Following on from
this thread
Please remain civil or posting privileges will be removed
Theres people in this country struggling to feed their kids,the government are working to make it unaffordable for vast tracts of the country to communte go to work.....but bruce springsteen sold out,so its all good because a bunch of middle aged/elderly music fans can attend a concert,
Utterly mind boggling,head-in-sand stuff
Another poll in the Sindo tomorrow. Wonder if it will be good or bad news for FFG?
Regards...jmcc
I'd expect it too. My hope is we move toward social housing builds. I can stomach some cronyism if the goals help rather than hinder.
.... my suspicions are that some people think sf are gonna wonder in and sort all this sh1t out, thats more than likely not gonna happen, largely due to the complexities involved, i.e. peoples expectations are simply gonna be too great, no government could fulfil them. im expecting sf to win strongly in the next ge, but a large proportion of floating voters will eventually float off, to god knows where, possible further to the extremes!
unfortunately i suspect sf already have their comfy slippers ready to go, again, id expect it, so if it happens, we pull them up on it, id expect their own flavor of sh1t, but in saying that, its gonna be interesting to see what happens with them in government....
Fair point. For FF/FG cronyism and sweet deals are like comfortable slippers they put on anytime they get power. They've systems and cronies in place ready to go.
I hope that if SF or who ever turn out to be the same that we at least get some respite for a year or two as they wouldn't have the game as rigged and ready to go.
If that happens I along with countless others will be disappointed.
Very much to do with it. Are you purposely missing my clear and repeated point? People claim they don't want tax money spent on social housing builds yet the alternative is renting or leasing apartments, in the case I showed, luxury apartments. So we are leasing luxury apartments for 25 years and will have nothing to show at the end. I don't think luxury apartments, leased, are preferable to having housing stock built, we will then own.
I would have only used private housing as an emergency, the way it use to be, hence the term, emergency accommodation. The last few governments have set the system up in a manner were enriching their cronies seems like the only option.
We'll have spent approx. 900,000 per luxury apartment over the 25 years (3000 × 12, x 25) and will have nothing to show at the end of it. We need to stop using poor short term goals as an excuse for lining the pockets of housing investors with tax payer money.
How can we invest for luxury apartment owners long term, but social builds aren't afforded the same long view? More money for pals.
....you re probably gonna be disappointed then, as our current problems are far beyond the ability of a single party or government to resolve, and all parties introduce their own bullsh1t into the process, so......
If they do they will have lost future votes from me.
If Brophy is not aware why the fuuck is he on tv and radio programs? Being not aware means you know the square root of fuuck all.
...unfortunately theres no guarantees that sf wont introduce their own type of bullsh1t into the process, in fact, id expect it!
I voted SF for the first time ever in the last election and I will vote for them in the next election to get rid of cronyism. I am a floating voter and not a member of any party. My statement about Harris's sock puppet accounts was just a joke but you were so eager to attack that you did not notice that.
OK, perfect, nothing to do with the apartments being classed as luxury, one area that's been backed down from.
Now, you have a budget, you can either buy and house 100 people or lease and house 3600 people (cost of servicing a long term lease per year vs. buying) or a combination of the above.
What do you do with that budget?
Precisely 😂😂 he looked particularly foolish today 😁
Yes, and what he checked didn't allow him to answer the question...handy that. 😁
...once again, in an environment of rapidly rising wealth inequality, i.e. what we re currently experiencing, it becomes more difficult for people to be able to achieve their needs, this is commonly called 'social mobility', i.e. under such conditions, it becomes far more difficult for people to advance in society, to achieve better outcomes in life. this outcome has been directly created via public policy, as our governments, past and present, have done their utmost to prioritise the needs and interests of some, over the interests of others, this is particularly evident when comparing older generations to younger generations, public policy is generally in favour of the interests of older generations, such as the value of asset markets such as property!
its incredible insulting to these younger generations to simply blame them for their current situation, when the above has been so clearly obvious. there is evidence to support workers are now far more productive than ever before, yet are now receiving even less for their efforts, i.e. the value of assets such as property have completely decoupled from incomes, and the gains have primarily 'trickled up', to wealthier entities, which is primarily owned by older generations, i.e. the young are simply fcuked if we dont resolve this quickly, which really means we re all fcuked, due to the fact we have an aging population, and all of us will need elder care as we age, which is primarily done by these younger generations!
this is our now reality!
