Social Housing - Rent Means Test

Hitman3000 · 20-06-2018 3:31pm

Ush1 wrote:

I think it's you who wants to submit that particular proposal comrade.

Why I don't benefit from social housing, I did once. I own my own home now, wanting to see others miserable is not my thing.

Diceicle · 20-06-2018 3:31pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

So what? Once they are honouring the terms of their tenancy with the L.A. there is no issue except with the feelings of those who begrudge the security of tenure and favourable rent L.A. tenants have. What do you want equality of misery?

So then they are occupying a home that could be used to house someone in a more needy situation than theirs.

Ush1 · 20-06-2018 3:34pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Why I don't benefit from social housing, I did once. I own my own home now, wanting to see others miserable is not my thing.

I genuinely don't know what you're on about but I have to laugh at paying what pretty much everyone else has to pay is seeing others miserable.

Surely keeping a house from someone more needy is exactly seeing others miserable?

Hitman3000 · 20-06-2018 3:34pm

Diceicle wrote:

So then they are occupying a home that could be used to house someone in a more needy situation than theirs.

No, once they are a bidding by their tenancy agreement they are entitled to occupy their home and to live in the community they are part of.

Hitman3000 · 20-06-2018 3:35pm

Ush1 wrote:

I genuinely don't know what you're on about but I have to laugh at paying what pretty much everyone else has to pay is seeing others miserable.

What??

Diceicle · 20-06-2018 3:35pm

Citizens who are in social housing, who can afford market rates are basically bed-blockers prolonging the misery of more needy families through their selfish actions it would seem....

El Weirdo · 20-06-2018 3:36pm

But wouldn't pushing more people into the private rented sector just push up already crazy prices?

Ush1 · 20-06-2018 3:36pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

No, once they are a bidding by their tenancy agreement they are entitled to occupy their home and to live in the community they are part of.

That's not what the poster said. Read it again.

Hitman3000 · 20-06-2018 3:37pm

Ush1 wrote:

Surely keeping a house from someone more needy is exactly seeing others miserable?

So sitting tenants are the guilty party here. You could have said that from the start and saved so much time and effort on your behave. Basically no L.A. has a right to put down riots or become part of a community? Gotcha.

Hitman3000 · 20-06-2018 3:37pm

Diceicle wrote:

Citizens who are in social housing, who can afford market rates are basically bed-blockers prolonging the misery of more needy families through their selfish actions it would seem....

The mask slips......

Ush1 · 20-06-2018 3:38pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

What??

What don't you understand exactly? I'm saying I think it's fair for people who can afford to pay their way, to pay their way and to help people genuinely in need.

Controversial I know, mad stuff Ted!

Chinasea · 20-06-2018 3:39pm

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Council houses don't usually come with flooring, much less furniture.

The only rents i saw which were that low were for some unfortunate Brits who got only a tiny pension from there and weren't entitled to state pension here.

Actually they do:

https://www.tuathhousing.ie/development/

The issue is with the fact that 2016 saw €73 MILLON in rent arrears in local authority housing.

What a sham all round.

Rent as low as €14.00 per week. Fully furnished "Turn Key" brand new.

Hitman3000 · 20-06-2018 3:39pm

El Weirdo wrote:

But wouldn't pushing more people into the private rented sector just push up already crazy prices?

Sash no place for that kind of logic.

Hitman3000 · 20-06-2018 3:40pm

Ush1 wrote:

What don't you understand exactly? I'm saying I think it's fair for people who can afford to pay their way, to pay their way and to help people genuinely in need.

What you think is irrelevant as you don't set rental policy for the LA's.

Ush1 · 20-06-2018 3:41pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

So sitting tenants are the guilty party here. You could have said that from the start and saved so much time and effort on your behave. Basically no L.A. has a right to put down riots or become part of a community? Gotcha.

Yeah, totally lost me now.

I'm not blaming tenants, I've said that already, I'm blaming policies that allow people, as an example given earlier, on 80k to get a subsidised home.

suicide_circus · 20-06-2018 3:41pm

Housing people without the ability to house themselves is a good thing. But it can't end there.

