Councillor gets social and housing sorted. Met with protests.

Boggles · 06-11-2019 9:38pm

BattleCorp wrote: »

It appears to be a growing minority that is increasingly costly to look after them.

That would be pensioners.

The people who made it possible for you to attend school and everything else you took for granted.

Eric Cartman · 06-11-2019 9:45pm

Boggles wrote: »

That would be pensioners.

The people who made it possible for you to attend school and everything else you took for granted.

pensioner numbers increasing
those who work arent having kids / having less than 2 kids
those who have never worked having all the children
migrants who dont work re-unifying their familes who dont work and having more kids who dont work.

we're literally going to fall off a cliff when the net contributor to net recipient quota drops and we're speeding towards that.

maxsmum · 06-11-2019 9:58pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

pensioner numbers increasing
those who work arent having kids / having less than 2 kids
those who have never worked having all the children
migrants who dont work re-unifying their familes who dont work and having more kids who dont work.

we're literally going to fall off a cliff when the net contributor to net recipient quota drops and we're speeding towards that.

Sad thing is I'm a professional who'd love to have more kids but can't afford childcare! And my kids would likely be good taxpayers too!

NasserShammaz · 06-11-2019 10:03pm

maxsmum wrote: »

Sad thing is I'm a professional who'd love to have more kids but can't afford childcare! And my kids would likely be good taxpayers too!

In a different country hopefully and not another generation funding an other generation I'll of parasites

AulWan · 06-11-2019 11:12pm

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

I know a few single mothers on HAP after their Ex's ****ed off and left them raising their kid(s) 5/6 days of the week.
It's a miserable and lonely existence, they have one night a week they can get out if they're lucky and have money. Some of them work part time when their kids are in school (hard to get this kind of work). They're not skangers etc, just normal people that haven't had a great run. They'd be lucky if they got to talk face to face to another adult in any given week.

I get they feel they need their own space, especially with kids. But for young mothers in particular, I genuinely feel they'd be better off living at home with their parents. Having on site/at home/on premises (or whatever you want to call it) support from family is very beneficial. It gives the woman a chance to get back on her feet, get a good job, go back to college, bit more free time, more money, etc.

I know a few single mothers that are living at home too, and there's absolutely no question that women living with their parents are far happier.

I have to disagree with this point. While it all sounds great in theory, in my experience when you have two women (mother and daughter) living in the same house raising a child (grandchild) it rarely goes well, long term. Difference in parenting styles or rows over discipline of older children, can cause major issues and tension. What Ive seen happen is grandmother ends up taking over and mother has to defer to her own mother when it comes to making decisions for their own child - it rarely ends on good terms.

Also, not all grandparents want , or have room, for a grandchild to live with them.

I still lived at home when I had my first and I moved out by the time they were 3 months old as I'd seen the above happen to some of my friends and I knew I wanted there to be absolutely no confusion in my child's mind, as to who was Mother and who was Grandmother. Luckily I was able to buy, but I'd tell any single parent to try and move out of their parents' houses as soon as they can manage it.

Effects · 07-11-2019 12:48am

maxsmum wrote: »

If you work in town in public service, and you're below the income limit, these houses should be earmarked for you.

Sorry, can't agree with that. I know people who work in the public service who are the some of laziest people I know. One of them even takes the max number of sick days that she can, just because it's available to take. Something like 183 days in a four year period.
People like that shouldn't be rewarded because they took a safe, easy job.

Raconteuse · 07-11-2019 12:57am

Idbatterim wrote: »

Yeah the Vienna model is excellent.

Germanic societies tend to be ones though where "social" is literal - people are aware that it's not just about them, they are part of a larger jigsaw and so they pull together, resulting in top quality public services and amenities.

In this country though, it's just "give ME all the stuff for nothing" under the *pretence* of social good. Very individualist. Seems more like capitalism to me.

end of the road · 07-11-2019 1:35am

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.

sure, but the reality is that there will always be situations where someone will get a better deal on a house.

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.

that is exactly why mixed developments of all walks of life is a good policy and should continue. force out the classism, self entitlement and thinking you are better then or above someone else just because of the amount of money you have or the status of your living arrangements.

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.

survival of the fittest doesn't work.
i don't get why you are happy to be spending a massive amount of money on hotels and subsidizing private land lords because a small few people you don't like might get something. dispite the fact that something different would likely benefit a lot more people, people who just need a dig out.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

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.

plenty of people benefit from free legal aid.
a vital tool to insure access to fair and representative justice for those who need it.

end of the road · 07-11-2019 1:38am

Idbatterim wrote: »

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 ?!

yeah, how much are my taxes possibly increasing to pay for this cleansing/jerry mandering nonsense?
rural ireland is dying for a reason, turning it into a dumping ground won't regenerate it, it will just be a repeat of what we already tried, probably on a more expensive scale.
what billions are being wasted on bookies, takeaways and pubs?

Idbatterim wrote: »

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.

so how much more will we have to pay in taxes to deal with the fallout from this?

Idbatterim wrote: »

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

it is when you and those of your viewpoint would be the first to refuse to employ these people if they came to you for a job i would suspect.

Calhoun · 07-11-2019 1:39am

Great to see the shine coming off old Gary after the local election debacle in his party.

Horsebox9000 · 07-11-2019 1:49am

Raconteuse wrote: »

Germanic societies tend to be ones though where "social" is literal - people are aware that it's not just about them, they are part of a larger jigsaw and so they pull together, resulting in top quality public services and amenities.

In this country though, it's just "give ME all the stuff for nothing" under the *pretence* of social good. Very individualist. Seems more like capitalism to me.

