Rural Fibre Broadband, Really?

_Brian wrote: »

If you want to live like a battery chicken your welcome to it.

Expect to see more of it in urban areas. As stated above it depends how it is done. If you imagine a latter-day Ballymun we have moved on past that. Selling the concept is the biggest challenge and the scale will not be like the photo, at least not for most of this century.

is_that_so wrote: »

Expect to see more of it in urban areas. As stated above it depends how it is done. If you imagine a latter-day Ballymun we have moved on past that. Selling the concept is the biggest challenge and the scale will not be like the photo, at least not for most of this century.

Why not at that scale? Thats the norm all over Europe and in london, cant speak for rest of UK. Land is finite. People seem to have a problem grasping this.

OP, it is absolutely essential that I get my porn in 4K, preferably 8K, on my 82" TV out here in the sticks...!

jmayo wrote: »

But this is the problem with Ireland.
And it is just not apartments, but townhouses and even semi Ds. You can hear the neighbour p*** because the build quality is not there.

It isn't some utopia as described by Klaz above where you have facilities for exercise or kids to play, where there are shops and services on the ground levels, where there is probably allocated storage space for each apartment and most importantly where there is security and policing to keep crime at bay.

No this is fooking Ireland where they build the accommodation, rack em and stack em.
Then they worry about the services sometime later.

Look up the history of Tallaght to see how Ireland has done things and continues to do things.
FFS we can't even build a few school properly without some shyster making a hames of it.
We have probably thousands of apartments out there that could be fire hazards.

The theory of high density living is fine.
The reality is very different, I can’t think of one example in Ireland that has been done properly. Think, tallaght, Finglas, Muirhevnamor , all places where people were stuffed in on top of each other and society broke down as a result.

I live in the sticks yes but I belong here on our farm, my family history goes back generations, within two hindered meters of my house are the ruins of my great, great grandmothers birthplace. We provide our own water, our own sewage, grow some of our own fuel on our site in a coppice.

_Brian wrote: »

The theory of high density living is fine.
The reality is very different, I can’t think of one example in Ireland that has been done properly. Think, tallaght, Finglas, Muirhevnamor , all places where people were stuffed in on top of each other and society broke down as a result.

I live in the sticks yes but I belong here on our farm, my family history goes back generations, within two hindered meters of my house are the ruins of my great, great grandmothers birthplace. We provide our own water, our own sewage, grow some of our own fuel on our site in a coppice.

the problem with tallaght and finglas isnt that its high density housing, its some of the people that they put in the houses.

do you think that ballsbridge will fall apart because on lansdowne place for example?

_Brian wrote: »

Sadly more and more of our population are becoming people you don’t want to be stacked in a tower block with.
And the elite areas you mention are way in the minority.

doesnt change my point though, its not an issue with the concept, its an issue with the people. Tower blocks work fine in manhatten.

My partners flat is in a fairly high density apartment complex and its absolutely fine. You cant hear anyone and the place is kept immaculate. The maintenance fees are pretty steep in fairness. I wasnt able to afford such a place so i bought a family home alone in D5. Id way rather be more central in a flat. We need to build so many apartments as central as possible so that folk like myself might be able to afford them and the suburbs can be left to families.

_Brian wrote: »

Not much consolation when your stuck in high density housing in Ireland with a bunch of feral knuckle draggers

Thats only if you put welfare people into the flats. There are probably 10s of 1000s of professionals who would love to live in high rise in a good central area.

Cyrus wrote: »

low density housing where your nearest neighbours are feral knuckle draggers isnt any better,

the common denominator is feral knuckle draggers.

i prefer to live away from them myself

Yea.
We have neighbors like that, but having your neighbors nearly 2km away lowers the inconvenience considerably.

Remote living is fecking mighty. Wouldn't change from it for the world

Problem with broadband though is the more bandwidth you give people the more they waste and this drives up demand. You can achieve loads with piddly speeds of .1 of a mbit if you know how. The bloat in most modern websites is fairly shocking as well. Most of the bandwidth you give people goes unused, and out of what does get used most of it is wasted

Born and raised in a large Dublin commuter town and living in the sticks now - I wouldn't go back to urban living, ever.

I have an amazing top spec house that cost less than a basic 3 bed in Ballyfermot. I dont have to contend with asshole neighbours like in my previous home. My kids can play outside safe from cars and the air quality is far better. I wake up with a view of the mountains, have a river at the end of the garden and a large wood about 5 mins walk away.

I could have stayed in Dublin and I have been offered fantastic jobs up there but I consciously decided to move down the country, work locally for about half the money and actually live a life and see my family.

Dublin may have the greatest tax contribution but it also has the biggest social outlay and it's greatest receipients of tax payers money. If the numbers were cruched per capita, I'd say the contributions versus outlay of people living rurally would far exceed Dublin and major urban areas.

