kona wrote: » **** that ****. They need to accept that theres loads of places other than dublin, which would benefit greatly from some ****in investment and employment. Sucking the life out of the country to flog overpriced high rise kips to people who have to leave the rest of the country to find work.
62.7% of the population lived in urban areas in April 2016.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » Many have accepted they will never own their own home, however if proper tenant rights were implemented that exist in other European countries ownership would not be as important an issue to people.
lola85 wrote: » We’re going off the topic. NIMBYS backed by councilors are just as big a problem in the housing crisis.
sdanseo wrote: » We did that before, it didn't work. It creates areas of perpetual low income and costs the state billions in the long run. We need to encourage people to own their own homes or rent.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » Security of tenure is the most obvious, and at present only exists in a council house.
kona wrote: » **** that ****. They need to accept that theres loads of places other than dublin, which would benefit greatly from some ****in investment and employment.
the_syco wrote: » No, actually, they don't. They can go looking elsewhere, such as Poland, though.
the_syco wrote: » They can't afford their own homes, and they are unable to pay the rent themselves. Why should private landlords take the risk? So the landlords should take the risk, and be unable to take their home back? .
the_syco wrote: » They can't afford their own homes, and they are unable to pay the rent themselves. Why should private landlords take the risk?
kona wrote: » Why would you come to the conclusion that poland is a better place for investment and job creation than say for example carlow or portlaoise?
Fritzbox wrote: » If wages, property prices and other overheads are significantly cheaper in Poland, as I believe they are - it wouldn't be hard to come to that conclusion, would it?
Plumbthedepths wrote: » The accidental landlord should be separated out from the business landlord. Amazing how other European countries have security of tenure but it can't be done here. If you are renting a house to someone it is not your home it is your business, although I do understand the reason why people insist on referring to it as 'rheir home'.
friendlyfun wrote: » "Residents are also concerned the development may interfere with important archaeological artefacts that may lie underground" They're really scraping the barrel
sdanseo wrote: » Either are a better alternative than throwing a few billion into mass social housing projects (the American use of the term "projects" describes how they generally turn out). Rather than create ghettos, help existing communities grow with a better standard of living.
kona wrote: » Significantly cheaper yes but i dont think it has the infrastructure and the type of workforce suited to the types of jobs which ireland would attract.
lola85 wrote: » But lack of supply is an issue too?The more houses for everyone the more prices go down.
Boggles wrote: » You'd think so, but not in this country for some reason. Not once in 30 years has building more houses led to cheaper houses. Except for when the economy collapses and then that just makes the problem worse. The main problem most certainly is affordable housing combined with supply.
lola85 wrote: » Think I read house prices down last month?
sdanseo wrote: » These people complaining need a slap across the face.
...Describing 5 and 6 stories as high rise is as stupid as is it ignorant: we're talking about the middle of a capital city.
Jesus (if he ever existed) wept.
Topgear on Dave wrote: » Didn't we build a shed load of houses round 04 to 08 and the ass fell out of the prices.
Boggles wrote: » There was 92,000 built in 2005, prices went up 12%. The alarm bells were being rung for real in 2006. A couple had rung them before that but were told to go kill themselves. Good old Bertie.
sdanseo wrote: » Force landlords to accept rent allowance. There is no reason not to do this, legislation can protect against both troublesome landlords or troublesome tenants.
sdanseo wrote: » Why should a landlord care where the revenue comes from provided the tenant is respectful and pays on time?
sdanseo wrote: » Rather than create ghettos, help existing communities grow with a better standard of living.
MOH wrote: » Not as ignorant as your complete lack of basic geography - try looking at a map.
What is considered Dublin City Centre? As I understand it, Dublin City Council defines the city centre as being the area bounded by the Royal Canal to the north, the Grand Canal to the south and the Phoenix Park to the west.
pablo128 wrote: » Again, Coolock is nowhere near being in the middle of the city centre.
Liberta Per Gli Ultra wrote: » Coolock is in the middle of the city and the Irish government is giving away free houses apparently. That's the right-wing Fine Gael government. The power of the internet.
lola85 wrote: » The housing crisis goes back 40 years. Not Eoghan Murphy era.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » Utter nonsense, but you have form for this .
lola85 wrote: » That’s it?
the_syco wrote: » Legislation is doing a sh|t job at protecting against troublesome tenants
Plumbthedepths wrote: » Actually it does, the housing crisis is not just driven by lack of supply, affordability is as much a problem.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » Building masses of social housing is the answer, relying on market forces to solve the problem is not working.