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

The social housing list in Dublin

Options
1…2122232527

Comments

  • Options
    #722
    mohawk
    Registered Users Posts: 1,781 ✭✭✭mohawk


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    Nobody has any issue with a person on disability or low income workers getting social housing, thats who it should be for but when you see the likes of Maggie Cash getting everything handed to her when she hasn't done an honest days work in her life it boils the blood.

    When there is children involved then society will feel it has to step in and house those families. Talk of reducing child benefits after a certain amount of children is something that doesn’t get much support. And you can be guaranteed that there would be screams of discrimination from the media and all the opposition parties if we implemented policies of housing those with jobs or those with disabilities in prime areas near transport links and jobs.
    I agree with you that it’s infuriating.


  • Options
    #723
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,131 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Murph_D wrote: »
    No need to apologise. Clarification is always good. Considerably different statistic to what was first posted.

    Edit: it's also incorrect. France had a higher rate in 2017.

    During 2018-2020, France and Belgium had higher rate than Ireland. In 2020, Sweden also had a higher rate.

    The statistic I initially referred to, and subsequently linked to a chart, is:

    People living in households with very low work intensity by age and sex (population aged 0 to 59 years)

    These are known as VLWI households / joblessness.

    We have high amounts of people living in VLWI households.

    Here are links to the raw data on Eurostat:

    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-datasets/-/ILC_LVHL11

    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/ilc_lvhl11$DV_654/default/table?lang=en

    The chart by Seamus Coffey, that I linked to earlier, covered 2004-2017.

    From 2007-2017 we had the highest VLWI rate in the EU15.

    In 2017 our rate was 18.3%, France's was 7.9%.


  • Options
    #724
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,131 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Murph_D wrote: »
    No need to apologise. Clarification is always good. Considerably different statistic to what was first posted.

    Edit: it's also incorrect. France had a higher rate in 2017.

    During 2018-2020, France and Belgium had higher rate than Ireland. In 2020, Sweden also had a higher rate.

    2018-2020 VLWI rates

    Ireland (good to see it falling from over 20%)
    2018 = 11%
    2019 = 15%

    France has VLWI joblessness rates well below ours.
    2018 = 7.8%
    2019 = 7.9%

    Belgium
    2018 = 12.1%
    2019 = 13%

    Sweden 2020 data has not been published yet.


  • Options
    #725
    Cilldara_2000
    Registered Users Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭Cilldara_2000


    Geuze wrote: »
    2018-2020 VLWI rates

    Ireland (good to see it falling from over 20%)
    2018 = 11%
    2019 = 15%

    France has VLWI joblessness rates well below ours.
    2018 = 7.8%
    2019 = 7.9%

    Belgium
    2018 = 12.1%
    2019 = 13%

    Sweden 2020 data has not been published yet.

    It's an interesting statistic alright but given that it seems to move with the overall economic performance, I don't think it shows permanent welfare numbers, IE people who have always claimed SW. You'd expect a flat line, or at least a gradual increase over the years.


  • Options
    #726
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,131 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    What is meant by "permanent welfare"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #727
    Cilldara_2000
    Registered Users Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭Cilldara_2000


    Geuze wrote: »
    What is meant by "permanent welfare"?

    IMO it would be someone who has never worked and has always had some SW payment since turning 18, or at least for a good number of years.


  • Options
    #728
    Blackjack
    Registered Users Posts: 3,594 ✭✭✭Blackjack


    According to this article, there were just under 7000 on jobseekers for ten years or more. Works out at a few million shy of three quarters of a billion to fund those 6957 over ten years.


  • Options
    #729
    Cilldara_2000
    Registered Users Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭Cilldara_2000


    Blackjack wrote: »
    According to this article, there were just under 7000 on jobseekers for ten years or more. Works out at a few million shy of three quarters of a billion to fund those 6957 over ten years.

    The total wouldn't be quite that high - the weekly rate wasn't €203 for all of those ten years.