Also worth noting, more people working from home and not having to commute means less traffic, less accidents, less emmissions etc. This can only be achieved through the national broadband plan.

Shelflife wrote: »

if you were to look at the situation slightly differently and instead of broadband we were talking about water.

So the rural population have themselves sorted with their own springs and group water schemes and pay for these services or install run them themselves.

Clearly Dublin population dont have this option but do have the option of taking water from Wicklow , treating it in Kildare and then pumping it back to Dublin also we wont charge the Dublin population for this service we are providing.

So in this instance the rural population source and pay for their own water supply but the Dublin population get it supplied for free ?

I dont think anyone would suggest that if you want to live in a city then you have to do without water or pay an exorbitant price for it .

While broadband isnt in the same category as water its becoming more and more necessary in the age that we live in and similar to electricity and water it should be accessible by all at a reasonable cost.

where do you think the money for the 'free' water comes from?

Shelflife wrote: »

The tax payers from the whole country.

Same as the broadband plan.

and where does the bulk of the tax come from......

Morris Moss wrote: »

What was your bill for water this year? Mine was over 2 and a half grand, so maybe if everybody paid for water like they should I wouldn't be subsidising the likes of the water protesters, anything people in the country have they pay for it.

On the rural broadband scheme I think it's madness, cover towns and villages upto a certain distance but after that if you want it pay for it.

whats your local property tax for this year?

its swings and roundabouts, but if you live remotely of course you should pay for your own water, it only makes sense to include it as a public service when people are in built up areas.

Cyrus wrote: »

and where does the bulk of the tax come from......

And where is the bulk of the tax take spent?

Dublin generates the most tax money but also spends the most, which is fair enough.

if you live remotely of course you should pay for your own water

Most do, they have wells or group water schemes. They still contribute to the water costs for Dublin via taxation.

On the rural broadband scheme I think it's madness, cover towns and villages upto a certain distance but after that if you want it pay for it

Likewise for water, if you want it, get it yourself through rain water harvesting and treat it. Why should I pay my taxes towards free water when I pay for mine?

Gary kk wrote: »

I thought that was kinda leveled so everyone pays a similar amount. So a house worth 250k in Dublin would pay the same amount as house worth 150k in say waterford.

its not

some local councils have a 15% discount but its places like Dun laoghaire rathdown where houses are more likely to be 600k+

Cassidy Stale Chimp wrote: »

Rural people pay for water through taxation and don't receive the service and then pay for their own water. The water charges were heavily supported by people in rural areas as it was a much fairer system. But a large cohort of knuckle dragging townie and city scum refused to pay, they should have sent on the riot squad on them rather than pandering to them.

for once i agree i had no issue with water charges as a concept, but also my property tax shouldnt be subsidising the rest of the country. Especially as i live in a private estate and already pay a management charge as the council havent taken it in charge.

i wouldnt say the anti water protestors was confined to scum in cities, there was plenty of other scumbags agitating against it.

Cyrus wrote: »

whats your local property tax for this year?

its swings and roundabouts, but if you live remotely of course you should pay for your own water, it only makes sense to include it as a public service when people are in built up areas.

Yes a public service, but one you should pay for much like your electricity, gas or cable.

Cyrus wrote: »

for once i agree i had no issue with water charges as a concept, but also my property tax shouldnt be subsidising the rest of the country. Especially as i live in a private estate and already pay a management charge as the council havent taken it in charge.

i wouldnt say the anti water protestors was confined to scum in cities, there was plenty of other scumbags agitating against it.

Your property tax should be for local services such as roads, footpaths, lighting, local libraries, local community centres, parks, playgrounds, etc.

But much like the road tax/motor tax/"whatever the feck you want to call it" and all the other motor related taxes are not ring fenced for roads and motorists, neither is your property tax really ring fenced for local services.
Same with any future environmental taxes which they tell you will be used to help fight climate change.
They all get dumped in the central pot and firstly public sector salaries, welfare, health spending, education have to be taken care of.
Then it's a grab for what is left.

As regards Broadband I think some local providers have been doing a pretty good job filling the gaps left by the big carriers and our state.
If anything offer them subventions and tax incentives.

Now the state is getting involved I expect little better, but a lot of money wasted and conveniently ending up in certain people's pockets.

I think the last proper major infrastructure project in the state was our digital phone upgrade in the early to mid 1980s.
We ended up with one of the best most modern systems in the world.
There even was foresight and side deals done to get Alcatel and Ericsson to set up companies and manufacturing sites in ireland some of which still exist.
Before that it would have been electrification.

Since then we have made a hames of major road projects, see M50 as prime example.
We made a total balls of Luas with huge time and cost overruns.
Don't get me started on Irish Water debacle or the National Childrens hospital.

We are fooking hopeless at big projects.