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

"Green" policies are destroying this country

1949597991001118

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,601 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    I cannot read !

    Both you and Yurt are in favour of moving people from the areas they have grown up in and can afford to build homes for themselves into villages and town where the will no longer be able to afford to do so where rezoning will have resulted in site prices leaving doing so beyond their means.

    The most likely result of that policy is less people in the catchment area which makes such villages and small towns even less sustainable than they already are. So what happens then, move the residents of these village to larger towns and cities ?

    That is not rural sustainability. It`s urbanisation. Rural sustainability is not going to be achieved by less people living rurally. It is the complete antithesis of sustainability



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


    Boogeyman.

    The serviced sites close to villages are sold at cost and the purchaser can self-build from there.

    There is already schemes in place to facilitate this. It's supported by government, and it's supported by local authorities.

    The sites aren't free (but they are affordable) unlike a family plot, which is probably where your objection really lies. Not any concern for the community. And make no mistake this model of development is all about community. Something you say you love, but in reality reject.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,257 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    The irony of your post is that you are arguing that there needs to be more new one off houses to avoid rural depopulation. To avoid depopulation then the existing housing stock can be maintained. New housing should be in sustainable settlements and planned sensibly for the 60 year plus expected lifespan of housing

    The people building the giant once off houses could easily afford something less extravagant in an existing settlement

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,601 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    The really irony is that both you and Yurt now realise that villages and small towns that are not viable are not going to become so by simply moving the same, (and most likely less), of the same population around the same locality, and are now flapping about like fish on a river bank.

    What is needed to make them viable is an increase in the local population, and that means more houses not the same or less. If either of you believe businesses in those villages or town will give an iota whether those builds are one-off or not, then you are fooling yourselves.

    If people can afford to build their own houses because they have their own sites rather than the tax payer having to provide them due to developers gouging the price of rezoned sites what does it matter to you what size their houses are ? Are you jealous that they are not living in some high-rise block or some soulless estate where the least of their problems would be that the neighbours would not give them even the time of day.



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


    Talk about missing the point. Chaz, you're not alone, but you don't really give a fig about community despite big talk - and you're wilfully refusing to engage your critical faculties.

    This has nothing to do about my jealousy or lack of it (I'm content with my lot in life in case you're worried), but the fate and future of rural communities. You're of the die-hard opinion that planning and future-proofing communities is some sort of socialist imposition on your god-given right to plonk a domicile anywhere you want. That way of life and the political assent to it has run out of road - because people who set policy and have the responsibility of thinking about more than individuals demands to fire up a house in the back of beyonds have worked out the costs of that to everyone else and communities, and they've decided the cost is too much.

    I'm not expecting you to admit you're wrong, but I think you know yourself your line of argument is deeply contradictory and wholly self-serving. I'm also satisfied that right-thinking folks with their heads screwed on reading this thread will recognize how deeply incorrect you are as well.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Leo Vradker is nothing but a publicity hound he only wants to distract from the fact that many in FG want to topple him / shank him in back.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Working from home has changed the entire equation. You can work for a multinational and be based anywhere in the country and boost that local economy. No need for people to be crammed into high density living just for the sake of it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,035 ✭✭✭jackboy


    The economies of towns and cities have been going downhill for years, regardless of their populations. People have reduced their shopping in these places in favour of shopping malls on the outskirts of cities. Covid has accelerated this and it is clear in the future that most retail outlets will go out of business and be replaced with home deliveries. That means large scale job losses which will turn cities into absolute hell holes. The disadvantages of rural living may actually decrease with time.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Step into the breach Michael and dani Healy Rae ,et al,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,355 ✭✭✭joseywhales


    I left Ireland about 12 years ago. Before I left I helped my dad build a "one off". My siblings, uncle, cousin, neighbour also worked on the house. The next door neighbour was our aunt and gp. Within two large fields, you will find 6 large houses all directly related to each other. There is another to be hopefully built next to my parents where my sister has bought some land. There can be very strong community outside of towns. Although my parents are entering their golden years and they are only connected to a town by a 5-10 minute drive, I think they are in a very good situation. They have regular callers and they have a very reliable community. In times of hardship you will often find people cooking extra dinner and delivering it for example or providing a lift. I think the situation is fine, I don't think living in a town would make their situation any better. They also have great security, there is never a worry of harassment or burglary, there's about 20 cousins within a 5 mile radius if there was any real issues. In a town I think my dad would feel like a stranger, he has low tolerance for anti social behavior also, I think he could find himself confronting kids no matter how old he gets. He is happy where he is.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    Perhaps true to an extent, but economic activity in Ireland has never been more concentrated in cities. Rural one-offs aren't really the dancing at the crossroads pastoral Tolstoyian life they're being framed as here by some - they're really a phenomenon of hyper-suburbanization of the most negative kind.

