of assistance, yet, you have people living in them for their whole lives because they are given the opportunity to buy their house, this shouldn't be allowed. Each house should be let out to a person for a set period of time, during which they are monitored to ensure they are applying for jobs, attending interviews etc and then, once they are back on their feet, they are given notice to leave and should find a place of their own to rent or buy.

Graces7 · 17-06-2018 08:56AM

Cyrus wrote: »

You should be able to make your point without resorting to that kind of language

So can I summarise that expletive laden rant to the man is out to get you? Or something to that effect?

You beat me to it. I no longer read posts like that . Thank you

Graces7 · 17-06-2018 08:58AM

erica74 wrote: »

The easiest solution to the problem is to stop allowing any tenant stay in social housing long term. These houses are supposedly for people down on their luck, in need of assistance, yet, you have people living in them for their whole lives because they are given the opportunity to buy their house, this shouldn't be allowed. Each house should be let out to a person for a set period of time, during which they are monitored to ensure they are applying for jobs, attending interviews etc and then, once they are back on their feet, they are given notice to leave and should find a place of their own to rent or buy.

Where does that idea come from, please? That is not the case. They are not short term emergency accommodation but permanent homes.

And they are not free.

Wanderer78 · 17-06-2018 08:58AM

erica74 wrote:

The easiest solution to the problem is to stop allowing any tenant stay in social housing long term. These houses are supposedly for people down on their luck, in need of assistance, yet, you have people living in them for their whole lives because they are given the opportunity to buy their house, this shouldn't be allowed. Each house should be let out to a person for a set period of time, during which they are monitored to ensure they are applying for jobs, attending interviews etc and then, once they are back on their feet, they are given notice to leave and should find a place of their own to rent or buy.

What if you cannot afford to pay for a house?

Graces7 · 17-06-2018 09:00AM

rosmoke wrote: »

Why would someone who isn't working requires a brand new house?
Till you get back on your feet a room and a bathroom should be enough.
There are plenty people who work for nothing, give all their salary on rent and food, and they keep doing this and don't expect things come for free.

It's scandalous. Work and get nothing, don't work and complain you don't receive a brand new house for free.

Punish those already suffering? back to the workus mentality! And they are NOT FREE!!!!

Eggs For Dinner · 17-06-2018 09:05AM

Cyrus wrote: »

What’s the joke ?

It could be a reference to a report by Daft that Dalkey has the highest average house purchase price in Ireland.

Cyrus · 17-06-2018 09:34AM

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

It could be a reference to a report by Daft that Dalkey has the highest average house purchase price in Ireland.

And I can’t have an opinion on social housing?

Wheeliebin30 · 17-06-2018 09:44AM

Graces7 wrote: »

Punish those already suffering? back to the workus mentality! And they are NOT FREE!!!!

If you are not working and in receipt of welfare from the state in which you use to pay 30 euro a week rent in a 3 bedroom house then yes it is a free house.

You have done nothing to earn that money.

Wanderer78 · 17-06-2018 09:55AM

Wheeliebin30 wrote:

If you are not working and in receipt of welfare from the state in which you use to pay 30 euro a week rent in a 3 bedroom house then yes it is a free house.

Thankfully there's no such thing as indirect taxation in Ireland, things such as consumption taxes etc!

PMBC · 17-06-2018 10:19AM

I dont agree with most of your post but do agree the social housing should not be sold. This was a political 'wheeze'.

whisky_galore · 17-06-2018 10:37AM

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Your examples are communal items available for every citizen to access and use, that's what taxes are for. You want a house? Work and pay for it like most people

People ARE bloody well working but still can't pay for it! They haven't a fcuking hope of ever owning a house the way things are.

Maybe some smart arse will say now that people with jobs in Dublin can afford a house in Roscommon maybe they should do a ball busting commute everyday. :rolleyes:

The 'I'm alright Jack' Ireland as was mentioned earlier.

Cyrus · 17-06-2018 10:39AM

whisky_galore wrote: »

People ARE bloody well working but still can't pay for it! They haven't a fcuking hope of ever owning a house the way things are.

Maybe some smart arse will say now that people with jobs in Dublin can afford a house in Roscommon maybe they should do a ball busting commute everyday. :rolleyes:

The 'I'm alright Jack' Ireland as was mentioned earlier.

As opposed to the I’m not alright so someone else sort it out for me ?

whisky_galore · 17-06-2018 10:45AM

Cyrus wrote: »

As opposed to the I’m not alright so someone else sort it out for me ?

As opposed to putting up with a sh1t quality of life or emigrating to somewhere where you might be within a donkey's roar of owning a place...or renting for a reasonable amount?

Padraig Mor · 17-06-2018 10:47AM

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

If you are not working and in receipt of welfare from the state in which you use to pay 30 euro a week rent in a 3 bedroom house then yes it is a free house.

You have done nothing to earn that money.

Doesn't even need to go to that level. It's nearly impossible to be evicted from social housing for non payment of rent so increasing numbers are not paying it - arrears are huge with the councils . It is in effect an optional payment and for many, their social house is literally a free house.

Wheeliebin30 · 17-06-2018 10:53AM

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Doesn't even need to go to that level. It's nearly impossible to be evicted from social housing for non payment of rent so increasing numbers are not paying it - arrears are huge with the councils . It is in effect an optional payment and for many, their social house is literally a free house.

50 million is owed to the council in Dublin alone I think.

