Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why are the government mixing social housing with private housing?

12357…21

Comments

  • #122
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    Yurt! wrote: »
    What was your excuse the other day when you were prattling on about Cultural Marxism all afternoon? Was that a day off too?

    Nope, I was just on the John. Burrito for lunch.


  • #123
    carolmon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 616 ✭✭✭carolmon


    Gatling wrote: »
    For Dublin City Council residents, rent is calculated as 15% of the principal earner’s weekly income which exceeds €32 if it’s a single person and €64 if it’s a couple.

    €256 pm for a 3 -5 bed property not bad considering people are paying €1700+ on a 2 bed rental property

    You stated rent was capped at €200 per week

    I think you need to do your sums again... it's 15% of assessable income above €64 per couple.

    https://www.thejournal.ie/social-housing-rents-4399149-Dec2018/

    For Dublin City Council residents, rent is calculated as 15% of the principal earner’s weekly income which exceeds €32 if it’s a single person and €64 if it’s a couple.

    After the principal earner is taken into account, it’s another 15% of the income of each subsidiary earner on top of that. Assessable income includes payment for employment or self-employment, any social welfare payments, training allowances and income from pensions.

    Shift allowances, travel allowances, bonuses, commission and overtime are all included.


  • #124
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,503 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Yurt! wrote: »
    No, it's simple economics. Businesses and services (banks, coffee shops, pharmacies) will not open in areas with lower purchasing power - increasing social stratification and leaving those areas without access to amenities and employment opportunities. There's been any amount of studies done on this, so no, not just received wisdom.

    It's got nothing to do with economics, it's pure left wing social engineering

    The kind of people who carry out those studies are invariably left wing ideologues


  • #125
    Yurt2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    14dMoney wrote: »
    Nope, I was just on the John. Burrito for lunch.


    You must have particularly slow bowel movements, because you were at it a while.


  • #126
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,444 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    Yurt! wrote: »
    You must have particularly slow bowel movements, because you were at it a while.

    It's all the booby-milk cheese glueing his intestines up.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    Yurt! wrote: »
    You must have particularly slow bowel movements, because you were at it a while.

    Not slow, just painful, bloody and fractured.


  • #128
    dudara
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,518 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    Moved from AH > CA


  • #129
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    topper75 wrote: »
    So in your take, if we had only just sprinkled Ballymun and Darndale with 'firewalls' of middle class gullible types forking out for what others got handed to them, there would have been no skag, smashed phone kiosks, piebald ponies grazing on rubbish, burned out cars, or perma-welfare tracksuiteers? That is what those areas were missing?

    I love the way the bleeding-hearts basically admit that the problem is these people, yet they think moving Anto and Deco into a 3 bedroom semi-detached in a sleepy suburb, will fix thuggery by osmosis.


  • #130
    Always Tired
    Closed Accounts Posts: 945 ✭✭✭Always Tired


    14dMoney wrote: »
    If you're able-bodied, you've no excuse to be unemployed in this climate.

    Sprry but that's complete BS. If you are stuck in a small town in the likes of Donegal with no car you have slim options. And how do you get a car or money to relocate when barely scraping by?

    I've a college degree, experience in a variety of fields. I'm on my 2nd stint of Jobpath, 18 months on it and they haven't referred me to a single job. I send out apps for the 1-2 min wage jobs you might see advertised and cant even get a response. The only things hiring regularly are hotels and takeaways.

    It's always people who haven't had to suffer unemployment who have this attitude, based purely on their own experience and some waffle stats from the government which is propped up by emigration and CE schemes and Dublin where bunk beds in shared rooms are going for 250 a week.


  • #131
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    A small number of families in social housing estates made it a misery for everyone else living there.

    Some bright spark decided that the buildings themselves were the problem, and the solution was to move the troublemakers into private estates where they are now causing misery for their new neighbours. It's worse now because they are spread out, and everyone gets to experience this.

    Eventually we will figure out that the problem was not the social housing estates, it was the small group of troublemakers who are never dealt with.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    carolmon wrote: »
    You stated rent was capped at €200 per week

    Oh no I didn't
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #133
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    topper75 wrote: »
    So in your take, if we had only just sprinkled Ballymun and Darndale with 'firewalls' of middle class gullible types forking out for what others got handed to them, there would have been no skag, smashed phone kiosks, piebald ponies grazing on rubbish, burned out cars, or perma-welfare tracksuiteers? That is what those areas were missing?

    Do you want to pay for hotels, private rentals or buying houses to rent to these folk OR build our own and rent/sell them to working taxpayers and the poor alike?


  • #134
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    14dMoney wrote: »
    And wouldn't you be pissed if your parents lost the house that they paid for, and there neighbors paying a tenner a week got to stay?

    No, I wouldn’t actually. We likely would have become a social housing family had my parents lost the house. We just about held on to it but it was touch and go. And now they own the house outright. They have an asset. The social housing family doesn’t. I bet many social housing families would love to be able to afford a mortgage and one day own a sellable asset.