    As for the increase in delivery and online retail. This is undoubtedly true, but people in peripheral housing away from communities will have to reconcile themselves they'll lose out on the double here too. Apart from the spectre of declining/dead retail in smaller towns, the 'last mile' principle of delivery services means that the last km / mile leg of a delivery constitutes over 55% of the cost of delivery, and you can bump that up to a higher percentage for the majority of rural Irish one-offs. E-commerce, online grocery etc will either not service extra-peripheral locations, or consumers in these locations will have to eat the high logistics costs.

    Post edited by Yurt2 on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,473 ✭✭✭✭John_Rambo


    This is in America where in most cities the car is king (although that's changing in some) and there's a lot of transient workers with short term lettings. Much different set up here in ancient European cities where families live in one area, or people settle in an area to become part of the community where they look after each other. You'll find evidence of this in Dublin, Cork, Rome, Waterford, Madrid... all over Europe.

    Have you heard of Third Age? They have serious concerns about the rising age & the single person households in rural Ireland. They use data from the IRISH census & the Dept of all-island research in Maynooth university. The departure of populations from market towns and rural villages have had serious implications for retention of amenities such as Garda stations, post offices, and the need for better rural transport links. The closure of so many garda stations around the country has already created feelings of insecurity among home owners, particularly older people living alone, and the government has recently re-opened some stations that had been closed. The local post office, bank, village shops is particularly relevant to less mobile people who are dependent on such facilities.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    The failure to address anti-social behaviour in towns and cities is one of the main reasons people move to the country, proper enforcement of laws, long sentences for repeat offenders and no social housing for anyone with convictions,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,035 ✭✭✭jackboy


    As low paid work continues to collapse in the large urban areas they will evolve into the hell scape cities seen in mid America.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13 whiskersmcgee


    Every square inch of Dublin is being turned into apartments, usually in the worst way possible.


    But do you know what's really being built in this country? The past, that's what.


    Tenements masquerading as "co-living", scarcity of facilities, scarcity of entertainment, scarcity of community, scarcity of housing, unaffordability, poverty increasing, homelessness, a new version of landed gentry who rent the swathes of housing they own, vast foreign ownership of supposedly Irish land, infrastructure and housing, biased taxes running away with themselves, education costs increasing and becoming more exclusionary, and so on.


    Of course there's going to be fuel poverty too. Of course!


    This place is doomed, pure doomed. All for the sake of greed. We're going back to the good old days before we were even a sovereign nation, make no mistake.


    Cities or rural country? Kiss them both goodnight.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,473 ✭✭✭✭John_Rambo


    Who told you every inch of Dublin is being turned in to apartments? This is just barstool talk. Have you ever been to Dublin? I'd strongly advice going on to google maps & google street view before mouthing off about a large municipal area that stretches from North County Dublin where some of the countries must successful farms are, inland to the Liffey valley and south to the foothills of the mountains and then back along the coastline.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13 whiskersmcgee


    Mate, I was driving around a lot of parts of Dublin recently, and it was literally a case of "do you remember that? Yeah, that's going to be apartments." Over and over and over.


    Bingo Halls, strips of land you could squeeze two footpaths onto, fields, bowling alleys, shopping centers...and so on.


    There'll be nothing left in the place except towers of people gawking out of windows at other towers of people gawking out windows.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,473 ✭✭✭✭John_Rambo


    It's a city, there's a housing shortage. Apartment living is becoming a way of life for a lot of people, a step on the ladder for other people. The last apartment I was in was bigger than my first house. This may not be for you, but for others it is and it's ok. Of course you're going to see changes in a city, cities are forever evolving to meet the demands society makes of it.

    To say every inch of Dublin is being taken over by apartments is not true.

    The biggest problem is holding on to our heritage & culture with a fast demanding city & the needs of the people living in it. I'd be more worried about the proliferation of hotels than homes. Homes are good & apartments with amenities close to the city are environmentally friendly, far more environmentally friendly than a one of house.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13 whiskersmcgee


    I can see where you're coming from.


    However, if you think these things are being built to solve the housing crisis or to help people out, you're gonna find out.


    That's if you haven't already found out after years and years and years of the crisis.


    This isn't about modern living, or advancement, or changes, it's about extracting maximum profit.


    These apartment blocks, and similar, are being built to extract maximum money. There isn't a snowballs chance in hell they will have a beneficial effect. The same way they didn't the year before, and the year before that,and the year before that...