People working hard, earning the average industrial wage and paying huge rents with no possibility of either buying their own home or having safe and secure leases for their rentals while subsidising others in society is wrong. Plain wrong.

Taking from group A and giving to group B while group A are on a knife edge is profoundly unjust and the hallmark of a dysfunctional society.

Wanderer78 · 20-06-2018 3:42pm

suicide_circus wrote:

Taking from group A and giving to group B while group A are on a knife edge is profoundly unjust and the hallmark of a dysfunctional society.

Or are there more complex causes at play here?

Ush1 · 20-06-2018 3:43pm

El Weirdo wrote: »

But wouldn't pushing more people into the private rented sector just push up already crazy prices?

As I said the government could charge market rates.

It's a different argument really about rental prices. You can link that to planning restrictions etc...

El Weirdo · 20-06-2018 3:44pm

Chinasea wrote: »

Actually they do:

https://www.tuathhousing.ie/development/

The issue is with the fact that 2016 saw €73 MILLON in rent arrears in local authority housing.

What a sham all round.

Rent as low as €14.00 per week. Fully furnished "Turn Key" brand new.

That's poorly worded. Turnkey does not mean that it comes with sofas, beds, white goods, etc.

Also, that's not local authority.

Also, as has been explained, very, very few (if any) tenants will be on the minimum rent.

Also, you haven't told me exactly which part of my first post in this thread is bull.

suicide_circus · 20-06-2018 3:45pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Or are there more complex causes at play here?

Loads of causes at play.

Those that find themselves in a position to live off their own efforts need to be looked after by the state that they fund. That is no happening currently.

Ush1 · 20-06-2018 3:46pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

What you think is irrelevant as you don't set rental policy for the LA's.

You know this is an internet discussion forum yeah?

You know the people on the Donald Trump thread aren't actually members of his administration.

El Weirdo · 20-06-2018 3:48pm

OSI wrote: »

Should someone that is entitled to a medical card due to a lack of income be entitled to keep that medical card when their situation dramatically improves? Should you still be entitled to JSA or JSB once obtaining a job, just because you were once entitled to it?

You can keep your medical card for up to 3 years after returning to work.

Do they still do the Back to Work scheme for people coming off the dole?

Wanderer78 · 20-06-2018 3:48pm

suicide_circus wrote:

Those that find themselves in a position to live off their own efforts need to be looked after by the state that they fund. That is no happening currently.

This is a far more complex problem than taxation and how it is spent, we truly should be looking at the highly dangerous workings of our complex economic systems, including our financial systems

Hitman3000 · 20-06-2018 3:49pm

OSI wrote:

Should someone that is entitled to a medical card due to a lack of income be entitled to keep that medical card when their situation dramatically improves? Should you still be entitled to JSA or JSB once obtaining a job, just because you were once entitled to it?

What's not to like about a bit of whataboutery.?

Diceicle · 20-06-2018 3:50pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

The mask slips......

Ah, dont be like that.
I could have worded it a bit more sensitively but essentially is that not the case?

suicide_circus · 20-06-2018 3:54pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

This is a far more complex problem than taxation and how it is spent, we truly should be looking at the highly dangerous workings of our complex economic systems, including our financial systems

That would need to be a global effort. And will probably only be looked at after a profound global financial collapse. In the meantime, working families pay through the nose for everything with no hope of security of accommodation while subsidising other people's accommodation, income, healthcare etc. Look after everyone or else you build an imbalanced society in which some are infantilised and others are milked.

Ush1 · 20-06-2018 3:57pm

Diceicle wrote: »

Citizens who are in social housing, who can afford market rates are basically bed-blockers prolonging the misery of more needy families through their selfish actions it would seem....

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Wanderer78 · 20-06-2018 3:57pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

That would need to be a global effort. And will probably only be looked at after a profound global financial collapse. In the meantime, working families pay through the nose for everything with no hope of security of accommodation while subsidising other people's accommodation, income, healthcare etc. Look after everyone or else you build an imbalanced society in which some are infantilised and others are milked.

it actually requires both national and international approaches, but first we must actually accept this, we re no where near that yet, and i will agree with you, it probably will take another major economic crisis or two for true change to begin. i will also agree with you, working people cannot keep paying for this, but is the problem truly with the minority in society, and is it best to vilify them and ultimately blame them for these outcomes?