Unbelievable, don’t pay who cares, sure imagine the outrage if they tried to evict a poor vulnerable family.

end of the road · 17-06-2018 10:58AM

erica74 wrote: »

The easiest solution to the problem is to stop allowing any tenant stay in social housing long term. These houses are supposedly for people down on their luck, in need of assistance, yet, you have people living in them for their whole lives because they are given the opportunity to buy their house, this shouldn't be allowed.

i can see the merrits of right to buy and agree with it in theory, but realistically it can't work for places like britain and ireland. so i would agree we probably will have to get rid of it.

erica74 wrote: »

Each house should be let out to a person for a set period of time, during which they are monitored to ensure they are applying for jobs, attending interviews etc and then, once they are back on their feet, they are given notice to leave and should find a place of their own to rent or buy.

if the government encourage the creation of jobs that pay a good wage, bring down the cost of living over all, implement policies that make housing affordible, and so on, then this idea might have some merrit. in saying that, we are never going to have full employment in this country and the aspects to make your suggestion viable will never happen because government has to keep pumping huge amounts of money to the private rental market and hotels, and continue to bury it's head in the sand on every issue.

Cyrus wrote: »

As opposed to the I’m not alright so someone else sort it out for me ?

no, as opposed to the reality that we have a ridiculously high cost of living that needs to be brought down.

Idbatterim · 17-06-2018 11:13AM

Whether the figures here are 100% accurate it even close to it. It’s a disgrace! You simply cannot affird to provide in any way reasonably affordable housing to the average worker with the current low rise, high cost apartment standards currently. A large part of the entire crisis can be fixed cost free at the stroke of a pen. It’s pretty much entirely a planning issue and the government being ideologically opposed to reasonably priced accommodation for the have nots on the the accommodation front, ie non home owners ...

s7ryf3925pivug · 17-06-2018 11:23AM

Social housing in dublin is generally a bad idea.

People who want to work will move themselves and their families to find it, and often have to.

People who want free houses expect to choose their location.

Not generalizing much at all.

The population in Dublin puts immense pressure on infrastructure as well as obviously rents

Wanderer78 · 17-06-2018 11:28AM

Shepherd Black Shoemaker wrote: »

Social housing in dublin is generally a bad idea.

People who want to work will move themselves and their families to find it, and often have to.

People who want free houses expect to choose their location.

Not generalizing much at all.

The population in Dublin puts immense pressure on infrastructure as well as obviously rents

Blaas4life · 17-06-2018 11:30AM

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

50 million is owed to the council in Dublin alone I think.

Unbelievable, don’t pay who cares, sure imagine the outrage if they tried to evict a poor vulnerable family.

Tbf you need only see the contempt the British are held in and what's taught about famine evictions in skool to see why culturally and politically noone will push through evictions

padd b1975 · 17-06-2018 01:27PM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Thankfully there's no such thing as indirect taxation in Ireland, things such as consumption taxes etc!

It doesn't matter how much consumption tax you "pay" if 100% of your income comes directly from exchequer funds without giving nothing back in terms of labour.

Wanderer78 · 17-06-2018 01:28PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

It doesn't matter how much consumption tax you "pay" if 100% of your income comes directly from exchequer funds without giving nothing back in terms of labour.

so we should vilify those that do?

padd b1975 · 17-06-2018 01:35PM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so we should vilify those that do?

I'm not vilifying anyone Comrade.

I just want those that can to do a bit more than claim and complain.

What do you think should be done to tackle the massive rent arrears currently running on the local authority balance sheet?

Wanderer78 · 17-06-2018 01:38PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

I'm not vilifying anyone Comrade.

I just want those that can to do a bit more than claim and complain.

What do you think should be done to tackle the massive rent arrears currently running on the local authority balance sheet?

comrade!

possibly more importantly, what should be done about spiraling house prices in general?

end of the road · 17-06-2018 01:46PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

I'm not vilifying anyone Comrade.

I just want those that can to do a bit more than claim and complain.

What do you think should be done to tackle the massive rent arrears currently running on the local authority balance sheet?

as the LA is a state agency then they could be allowed to take the money at source, from benefits received. now how it could be implemented to work successfully i don't know but i'm sure it could be done.

s7ryf3925pivug · 17-06-2018 01:46PM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

comrade!

possibly more importantly, what should be done about spiraling house prices in general?

Well that’s the point. Providing free/subsidized housing to some people results in less housing available for people who pay, and hence results in higher prices/rents.

padd b1975 · 17-06-2018 01:47PM

end of the road wrote: »

as the LA is a state agency then they could be allowed to take the money at source, from benefits received. now how it could be implemented to work successfully i don't know but i'm sure it could be done.

I agree with this.

Eggs For Dinner · 17-06-2018 01:49PM

whisky_galore wrote: »

People ARE bloody well working but still can't pay for it! They haven't a fcuking hope of ever owning a house the way things are.
.

The problem is that too many people have far too high an expectation of what they are "entitled" to, given their financial circumstances. If you can't earn enough to accommodate 3 kids, a cat, a dog and a goldfish, then don't have those things until you can afford them. Why should the State pay for lifestyle choices?

padd b1975 · 17-06-2018 01:49PM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

comrade!

possibly more importantly, what should be done about spiraling house prices in general?

Not what I asked, typical leftie goalpost moving.

At least you didn't try to play the race card, so I'm grateful for that.

Tiny number of social units being built:

Comments