Councillor gets social and housing sorted. Met with protests.

James Brown · 06-11-2019 6:00pm

Gatling wrote: »

Tell working families sorry you might never be able to buy your own home ,then tell them a family in social housing can buy their LA house after 24 months in it at a big discount ,

The only issue there is the cap. What income is too high for social housing?
I'd suggest the best fix would be to approach your politicians on making affordable housing available to any family who don't make enough to afford to buy off market.
Why go after those worse off than you, who don't make the policies or make the housing crisis worse by pandering and catering for private developers?

We are engaged in a race to the bottom. 'If I can't afford it, why is somebody worse off getting it at a discount?'.
Should be looking to policy makers to improve everyone's lot, not take from those worse off.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 6:00pm

Scoundrel wrote: »

:rolleyes:this is absolute nonsense no one wants free housing just affordable state built housing in return for paying our tax yes there are perma dole wasters but they are a statistically insignificant amount of people. The private sector only build houses in order to make obscene profit often cutting corners to do so and successive governments have lazily dumped housing into their laps I'm arguing simply that in return for all the tax we pay the very least a government should do is provide housing for its people.

This shows the naïveté and I’m sick of hearing this BS! . The private house builders sole motivation like any company is profit. Or what am I missing. “The market , hasn’t solved the problem“. Companies are generally very efficient at what they do. It’s the politicans and civil servants that are responsible for this disgrace ! Surprise surprise they use spin doctors and keep pointing the blame at any one but themselves , not surprisingly and you and many others actually buy this narrative. It’s unbelievable stuff !

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 6:01pm

bubblypop wrote: »

Not when there are not enough social houses it doesn't.
There are huge amounts of single people who bought their council houses cheap & now live alone in 3 bed houses.
Would make more sense for those people to rent a social house for an long as they need to, until such a time as they can afford their own home.
If they stay in social housing for their whole life, they get downsized to an appropriate residence at their needs change.

Like they do in any other country. Mad talk here though !!!

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 6:02pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Rent is based on income. The whole point is they pay next to nothing if they earn next to nothing.

You can't buy if you are in arrears or have a history of non-payment.

The discount below market is calculated based on how many years you payed rent there. People who lived in properties built in the 30's and 40's for decades, got offered a discount on current market value. I would guess in many cases the council made any money spent in construction back a number of times over.

What discount do I get it I get the opportunity to buy a place that’s rented on the private market , having paid a fortune at market rent for years or decades ?

06-11-2019 6:03pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Sounds fair enough.

It's very fair, and in areas like mine (sh/t hole) it helps tame the place and calm people down as people, generally speaking, are more likely to take care of their house, and general area, once they are committed to it financially.

Our estate has a lot of anti social messing, but it's mostly caused by the stereotype social tenant. Driving through the estate, it can be obvious which houses are owned privately (generally taken care of and maintained) and which ones aren't.

People will give out about the scheme a lot, but i think it's a good one.

Gatling · 06-11-2019 6:04pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The only issue there is the cap. What income is too high for social housing?

Currently €42,000 (open to correction) is the cap in Dublin income wise for social housing , but a couple already in social housing could in theory earn double that and still pay a small subsidised rent ,
When they could actually afford to get a mortgage

kowloon · 06-11-2019 6:09pm

FTA69 wrote: »

I don’t get this “foreva home” b*llocks that comes up everytime someone suggests building social housing.

I hear it all the time when it comes to adopting cats and dogs. Are people using it to describe houses purposely comparing the inhabitants to dogs or have I gotten this wrong?

James Brown · 06-11-2019 6:18pm

Gatling wrote: »

Currently €42,000 (open to correction) is the cap in Dublin income wise for social housing , but a couple already in social housing could in theory earn double that and still pay a small subsidised rent ,
When they could actually afford to get a mortgage

True. How many couples do we think are earning over or double €42,000, and have not been rent assessed since they start earning that much?
Rent is based on income. They assess income from time to time.

I would guess if you go into them looking to avail of such a scheme and have an income in the region of 80 grand, they tell you were to go. I would hope so anyway.

Gatling · 06-11-2019 6:18pm

kowloon wrote: »

I hear it all the time when it comes to adopting cats and dogs. Are people using it to describe houses purposely comparing the inhabitants to dogs or have I gotten this wrong?

It's the buzzword for people demanding social housing all I want is my foreva home I always promised my children

Boggles · 06-11-2019 6:43pm

Gatling wrote: »

Tell working families sorry you might never be able to buy your own home ,then tell them a family in social housing can buy their LA house after 24 months in it at a big discount ,
Meanwhile the working families face multiple hour commutes from outside Dublin or elsewhere while Johnny sit on his hole gets to choose what part of Dublin he chooses to live for next to nothing

Do you live in a cave somewhere, cut off entirely from society? People who live in Social Housing work FFS

:rolleyes:.