    And note how the proportion of all building in this country is, every year, more and more majority apartments. Big money!


    They'd turn you into an apartment if they could. And that's what will be left in the city, extortionate boxes that were built on the rubble of facilities.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 990 ✭✭✭Fred Cryton


    Apartments are being built in city centres, and that's absolutely correct. We need high density apartment living in our city centres.

    The problem with the Greens is they seem to be arguing we should ONLY build apartments centrally located in cities. And no other type of housing at all - they want to restrict planning for suburban and one off housing. Irish people will always want the 3 or 4 bed semi d in suburbia or the one off home in the countryside to raise their families. The Greens are restricting choice, and restricting much needed housing supply in a "crisis" because they have some utopian vision of Irish familiies living in city centre apartments and cycling everywhere. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. And it's most peoples version of hell by the way.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13 whiskersmcgee


    It would be great if it were incompetency.


    But it isn't. There are people making money out of renter's, "buyers" and developments like it's going out of fashion.


    That's the only indication you need as to the future of this country. No matter what they say, anybody of them, it's about the money. Hence a crisis that never ends.


    You'd be as well waiting for hell to freeze over. The only thing that at least allows a chance to end this housing robbery is a crippling recession. And it's no guarantee that a recession would change anything anyway.


    That's how bad it's gotten.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It doesnt matter to opponents of one off housing that your social circle is so nearby. They assume every one off dweller will have to drive to a town or city an hour away and burn a ton of fuel. All that matters in their calculations is how far you are to work and shops. Everyone buys online now anyway and the delivery networks span the country. Electric cars have changed the equation regarding pollution. The whole thing is a nonsense.

    The birth rate in Ireland is below replacement. One offs and suburban sprawl shouldnt be an issue. There should only be replacement of existing stock on the balance. The issue of an ever expanding population is something most do not even want to tackle. Instead they tinker around the edges on topics like one off housing and changing to LED light bulbs.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,473 ✭✭✭✭John_Rambo


    Of course there's profit involved, as there is in anywhere in the country, including farming. That's how it works, but it's not the Matrix. Your dystopian idea of Dublin and what it's to become is way off the mark. Driving around it observing what was once brown field sites, bowling alleys or shopping centres is just nostalgia for something you never availed off.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13 whiskersmcgee


    You seem to have gotten this idea that I'm some kind of culchie that visits Dublin once a year.


    I'm from Dublin. I live in Dublin.


    It's well on its way to being wrecked, and if you don't believe it, don't believe it. Just watch all the supposed improvements of 2022 be pushed to 2023, and from 2023 to 2027 and so on.


    Governments, plural, and their mates are taking the absolute piss. It's ALL about profit, not just a separate factor. This is a bleed 'em-and-run governance we are under.


    Just use your own eyeballs and ears as the years come and go, watch prices go up and up, watch facilities disappear more and more. Myself, my limit was reached after "only" a few years of this supposed crisis. Maybe your line will be crossed after 9 years, or 13, who knows?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,473 ✭✭✭✭John_Rambo


    The city is resilient, it's been through a lot from British rule, a heroin crisis and numerous recessions. It prevailed long before the likes of you doomsayers came a long and it will prevail long after you're gone.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,601 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    From someone who posted their belief that it is villages that are sustaining rural communities I have no idea what these "right-thinking folks" are expected to take from your posts other than you know as little about rural sustainability as you do about the E.U. Water Framework Directive.

    Your belief that by coercing those who wish to build on their own lands into villages is going to make rural communities more sustainable is the same numeral illiteracy as believing there will be 1 million electric cars on Irish roads by 2030. It`s complete nonsense.

    Your not going to achieve rural sustainability by simply moving the same, (and much likely less), people around a rural area and expecting that to magically create sustainability. All that will achieve is add to the tax payers burden with more people being added to housing waiting lists that already have close to 30,000 waiting over 5 years to be houses.

    Your proposal has nothing to do with your supposed concern for rural sustainability. It`s step by step plan of urbanisation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,100 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Doesn’t matter what side of the debate you are on, in this thread, one thing we all have in common is that there is no way we are going to be putting ourselves or our families at a disadvantage for the greater good of community.

    I think we can see this trait when we look at covid restrictions responses etc

    For this reason I think humans won’t combat climate change (regardless of wether you think humans can have any effect on the climate or not), because we cant put ourselves at a disadvantage for the good of society. That’s going against our survival instincts which are hardwired into us.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,077 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    'It's just a flesh wound'...



Advertisement