Jinglejangle69 wrote: » Second highest quality of life according to the UN!!! Oh but the people living in poverty, all used from a ridiculous set of criteria like not been able to eat out every 2 weeks!! Give me a break FFS
christy c wrote: » I'm not sure on the liking work part, but the government 100% are giving money to the 1 in 6 households who are not working. Many conveniently forget that or downplay it when it suits them.
PearseCork92 wrote: »
Bowie wrote: » You are avoiding the point. How many are people who decided not to work? Does the government give money to people who don't want to work? It always gets shunted on to a minute number of grifters ignoring the working tax payers forced to depend on welfare.
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » Oh I'm so offended by your video!! Typical go to for defenders of wasters. You're a tory!!!
[Deleted User] wrote: » A friend of mine,left her abusive husband with 3 kids,when he stabbed her,after 3 years of escalting abuse (was reason,wasnt online last few weeks,helping sort this)....catch a hold of yourself I know plenty of people,who have had to move home this year....the country is fcuked,it cant provide a future for its youth,all the puff nonsense pushed isnt going to coverup the sh1thole situation of housing crisis....blaming magereet cash,for mates (both teachers) having to move home is a joke,from a jokeshop of a government Do people genuinely not realise,people cant afford rent
christy c wrote: » I'm ignoring nothing, we have 1 in 6 households jobless, colossal by anyone's standards. We usually don't hear much about that from those who claim to be worried about the taxpayer.
PearseCork92 wrote: » You seem out of sorts. U ok hun?
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » People in every country in the world can't afford rent. I hope your friend gets the help she needs and DESERVES, if only people like Maggie Cash didn't pull publicity stunts and gets bumped up housing lists then your friend who deserves a house would have one. Just remember SF marched Maggie out on a protest and were behind her crusade. Embarrassing at the minimum.
Bowie wrote: » Who gave her her 4 bedroom house?
[Deleted User] wrote: » ...the out-of-control suicide situation...
Bowie wrote: » Well make that point. It's not related to mine. Blanch made another false claim that I don't acknowledge that we are dependent on welfare. Many certainly are. Many working tax payers. I've said before the country would probably collapse if not for state hand outs in one form or another (pre-Covid).
Jinglejangle69 wrote: » DCC I presume when the majority of DCC were Sinn Féin.
a very cool kid wrote: » I for one can't wait for Sinn Féin to get into power down here and build 60,000 social houses for everyone in 5 years.
McMurphy wrote: » I love it when (and to be fair here, this poster isn't the first) someone comes into a thread guffawing about this 60k housing plan, obviously oblivious that FG are planning the same.60,000 social housing units to be built by 2025 under Fine Gael plan
christy c wrote: » Its absolutely related, its very reasonable to assume some of the colossal number of jobless households don't want to work.We've been down this road before, you had a nonsensical argument that the economy would collapse if not for welfare, when the source of that welfare is the very same economy.
christy c wrote: » Exactly, and they are still called "right wing".
Bowie wrote: » Here we go... So you weren't looking to discuss you were working towards shifting the topic. You wanted to get a dig in because I'm besmirching the best of a bad lot. I've no interest in speaking on people who game the system. Anytime we mention poverty or people dependent on welfare it gets dragged onto this. Valid, it happens in all walks but it avoids the fact that working people are dependent on state aid. The economy doing well does not automatically mean society is doing well. The economy was doing well when we were having record numbers of homeless children year on year.
McMurphy wrote: » What's left/right got to do with the price of fish christy? Point made was others laughing at one partys plan to build more social housing, while seemingly oblivious that the others are planning it too.
Bowie wrote: » They are when they are being leased, rented and bought off private companies.
christy c wrote: » No I made a comment when you mentioned those who don't like to work, and expanded it to the colossal number that don't actually work. That's a problem no matter what way you look at it. You then expanded to welfare propping up the economy, and I explained our previous interactions on the topic.
christy c wrote: » Right wing wouldn't involve providing housing of any description IMO, regardless of source
Bowie wrote: » Blanch said I wouldn't acknowledge we are dependent on welfare. I corrected him. My point was the economy doing well doesn't mean we all automatically do well. You came in with this: The government pay welfare to people they deem are due welfare. We are not dependent on welfare because of people who decide not to work. We have many working people who need avail of assistance.
Bowie wrote: » If the profits are going to private concerns a housing crisis can be a very profitable thing.
a very cool kid wrote: » Well they clearly haven't done it - I expect SF to deliver when they get into power.
christy c wrote: » Sure can, still not a right wing policy to provide state housing to people IMO
Bowie wrote: » They'd lose money if we built our own social. That's likely why FG wouldn't in any sizable amount.
christy c wrote: » I'm aware of what I said. I agree, some working people are dependent on welfare, as are the jobless households. Agreed?