Gatling · 06-11-2019 6:45pm

Boggles wrote: »

People who live in Social work

Not all though ,

And now you will ask for proof followed by me laughing followed by deflections and roundabouts till a mod gets involved typical stuff

Gatling · 06-11-2019 6:49pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

True. How many couples do we think are earning over or double €42,000, and have not been rent assessed since they start earning that much?
Rent is based on income. They assess income from time to time.

Usually It's capped at 15% of the principal earner but that only covers paid and taxable income for instance many families will declare one parent while denying all knowledge of their partners

blanch152 · 06-11-2019 7:09pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Found the details.
I was familiar with the tenant purchase scheme.

You get a discount based on income.
You have to pay back any discount you get over a number of years and it reduces over time. I don't see the problem?
It's basically affordable housing for people on low incomes.

Eh, no, you don't pay back the discount, the council writes it off, 2% a year.

https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/publications/files/2016_02_19_-_tenant_information_booklet_-_tips_2016.pdf

It's all in the booklet - see pages 12 and 13.

It's a foreva house for half-price scheme.

James Brown · 06-11-2019 7:13pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Eh, no, you don't pay back the discount, the council writes it off, 2% a year.

https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/publications/files/2016_02_19_-_tenant_information_booklet_-_tips_2016.pdf

It's all in the booklet - see pages 12 and 13.

It's a foreva house for half-price scheme.

Writes off what at 2% a year? I mean if you're not paying it back, what are they lowering by 2% a year?

The use of 'foreva' as it relates to housing tax payers is the height of ignorance, especially during the Fine Gael housing crisis. This 'us and them' approach is disgusting quite frankly. The only difference is income level. Being poor isn't a crime despite Fine Gael's best efforts to punish them.

We are engaged in a race to the bottom. 'If I can't afford it, why is somebody worse off getting it at a discount?'.
Should be looking to policy makers to improve everyone's lot, not take from those worse off.

What's your solution Blanch? You're a great hurler from the ditch but won't put your own ideas out there.

BattleCorp · 06-11-2019 7:41pm

Scoundrel wrote: »

Yes absolutely the government should be providing housing for everyone payed for through tax and of course an affordable mortgage would be payed each month by householders. IMO private development is the cause of the crisis

You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the government should be providing houses for everyone. Is there even a country in the world that does that.......Oh yeah, North Korea does. It is absolutely unaffordable for the government to provide houses for everyone. There isn't enough tax revenue available to pay for it.

I don't see how private development caused this crisis either. Why do you think private development caused the crisis?

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 7:45pm

I don’t agree with rio off housing. The culprits are the government, far too many are getting a ridiculously over the top deal and others are shafted as a result. I’m for a system that allows affordable housing to all. Increased funding for this , can come from the biggest piss take of all, virtually fre housing , joke rent. No lpt. That’s where another few hundred million a year come from , to start providing more housing for the hard working Masses. Big increase in lpt too !

James Brown · 06-11-2019 7:45pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the government should be providing houses for everyone. Is there even a country in the world that does that.......Oh yeah, North Korea does. It is absolutely unaffordable for the government to provide houses for everyone. There isn't enough tax revenue available to pay for it.

I don't see how private development caused this crisis either. Why do you think private development caused the crisis?

The government does provide housing for pretty much everyone. It's how much business we, the tax payer, wants to give to private business that's the only discussion AFAIC.

Affordable housing should be made available to anybody working who is not, by a specified margin, able to buy at the FG/FF artificially inflated market rate.

Fine Gael and Fianna Fail caused and exacerbate the housing crisis. LA's don't help either.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 7:47pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the government should be providing houses for everyone. Is there even a country in the world that does that.......Oh yeah, North Korea does. It is absolutely unaffordable for the government to provide houses for everyone. There isn't enough tax revenue available to pay for it.

I don't see how private development caused this crisis either. Why do you think private development caused the crisis?

Please. Asking how private developers caused the crisis, just feeds the trolls. I thought policy and planning in this area , and providing reasonably affordable property for those on low to lowish incomes was the states remit. But I’m clearly a moron!