Oddly Brophy actually claimed he checked some facts before today's Saturday with Katie Hannon show and still managed to make an eejit of himself today 🙄
Brophy's go to response seems to be 'I am not aware...' which saves him time and again.
A clueless minister good at the silver tongue waffling.
Sock puppetry?
Where have we seen that before?
🤔
Lies again.
I did not retweet or share a tweet about that story. I did comment on it, as you did too and I always said 'if true'.
My original post on the matter is below
If this story breaking about the government jet being used is true,(I'm not saying it is) Leo will be gone before Coveney.
FF/FG/Green Government - Part 3 - Threadbanned User List in OP - Page 131 — boards.ie - Now Ye're Talkin'
The posting of which ^ also makes a mockery of BrokenAngel's remark that there is 'no search function' on Boards. I found that in 2 seconds using the search function.
These chancers have a script when on radio/tv and no matter the question or points raised, the script is always followed. Bit like Leaders Questions in the Dail
And if all else fails say but Shinners and others
From what we can gather it’s bad for FG and a journalist to have sock puppet account,l
But it’s ok for the opposition and opposition friendly journalist to have sock puppet accounts, opposition supporters can do whatever they want
I will leave it to the mods to discuss what the position is with sock puppet/multiple accounts on boards.
Who? I'm not. Read my last post, if it wasn't clear for you in the previous one. The issue is leasing and buying instead of building, not a developers allocation of social. Don't make up my point for me if the one I make doesn't fit your narrative.
The budget argument falls on its arse when we see government cronies brag about the tax take, the economy and we see blank cheques for other projects. Its about making money for housing investors not good deals for the tax payer.
As usual as here it’s dragged into personal comments….then you ask people to thank you 🤦♂️🤦♂️
No because when THEY do its OK, but when others do it its wrong....
It is a strange one, but here's an individual attacking that setup (developers need to provide units for social housing) on the basis that they are luxury apartments (what makes them luxury vs. other apartments other than location, I'm not sure), the end goal would be either that all developers only build luxury units and avoid that requirement, or the state bans luxury units being built.
The next part is the rent vs. buy argument and why the council enters into long term leases for any social housing units, and the answer there is budget, there simply isn't the budget to house people if all social units must be bought, thus long term leases are put in place instead. I understand these things and they will likely continue if the current opposition ends up in Dail Eireann, however some posters use this as an attacking point of the current government, when really the alternate is some form of communism (which that poster seems to be a fan of, even if they won't mutter it out load, watching the opposition move to the centre is going to be a bit of a shock to the system for some).
You know you are wrong and your response is pathetic. As expected. I do not want an apology. You are now a proven liar. Well done. No honour.
Animals are most dangerous when cornered. These people are no more than animals hopefully heading for oblivion.
If you retweet something you are promoting it. Charlie might get off your hook but very few others.
Oh, is this the new rule now?
Well, didn't you retweet lies and untruths about Leo's trip to a festival? Why yes, yes you did....
Therefore arent you promoting lies, fake news and untruths?
Black..Pot...Kettle and all that....
I am speaking about people favouring the tax payer leasing luxury apartments for 25 years with no option to buy, over paying to build housing we own.
A Dublin council has signed an unprecedented 25-year lease on a €55m luxury apartment block for social housing now owned by a cuckoo fund.
The bad guys here are the policy makers.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c6e76a2e0d85c3808d93c2f75a0c528d.svg)