    To put it in context, the total jobseekers allowance paid for the ten years to 2019 was €25.6bn.

    So you're talking about in the region of 2% to 3% of the total is going to what we could probably fairly call the permanent welfare class.

    Ofc you'd imagine that they might take up a somewhat higher proportion of certain other benefits, but on the flip side, none of the single largest scheme is paid to them, that is the contributory pension. The ten year total for that to 2019 was €58.8bn.

    I think it's still fair to say that overall, their cost to the rest of us is a small proportion of the total social welfare bill. I think I'd still be happy enough that the social safety net catches everyone including the small proportion of never working people as I said above.


  • Options
    #730
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,432 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Geuze wrote: »
    The statistic I initially referred to, and subsequently linked to a chart, is:

    People living in households with very low work intensity by age and sex (population aged 0 to 59 years)

    These are known as VLWI households / joblessness.

    We have high amounts of people living in VLWI households.

    Here are links to the raw data on Eurostat:

    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-datasets/-/ILC_LVHL11

    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/ilc_lvhl11$DV_654/default/table?lang=en

    The chart by Seamus Coffey, that I linked to earlier, covered 2004-2017.

    From 2007-2017 we had the highest VLWI rate in the EU15.

    In 2017 our rate was 18.3%, France's was 7.9%.

    Thanks for that clarification. Again, much more detail than the original link to a tweet with a graph on it and no click through to the underlying data.

    There seem to be several ways to describe 'jobless households'. I stand over my previous post, which is based on 'Population in Jobless Households' annual data, 2011-2020.

    Eurostat charts are hard to link to, but I think this link might work.

    Oh, and Greece is an EU15 member and has a higher number on your linked chart than Ireland in years 2017-2019.


  • Options
    #731
    JimmyVik
    Registered Users Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    Cilldara_2000 wrote: »
    The total wouldn't be quite that high - the weekly rate wasn't €203 for all of those ten years.

    To put it in context, the total jobseekers allowance paid for the ten years to 2019 was €25.6bn.

    So you're talking about in the region of 2% to 3% of the total is going to what we could probably fairly call the permanent welfare class.

    Ofc you'd imagine that they might take up a somewhat higher proportion of certain other benefits, but on the flip side, none of the single largest scheme is paid to them, that is the contributory pension. The ten year total for that to 2019 was €58.8bn.

    I think it's still fair to say that overall, their cost to the rest of us is a small proportion of the total social welfare bill. I think I'd still be happy enough that the social safety net catches everyone including the small proportion of never working people as I said above.


    Are they not getting other benefits too. Like HAP, council houses, back to school, Medical cards, Christmas bonus to name a few.

    There is a cost to that kind of stuff.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #732
    Jinglejangle69
    Registered Users Posts: 7,260 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Why don't you go on the dole and housing list then?

    This is the most laziest argument ever.

    It's like been annoyed someone robs a bank and took your money only for someone to say sure why don't you rob a bank if you're that annoyed.

    Silly silly argument.

    Fortunately some of us realise if everyone did what you suggest there would be zero money to actually have a functioning country.


  • Options
    #733
    Jinglejangle69
    Registered Users Posts: 7,260 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    Wasn't t there an article from a few years ago showing foreign people accounted for 70% of the social house waiting list in certain parts of Dublin?


  • Options
    #734
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,432 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Jinglejangle69 wrote: »
    Want there an article from a few years ago showing foreign people accounted for 70% of the social house waiting list in certain parts of Dublin?

    Well if there was, why don’t you post a link to it, instead of just implying that there was?

    Classic misinformation tactic.


  • Options
    #735
    Jinglejangle69
    Registered Users Posts: 7,260 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    Murph_D wrote: »
    Well if there was, why don’t you post a link to it, instead of just implying that there was?

    Classic misinformation tactic.

    Over a half i just googled it.

    Article is quiet old in fairness.