Dyr · 06-11-2019 7:48pm

Land value in Dublin off the chart. Joe taxpayers land being handed over to private develpors for free

Dublin city council at its finest folks

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 7:59pm

1) we shouldnt be building social housing there anyway
2) the 164 'non price capped' houses, who in their right mind would spend presumably over 310k to live near that kip
3) affordable at 310k .....
"New figures from the Central Statistics Office show that median gross income for households stood at €45,256 in 2016" which x3.5 = 158k divide by 9 multiply by 10 and 176k buy with a 17.6k deposit is the cap at which a property should be titled "affordable" a cent above that and its out of reach of households on the median income.

Garry gannon really did try here, but not a chance was that deal going through, Id pity anyone putting money up for these at all, its going to end up with hard working people ending up in negative equity unable to jump up from a 2 bed apartment fierce quick.

A mix of 'affordable' and privately owned owner occupier mandate homes would have been the best for that site.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 8:09pm

sure with All this talk of sustainability etc, doesn’t it make sense that the skangers live in central locations and workers drive up here from Roscommon ?

We keep on hearing about the dying of rural Ireland. Relocate the skangers there , they’ll be relatively isolated not causing nuisance to multiple neighbors in an apartment and the local economy can thrive , with the billions wasted on bookies , takeaways and pubs ! Huge demand then for welfare Wednesday post offices and to reopen closed Garda stations !

Are the social and affordable in the same or different blocks ? Assuming privaye one’s are in their own block ?!

Boggles · 06-11-2019 8:12pm

Gatling wrote: »

Not all though

Indeed, but your ignorant rage typing suggest none do.

BattleCorp · 06-11-2019 8:16pm

Idbatterim wrote: »

Are the social and affordable in the same or different blocks ? Assuming privaye one’s are in their own block ?!

I know I'll be shot down for having this opinion but I'd be well p1ssed off if I worked my balls off for years and paid top dollar for one of those houses and someone got one for pretty much free beside me.

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 8:18pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

I know I'll be shot down for having this opinion but I'd be well p1ssed off if I worked my balls off for years and paid top dollar for one of those houses and someone got one for pretty much free beside me.

even being beside an 'affordable' house (if it was to the same standard) would piss me off , but the idea of one of the 'non affordable' units even sharing a stairwell or courtyard with the social houses would turn my stomach.

Gatling · 06-11-2019 8:18pm

Boggles wrote: »

rage typing .

Some people are having a discussion you just seem to be trolling me .
Don't blame anyone for your own failing to understand a discussion

Gatling · 06-11-2019 8:22pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

I know I'll be shot down for having this opinion but I'd be well p1ssed off if I worked my balls off for years and paid top dollar for one of those houses and someone got one for pretty much free beside me.

Happened to one of managers bought in a fairly new estate in Kildare has a mortgage for 550,000 the road backing on to them about 10 houses were bought by the local authorities for social housing ,

LillySV · 06-11-2019 8:24pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

I know I'll be shot down for having this opinion but I'd be well p1ssed off if I worked my balls off for years and paid top dollar for one of those houses and someone got one for pretty much free beside me.

Did u read all the millennials, freeloaders and scum demanding free houses on his twitter account.... taxpayer paying too much for too long to provide for uselesss wasters who are too lazy to provide for themselves

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 8:26pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

I know I'll be shot down for having this opinion but I'd be well p1ssed off if I worked my balls off for years and paid top dollar for one of those houses and someone got one for pretty much free beside me.

You see this is it. All of this “ best practice “ bull**** , come up with by the decision makers , who will never, EVER be victims of their own policy of living beside these **** and would leave pack up within hours if they ever had to !

Or by the do gooders, no experience of having these people as neighbors. Laughable hypocrites or delusional, take your pick!

The odd time I go up north , I throw a hundred euro worth of petrol into the tank , couldn’t care less if it’s a few irrelevant cent less down here. Stops a big chunk of it being wasted down here !

I was in the states a few months ago. I’d be considered left wing over there chatting to people! Here? With my moderate views ? Far far right! Don’t forget who votes you in varadkar you snake. Because you’re not getting a single vote from Margaret cash or her Ilk , the ones you bend over backwards for while hanging the early risers out to dry you treacherous invertebrate!

lola85 · 06-11-2019 8:29pm

Social housing used to be the basics.

2 bedroomes house regardless of how many kids you have, that’s your problem to sort.

Now it’s people demanding 5 bedroom houses for each kid and fully furnished.

Sick entitlement culture.

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 8:36pm

lola85 wrote: »

Social housing used to be the basics.

2 bedroomes house regardless of how many kids you have, that’s your problem to sort.

Now it’s people demanding 5 bedroom houses for each kid and fully furnished.