Diceicle · 20-06-2018 4:02pm

Ush1 wrote: »

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

True, its the system that needs changing - and its a problem that shouldn't be added to.
My issue is with some of the attitudes expressed in the thread where its essentially a shrugging of shoulders and an 'I'm alright, Jack' while families sit in hotels etc.
These people are part of the problem.

Ush1 · 20-06-2018 4:07pm

Diceicle wrote: »

True, its the system that needs changing - and its a problem that shouldn't be added to.
My issue is with some of the attitudes expressed in the thread where its essentially a shrugging of shoulders and an 'I'm alright, Jack' while families sit in hotels etc.
These people are part of the problem.

It's much easier to bemoan the government should just build more and more homes for people, instead of saying that demographics of tenants are exploiting the social housing system in what is clearly not the spirit of it's function, also to the detriment of people who genuinely need to avail of it.

Chinasea · 20-06-2018 4:08pm

El Weirdo wrote: »

That's poorly worded. Turnkey does not mean that it comes with sofas, beds, white goods, etc.

Also, that's not local authority.

Also, as has been explained, very, very few (if any) tenants will be on the minimum rent.

Also, you haven't told me exactly which part of my first post in this thread is bull.

Last word merchants are a waste of time.

Read the links. Worship what you will.

El Weirdo · 20-06-2018 4:12pm

Chinasea wrote: »

Last word merchants are a waste of time.

As are those who bring nothing of substance to the conversation and refuse to debate the points made.

rob316 · 20-06-2018 4:12pm

You can't blame anyone in the system just shrugging their shoulders. They played the game, they're going to look after themselves and their own. I cant and wont feel bad that I'm paying considerably less than market value, that a person renting privately is been rinsed for.

Mrs OBumble · 20-06-2018 6:11pm

Chinasea wrote: »

Read the links. Worship what you will.

I did. They make it clear that this is not the usual council home-for-life arrangement:

Speaking on behalf of Westmeath County Council, Cathaoirleach of the Council, Councillor Paul Daly stated “These homes were lying vacant and unfinished until the collaboration between Westmeath County Council, Túath Housing, the DECLG, Housing Agency and NAMA resulted in Túath leasing 12 new homes within this high quality development. The properties are leased by Túath for a period of 20 years and 9 months with an option to purchase in the latter stages of the lease. This development is a valuable contribution to meeting the needs of these housing applicants in Mullingar and I hope to see more similar collaborations between the Council and the affordable housing sector.”

Chinasea · 20-06-2018 6:18pm

I refer to the Dun Laoghaire apartments.

Fully furnished, brand new one bedroom some of which are €14.00 per week.

I know it is hard for some to believe.

Mrs OBumble · 20-06-2018 6:24pm

Chinasea wrote: »

I refer to the Dun Laoghaire apartments.

Fully furnished, brand new one bedroom some of which are €14.00 per week.

I know it is hard for some to believe.

Acquired thru a deal with NAMA, likely to be similar to the Westmeath situation. Not the council housing norm.

Income related rents FROM 14 per week. You'd have a very ****ty income eg the British pensioners I mentioned before, to be paying that little.

Chinasea · 20-06-2018 6:29pm

I've provided the links.

I take issue with €73 MILLON in local authority rent arrears. IMO the rents, enforcement of tenancy agreements and management thereof is a total sham. Walk through any of the estates and then report back.

I'm not going down the black is white road though.

James Brown · 20-06-2018 6:48pm

The problem with the perception of social housing is, people think putting people up in a hotel/B&B or the council buying a house to put them in or renting off a private landlord to put them is...better than building social housing the state owns and renting that out.

The problem is two fold, we've the ill informed spouting 'free house' and 'forever home' and a government loving it because they want a housing crisis to keep the industry heated and rents/sale prices high.

FYI: The social housing model is cheaper

We could enforce eviction on rent arrears, we could save the tax payer money by increasing social housing stock and renting out property the state owns....or we could continue using tax payer money to buy houses off the market, rent them out to those people anyway, fund B&B's/Hotels and subsidise rents which go to private profit.
The problem is with a housing crisis we can no longer blame the unemployed or homeless on looking for a tax payer dig out. As it gets worse and people see friends and neighbours needing tax payer assistance, we'll run out of societal groups to blame.