  • Options
    #736
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,432 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Jinglejangle69 wrote: »
    Over a half i just googled it.

    Article is quiet old in fairness.

    Half seems too high too. Link?


  • Options
    #737
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,131 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Jinglejangle69 wrote: »
    Wasn't t there an article from a few years ago showing foreign people accounted for 70% of the social house waiting list in certain parts of Dublin?

    The figure is high in Fingal, but not that high.


    Here is some info, all collected by FOIs:


    According to FOI requests:

    • In Dublin City, 4,703 individuals out of the 14,672 housing list applicants were born outside the island of Ireland (32%).
    • 3,749 of those on the list had no Irish citizenship (25.5%).

    • In South Dublin, 2,366 individuals out of the 6,748 housing list applicants were born outside the island of Ireland (35%)
    • 1,779 of those on the list had no Irish citizenship (26.4%).
    • The top foreign nationalities on the South Dublin housing list were Polish, Nigerian and Bosnian.
    • South Dublin County Council have built 365 units of housing since 2014

    • Fingal County Council would not provide figures.
    • A 2011 council reported stated that 4,108 of the 8,144 housing list applicants were foreign born (50%)
    • The council has built 293 units of housing since 2014.


  • Options
    #738
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,131 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Jinglejangle69 wrote: »
    Over a half i just googled it.

    Article is quiet old in fairness.

    2021 article here:

    http://www.theburkean.ie/articles/2021/04/29/how-much-of-the-dublin-housing-list-is-foreign-born


    By the way, this article is the OP in this thread.


  • Options
    #739
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,131 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Jinglejangle69 wrote: »
    Wasn't t there an article from a few years ago showing foreign people accounted for 70% of the social house waiting list in certain parts of Dublin?




    South Dublin County Council-35% Foreign Born

    Of the 6,748 applicants on the South Dublin housing list a total of 2,366 (35%) are born outside the Republic of Ireland according to figures obtained by means of Freedom of Information. Among those listed 1,779 (26.4%) individuals on the housing list are without Irish citizenship.

    Unlike other councils South Dublin was able to give us a breakdown of the nationalities applying for public housing. The following list are the leading nationalities on the list per the figures supplied to us.

    Nationality Number of Applicants
    British 62
    Bosnian 228
    Latvian 102
    Lithuanian 166
    Polish 362
    Somalian 68
    Pakistan 89
    Nigerian 239
    Iraq 52
    Congolese 75
    Moldovan 51


  • Options
    #740
    Jinglejangle69
    Registered Users Posts: 7,260 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    Geuze wrote: »
    South Dublin County Council-35% Foreign Born

    Of the 6,748 applicants on the South Dublin housing list a total of 2,366 (35%) are born outside the Republic of Ireland according to figures obtained by means of Freedom of Information. Among those listed 1,779 (26.4%) individuals on the housing list are without Irish citizenship.

    Unlike other councils South Dublin was able to give us a breakdown of the nationalities applying for public housing. The following list are the leading nationalities on the list per the figures supplied to us.

    Nationality Number of Applicants
    British 62
    Bosnian 228
    Latvian 102
    Lithuanian 166
    Polish 362
    Somalian 68
    Pakistan 89
    Nigerian 239
    Iraq 52
    Congolese 75
    Moldovan 51

    Yeah and was 50% in 2011.


  • Options
    #741
    Mimon
    Registered Users Posts: 1,474 ✭✭✭Mimon


    Cilldara_2000 wrote: »
    The total wouldn't be quite that high - the weekly rate wasn't €203 for all of those ten years.

    To put it in context, the total jobseekers allowance paid for the ten years to 2019 was €25.6bn.

    So you're talking about in the region of 2% to 3% of the total is going to what we could probably fairly call the permanent welfare class.

    Ofc you'd imagine that they might take up a somewhat higher proportion of certain other benefits, but on the flip side, none of the single largest scheme is paid to them, that is the contributory pension. The ten year total for that to 2019 was €58.8bn.