Sick entitlement culture.

true, but in those days it was different kinds of tenants too, theres a turning point on social housing in the 70s, most people arguing for social housing seem to either believe its like the 50s or just have economic guilt. Drugs, immigration and the constant bloating of the welfare state changed everything. Even our acceptance of single parent families and having kids before marriage, as much as theres nothing wrong with that, it created a culture. When my grandfather got his council house the entire street was working, antisocial behaviour was minor and drugs werent a factor. Most growing up there went to school and got jobs and the work ethic was instilled, thats not a thing anymore. Children now are growing up in Ireland where their parents and their friends parents have never held a job, where the only guy on the road who does anything productive with his day is selling coke and theres about 28 fathers responsible for 30 children but only 2 of them are around. Its a complete decay of ambition, ethics, morality and paternal education. It can only result in decay and crime and antisocial problems.

Boggles · 06-11-2019 8:36pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

even being beside an 'affordable' house (if it was to the same standard) would piss me off , but the idea of one of the 'non affordable' units even sharing a stairwell or courtyard with the social houses would turn my stomach.

Where do you live?

It has been a prerequisite for years that 10% of new developments are set aside for affordable / social housing.

Honestly you would want to be a special sort of contrarian if that would you píss you off to the point where you were physically sick.

Couldn't imagine living with that level of begrudgery TBH.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 8:37pm

lola85 wrote: »

Social housing used to be the basics.

2 bedroomes house regardless of how many kids you have, that’s your problem to sort.

Now it’s people demanding 5 bedroom houses for each kid and fully furnished.

Sick entitlement culture.

I believe that’s the way it is in Germany. You can forget thinking more scrotes is going to get you more leverage!

Set up a giant camp site in Phoenix park and give them a tent ! They can have their f***** central location to go in and peruse fine art in the national gallery and fine dine or whatever it is they do with all that time and money on their hands !

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 8:38pm

Boggles wrote: »

Where do you live?

It has been a prerequisite for years that 10% of new developments are set aside for affordable / social housing.

Honestly you would want to be a special sort contrarian if that would you píss you off to the point where you were physically sick.

in the middle of 2 acres of land surrounded by an estate of detached houses built in the 70s that were all privately owned and always have been.

Gatling · 06-11-2019 8:38pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

in the middle of 2 acres of land surrounded by an estate of detached houses built in the 70s that were all privately owned and always have been.

Rich kids

Boggles · 06-11-2019 8:40pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

in the middle of 2 acres of land surrounded by an estate of detached houses built in the 70s that were all privately owned and always have been.

Still living at home? Good for you, not everyone is so fortunate to be able to do that.

Hopefully the council buy up a few of the houses around you.

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 8:41pm

Boggles wrote: »

Still living at home? Good for you, not everyone is so fortunate to be able to do that.

:pac: I dont own it and won't claim to, but good areas have rentals too.... youd love to think im like this because my parents are minted, sadly not.

Boggles · 06-11-2019 8:45pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

:pac: I dont own it and won't claim to, but good areas have rentals too....

I was jesting.

Having a percentage of affordable homes in new developments is a good idea, rising tide and all that.

We don't need to build more houses that just leads to higher house prices, we need to build more affordable homes for everybody who wants one.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 8:48pm

The more I think about it the more it makes sense to relocate the skangers. It rains more in west of Ireland , relocate them there and they can get their free water from the heavens in pots and pans! Will boost the numbers going to mass there too !

Gatling · 06-11-2019 8:49pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

:pac: I dont own it and won't claim to, but good areas have rentals too.... youd love to think im like this because my parents are minted, sadly not.

Unlike largely social housing estates where aspirations tend to amount to leaving school early then going on the scratcher ,or a young girl deciding she's going to have a baby followed by several others because she wants her own 4eva house like her mammie got and her mammie before her .

It's an endless cycle

James Brown · 06-11-2019 8:50pm

lola85 wrote: »

Social housing used to be the basics.

2 bedroomes house regardless of how many kids you have, that’s your problem to sort.

Now it’s people demanding 5 bedroom houses for each kid and fully furnished.

Sick entitlement culture.

No. Now it's hotels and private landlords paid by the state.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

true, but in those days it was different kinds of tenants too, theres a turning point on social housing in the 70s, most people arguing for social housing seem to either believe its like the 50s or just have economic guilt. Drugs, immigration and the constant bloating of the welfare state changed everything. Even our acceptance of single parent families and having kids before marriage, as much as theres nothing wrong with that, it created a culture. When my grandfather got his council house the entire street was working, antisocial behaviour was minor and drugs werent a factor. Most growing up there went to school and got jobs and the work ethic was instilled, thats not a thing anymore. Children now are growing up in Ireland where their parents and their friends parents have never held a job, where the only guy on the road who does anything productive with his day is selling coke and theres about 28 fathers responsible for 30 children but only 2 of them are around. Its a complete decay of ambition, ethics, morality and paternal education. It can only result in decay and crime and antisocial problems.