Ginger83 · 20-06-2018 6:59pm

rob316 wrote: »

You can't blame anyone in the system just shrugging their shoulders. They played the game, they're going to look after themselves and their own. I cant and wont feel bad that I'm paying considerably less than market value, that a person renting privately is been rinsed for.

Why not?

suicide_circus · 20-06-2018 7:05pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

it actually requires both national and international approaches, but first we must actually accept this, we re no where near that yet, and i will agree with you, it probably will take another major economic crisis or two for true change to begin. i will also agree with you, working people cannot keep paying for this, but is the problem truly with the minority in society, and is it best to vilify them and ultimately blame them for these outcomes?

Im not vilifying them, im vilifying the system. There will always be people who for whatever reason can not take care of themselves or their children.

Wanderer78 · 20-06-2018 7:24pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

Im not vilifying them, im vilifying the system. There will always be people who for whatever reason can not take care of themselves or their children.

why not vilify the greater systems that are actually screwing us all, including the wealthy

Mrs OBumble · 20-06-2018 7:27pm

Chinasea wrote: »

I take issue with €73 MILLON in local authority rent arrears. IMO the rents, enforcement of tenancy agreements and management thereof is a total sham. Walk through any of the estates and then report back.

I'm not going down the black is white road though.

I'm not disagreeing with you on the arrears front.

But what do you do with the non-payers? Tossing them out of the house to sleep in the hedgerows is kinda frowned on these days. All it takes is one high-profile suicide of a tenant who was due to be evicted, and judged will be very slow to order eviction is that town for the next 20+ years.

Docking the rent from wages or benefits can work - but may just cause the kids to go hungry 'cos Man or Dad drank the rent money. And I'm not sure if it's constitutional or not.

Wanderer78 · 20-06-2018 7:28pm

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing with you on the arrears front.

But what do you do with the non-payers? Tossing them out of the house to sleep in the hedgerows is kinda frowned on these days. All it takes is one high-profile suicide of a tenant who was due to be evicted, and judged will be very slow to order eviction is that town for the next 20+ years.

Docking the rent from wages or benefits can work - but may just cause the kids to go hungry 'cos Man or Dad drank the rent money. And I'm not sure if it's constitutional or not.

if mammy and daddy have an alcohol problem, maybe mental health professionals are required to truly deal with the situation?

suicide_circus · 20-06-2018 7:32pm

Wanderer78 wrote: »

why not vilify the greater systems that are actually screwing us all, including the wealthy

When a better system has been invented show me where to sign up

Wanderer78 · 20-06-2018 7:35pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

When a better system has been invented show me where to sign up

we first must actually accept, what we currently have, is extremely dangerous for all of us, we re no where near that yet, then, democratically, we must decide what to move onto. there are some interesting ideas out there of how we might do this, and interesting ideas of how we might change our current systems. sadly, many of the ideas are no where near our political sphere

El Weirdo · 21-06-2018 9:45am

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing with you on the arrears front.

But what do you do with the non-payers? Tossing them out of the house to sleep in the hedgerows is kinda frowned on these days. All it takes is one high-profile suicide of a tenant who was due to be evicted, and judged will be very slow to order eviction is that town for the next 20+ years.

Docking the rent from wages or benefits can work - but may just cause the kids to go hungry 'cos Man or Dad drank the rent money. And I'm not sure if it's constitutional or not.

We used to try to get them onto a repayment plan by using the An Post's household budget.

In fact, if they were social welfare recipients, we encouraged them to sign up to pay the rent that way whether they were in arrears or not.

James Brown · 21-06-2018 4:29pm

The tax payer is funding private profits of the construction/housing industry.

Every time we spend tax money on a hotel or private rental instead of a social housing build, the only people benefiting are developers and landlords.

Fine Gael are well aware of this.

We can continue this route or build social housing. Looking at it, the costs of emergency accommodation are increasing, the crisis gets worse and the tax payer takes an increasing hit.

But sure 'forever home'...something something.

Social Housing - Rent Means Test

Comments