    I think it's still fair to say that overall, their cost to the rest of us is a small proportion of the total social welfare bill. I think I'd still be happy enough that the social safety net catches everyone including the small proportion of never working people as I said above.

    You are not factoring in other costs associated with long term unemployed such as housing assistance, fuel allowance etc. Housing cost will probably be a lot more than what they get in dole payments.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #742
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,843 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    Hiking vat a few percent and scrapping the lpt, would be brilliant, if vat weren't already so high...


  • Options
    #743
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Jinglejangle69 wrote: »
    This is the most laziest argument ever.

    It's like been annoyed someone robs a bank and took your money only for someone to say sure why don't you rob a bank if you're that annoyed.

    Silly silly argument.

    Fortunately some of us realise if everyone did what you suggest there would be zero money to actually have a functioning country.

    Well some of us realise there is no point begrudging people who cannot house themselves a home.
    If you want to work and own your own home, I can't understand why you would be jealous of others, who don't?

    Its not a lazy argument, it's the reality


  • Options
    #744
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,131 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    Hiking vat a few percent and scrapping the lpt, would be brilliant, if vat weren't already so high...

    The LPT is one of the best taxes. That is widely agreed.

    Most commentators suggest it should be expanded.


  • Options
    #745
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    What is the issue with 'foreign born' exactly?


  • Options
    #746
    Cilldara_2000
    Registered Users Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭Cilldara_2000


    JimmyVik wrote: »
    Are they not getting other benefits too. Like HAP, council houses, back to school, Medical cards, Christmas bonus to name a few.

    There is a cost to that kind of stuff.
    Mimon wrote: »
    You are not factoring in other costs associated with long term unemployed such as housing assistance, fuel allowance etc. Housing cost will probably be a lot more than what they get in dole payments.

    I literally said this in the post you two replied to:
    Cilldara_2000 wrote: »
    Ofc you'd imagine that they might take up a somewhat higher proportion of certain other benefits, but on the flip side, none of the single largest scheme is paid to them, that is the contributory pension. The ten year total for that to 2019 was €58.8bn.


  • Options
    #747
    JimmyVik
    Registered Users Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    Cilldara_2000 wrote: »
    I literally said this in the post you two replied to:


    So you did.
    On the pension though, they dont need a contributory pension.
    They effectively have a pension for their whole lives.


  • Options
    #748
    Fritzbox
    Registered Users Posts: 489 ✭✭Fritzbox


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    Hiking vat a few percent and scrapping the lpt, would be brilliant, if vat weren't already so high...

    VAT is not particularly high in Ireland. Here in Germany I pay 7% VAT on basic foodstuffs - in Ireland I believe it is still 00%?


  • Options
    #749
    agoodpunt
    Registered Users Posts: 544 ✭✭✭agoodpunt


    As an outlier in western europe with less than 5m they are choosing a country and Dublin city, extra taxes or leaner services will be needed to satisfy this new all inclusive better life destination arrivals to the land of social inclusion for all except those who work and pay taxes


  • Options
    #750
    Jinglejangle69
    Registered Users Posts: 7,260 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Well some of us realise there is no point begrudging people who cannot house themselves a home.
    If you want to work and own your own home, I can't understand why you would be jealous of others, who don't?

    Its not a lazy argument, it's the reality

    It's not jealousy.

    It's tax payers money been used to house layabouts and scam artists who contribute nothing to the pot.

    Same way we call out waste in all aspects of society be it health, education etc.

    Are you suggesting people should never call out waste and bad usage of tax payers money?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #751
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Jinglejangle69 wrote: »
    It's not jealousy.

    It's tax payers money been used to house layabouts and scam artists who contribute nothing to the pot.

    Same way we call out waste in all aspects of society be it health, education etc.

    Are you suggesting people should never call out waste and bad usage of tax payers money?

    Are you suggesting that everybody on a welfare payment or social housing is a scam artist or layabout?


Advertisement