You are still talking about a minority.
Most people are hard working tax payers. What about them? What about the people like your Grandfather?

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 8:50pm

Boggles wrote: »

I was jesting.

Having a percentage of affordable homes in new developments is a good idea, rising tide and all that.

We don't need to build more houses that just leads to higher house prices, we need to build more affordable homes for everybody who wants one.

Ive never given out about developments of affordable housing , ive actually given out about how the definition of affordable can be 310k , id much rather see an affordable housing plan for the commuters of dublin at the detriment of social housing which has no need to be in the commuter belt. But I do think the mixed development model is flawed, the children of those in affordable housing only stand to lose when you put social with it. Affordable housing now is what social housing was in the 50s , social housing now is what slums were.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 8:51pm

Gatling wrote: »

Unlike largely social housing estates where aspirations tend to amount to leaving school early then going on the scratcher ,or a young girl deciding she's going to have a baby followed by several others because she wants her own 4eva house like her mammie got and her mammie before her .

It's an endless cycle

Simple. No leaving cert , no welfare. A welfare system based on what you paid in too. No contributions, no welfare. Cut it off totally after a period.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 8:54pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ive never given out about developments of affordable housing , ive actually given out about how the definition of affordable can be 310k , id much rather see an affordable housing plan for the commuters of dublin at the detriment of social housing which has no need to be in the commuter belt. But I do think the mixed development model is flawed, the children of those in affordable housing only stand to lose when you put social with it. Affordable housing now is what social housing was in the 50s , social housing now is what slums were.

310,000 is “ affordable “ yet the scrotes getting the virtually free housing, with the free money provided by those expectated to pay e310,000 can’t or won’t even pay the pittance in rent to the council ? Comedy ! Comedy !

lola85 · 06-11-2019 8:54pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No. Now it's hotels and private landlords paid by the state.

You are still talking about a minority.
Most people are hard working tax payers. What about them? What about the people like your Grandfather?

I’m quite happy with hotels and houses rented out by private landlords to house these people.

Honestly they don’t deserve a house for pittance while we subsidize our own mortgage and theirs.

If they want better then better themselves first.

Survival of the fittest and all that.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 8:55pm

lola85 wrote: »

I’m quite happy with hotels and houses rented out to private landlords to house these people.

Honestly they didn’t deserve a house for pittance while we subsidize our own mortgage and theirs.

If they want better then better themselves first.

Survival of the fittest and all that.

And take responsibility? And work hard to improve their own situation? Don’t be absurd! Mad talk !

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 8:56pm

Idbatterim wrote: »

And take responsibility? And work hard to improve their own situation? Don’t be absurd! Mad talk !

the state has to bottle (vodka) feed them from cradle to grave or its not good enough. Free house, free legal aid, free school clothes and books, free everything and absolutely no personal responsibility.

BattleCorp · 06-11-2019 9:07pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You are still talking about a minority.
?

It appears to be a growing minority that is increasingly costly to look after them. Our social welfare model that rewards those who don't try to help themselves is unsustainable.

Idbatterim · 06-11-2019 9:11pm

Yeah. There is going to be a massive increase in pension aged population. You can assume health budget will obviously then increase largely too. Then you have motor related revenue for example that will probably start falling quite a lot over the next few years. The days of ridiculous welfare increases every year are over. This budget they got nearly nothing and it’s an election year with a booing economy. Not that the workers got anything either. But you can tell that if they aren’t throwing anything to the welfare classes first and foremost, that all is not rosy !

James Brown · 06-11-2019 9:18pm

lola85 wrote: »

I’m quite happy with hotels and houses rented out by private landlords to house these people.

Honestly they don’t deserve a house for pittance while we subsidize our own mortgage and theirs.

If they want better then better themselves first.

Survival of the fittest and all that.

That's not what societies are for.

If they want better, for sure.

As a tax payer I'd rather not be paying hotel bills or rents at the going rate or buying houses at the going rate for these people to use as social housing.

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 9:27pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's not what societies are for.

If they want better, for sure.

As a tax payer I'd rather not be paying hotel bills or rents at the going rate or buying houses at the going rate for these people to use as social housing.

agreed, but the solution is to tell them they can't have dublin. thats what theyre holding out for.

Councillor gets social and housing sorted. Met with protests.

Comments