  • #135
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Do you want to pay for hotels, private rentals or buying houses to rent to these folk OR build our own and rent/sell them to working taxpayers and the poor alike?

    Why can't we build an estate for those who want to pay privately, and an estate for those who don't?


  • #136
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭pablo128


    14dMoney wrote: »
    Why can't we build an estate for those who want to pay privately, and an estate for those who can't

    I took the liberty of fixing your post there.


  • #137
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    pablo128 wrote: »
    I took the liberty of fixing your post there.

    Great, now answer the question.


  • #138
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭pablo128


    14dMoney wrote: »
    Great, now answer the question.

    That question has been answered many times in this thread.

    And in many threads before it. They are commonly referred to as 'dole bashing' threads.


  • #139
    wench
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,675 ✭✭✭wench


    Arya Rhythmic Vaccine wrote: »
    Another item is the long list of reasons I wouldn't live in an estate. It's a total disgrace really, private owners should not be forced to live in the same estates as those in social housing and all the issues that go along with them.

    Especially as they are getting the houses free or at a massive discount while the private owner is paying for their own house, paying for the social house through taxation and having to put up with living in the estate with them.

    This rule of developers having to put in social housing should really be challenged.
    Yeah, we can't all move back to Mammy and live in her garden though.


  • #140
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    pablo128 wrote: »
    That question has been answered many times in this thread.

    And in many threads before it. They are commonly referred to as 'dole bashing' threads.

    No it hasn't. Its quite straightforward. You live around people like you.


  • #141
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    wench wrote: »
    Yeah, we can't all move back to Mammy and live in her garden though.

    Uh huh. For many in our fair isle, Mammy and Daddy are their social welfare providers. Sure, Mammy and Daddy have earned that money but their offspring haven’t.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,280 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Social and private housing are moxed to dilute the number of social tenants meaning that when they kick off it doesnt ruin the reputation of an entire area, private homeowners are also more likely to take care of properties meaning that aesthetically areas don’t look bad. Its really a giant trick by the government to pretend that social tenants arent the problem and its somehow somebody elses fault that the likes of ballymun and moyross happened


  • #143
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Social and private housing are moxed to dilute the number of social tenants meaning that when they kick off it doesnt ruin the reputation of an entire area, private homeowners are also more likely to take care of properties meaning that aesthetically areas don’t look bad. Its really a giant trick by the government to pretend that social tenants arent the problem and its somehow somebody elses fault that the likes of ballymun and moyross happened

    Very true. That and referring to general thuggery as 'disadvantaged'


  • #144
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,280 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    14dMoney wrote: »
    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Social and private housing are moxed to dilute the number of social tenants meaning that when they kick off it doesnt ruin the reputation of an entire area, private homeowners are also more likely to take care of properties meaning that aesthetically areas don’t look bad. Its really a giant trick by the government to pretend that social tenants arent the problem and its somehow somebody elses fault that the likes of ballymun and moyross happened

    Very true. That and referring to general thuggery as 'disadvantaged'

    Pretending that social tenants have the same needs and wants and the same ability to maintain property as private owners is the biggest lie governments perpetuate worldwide


  • #145
    corks finest
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,966 ✭✭✭corks finest


    eviltwin wrote:
    Despite you think not all people who are eligible for such housing are scumbags or criminals or welfare claiments


    Correct ,but as a tenant in one there's an awful lot on anti social stuff/ noise from parties at all hours/ fighting/hassle / unruly kids/parents/ lack of civil pride/littering/ scroungers list goes on.
    I'm here over a divorce,raising my kid since he was 2 + ,come from Bishoptown so have seen both sides of the coin.
    In general ppl who get something for nothing don't give a fu*k about neighbours/ neighbourhood , great incentive for my 16 yr old to study gain a degree and get to hell away from our current abode,and by God I'll make sure he does just that, education equals opportunity equals choice


  • #146
    Mad_maxx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,503 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    It's the reason I'd never buy in a brand new estate


  • #147
    MonkieSocks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,393 ✭✭✭MonkieSocks


    Gonna be huge blocks of apartments for social homes in Coolock Village ( Chanell school), the old Chivers site and Cadburys site.

    All very close together.

    That area is very neglected by Dublin City Council.

    =(:-) Me? I know who I am. I'm a dude playing a dude disguised as another dude (-:)=



  • #148
    Markcheese
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,062 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Mad_maxx wrote: »
    It's the reason I'd never buy in a brand new estate

    Well the councils buy houses in established estates... So outa luck there...

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • #149
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    Markcheese wrote: »
    Well the councils buy houses in established estates... So outa luck there...

    That's what I hated about. They're forcing different types together in a "you'll like what I tell you to like" move.


  • #150
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭pablo128


    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058002587

    Have a read of that.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    14dMoney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 407 ✭✭14dMoney


    pablo128 wrote: »
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058002587

    Have a read of that.

    Shocking stuff.


Advertisement