This x100000000
My partner is German and works in social services here and she couldn't believe how self centred many of the people she encountered here have been. She's worked in this field in a few countries and says Ireland is definitely unique and not for good reasons

Horsebox9000 · 07-11-2019 1:53am

Calhoun wrote: »

Great to see the shine coming off old Gary after the local election debacle in his party.

Geniunely this made me respect him more. He stepped up and got something sorted. By no means perfect but isn't there a housing crisis. So surely something is better than nothing at this rate.

Could you tell me why you think this takes the shine of him.

Raconteuse · 07-11-2019 1:56am

Horsebox9000 wrote: »

This x100000000
My partner is German and works in social services here and she couldn't believe how self centred many of the people she encountered here have been. She's worked in this field in a few countries and says Ireland is definitely unique and not for good reasons

To be fair, I think it's an Anglophone rather than Irish thing. It is dreadful here though. Something that puts me off this society.

07-11-2019 2:01am

I genuinely agree that something being done with this site is far better than nothing.

But Gary and the Doc+Dems have always been loud on social media, criticising other parties decisions and putting themselves out there as the bestest, wokest, most high-horsed progressive socialists you can find.

So I am amused that they now have taken a controversial decision and they are getting a bit of blowback for it.

Calhoun · 07-11-2019 2:03am

Horsebox9000 wrote: »

This x100000000
My partner is German and works in social services here and she couldn't believe how self centred many of the people she encountered here have been. She's worked in this field in a few countries and says Ireland is definitely unique and not for good reasons

Aren't the German's fairly notorious for keeping a fairly stable balance sheet to the detriment of public service?

Additionally it would be allot easier to pull together on our public services if we didn't have so much waste and actually got decent services.

Horsebox9000 wrote: »

Geniunely this made me respect him more. He stepped up and got something sorted. By no means perfect but isn't there a housing crisis. So surely something is better than nothing at this rate.

Could you tell me why you think this takes the shine of him.

I would say its because he has tapped into a voter that doesn't like corporate/developer side of things and this has shown hes not exactly the socialist man of the people.

He is not someone id like in government at any level after the local election stunt.

Horsebox9000 · 07-11-2019 2:11am

Calhoun wrote: »

Aren't the German's fairly notorious for keeping a fairly stable balance sheet to the detriment of public service?

Additionally it would be allot easier to pull together on our public services if we didn't have so much waste and actually got decent services.

I would say its because he has tapped into a voter that doesn't like corporate/developer side of things and this has shown hes not exactly the socialist man of the people.

He is not someone id like in government at any level after the local election stunt.

1. You'll have to ask the Germans.

2. Isn't he in the social democrats and part of being in democracy is about making compromises?
If the voter you speak of were people in the initial protest video then can we really call them voters?
I don't like corporate / developer side of things myseld but I also like housing being built. The faux outrage on this is baffling to me. If this is the reaction from people on things like this then why bother offer any social / affordable housing at all

Calhoun · 07-11-2019 2:25am

Horsebox9000 wrote: »

1. You'll have to ask the Germans.

2. Isn't he in the social democrats and part of being in democracy is about making compromises?
If the voter you speak of were people in the initial protest video then can we really call them voters?
I don't like corporate / developer side of things myseld but I also like housing being built. The faux outrage on this is baffling to me. If this is the reaction from people on things like this then why bother offer any social / affordable housing at all

I am not his core voter, there was a time i thought the social democrats would have been worth a vote due to the party leaders but not anymore.

I would assume the people he is targeting want the old model of council only built houses as opposed to any developer. This is the demographic he dialed into so thats why he got the response.

Boggles · 07-11-2019 9:13am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

pensioner numbers increasing
those who work arent having kids / having less than 2 kids
those who have never worked having all the children
migrants who dont work re-unifying their familes who dont work and having more kids who dont work.

we're literally going to fall off a cliff when the net contributor to net recipient quota drops and we're speeding towards that.

Migrant work participation rates are higher than the natives.

Ireland has one of the highest fertility rates in the EU.

If we want people to have more kids we have to make it more feasible, i.e an increase in social protection and affordable homes.

Gatling · 07-11-2019 9:19am

Boggles wrote: »

Migrant work participation rates are higher than the natives.

If we want people to have more kids we have to make it more feasible, i.e an increase in social protection and affordable homes.

Not really possible in some cases but others have higher unemployment rates as you know from other threads

Increase social protections so basically tax the taxpayers even more for the few the welfare budget is already at 20billion a year

LillySV · 07-11-2019 9:28am

Boggles wrote: »

Migrant work participation rates are higher than the natives.

Ireland has one of the highest fertility rates in the EU.

If we want people to have more kids we have to make it more feasible, i.e an increase in social protection and affordable homes.

Increase welfare will only encourage more vermin ... if they want more kids that will work, cut back on the welfare privileged and provide more subsidized childcare for workers

Boggles · 07-11-2019 9:33am

Gatling wrote: »

Increase social protections so basically tax the taxpayers even more for the few the welfare budget is already at 20billion a year

Social protection is not for the few, over 2 million people avail of it.

Eric Cartman · 07-11-2019 9:54am

Boggles wrote: »

Migrant work participation rates are higher than the natives.

Ireland has one of the highest fertility rates in the EU.

If we want people to have more kids we have to make it more feasible, i.e an increase in social protection and affordable homes.

Convert child benefit to a tax credit , introduce a childcare tax credit and thatll flip the tables on that.

That ‘migrant participation rate’ is a myth, thise stats count people brought in to work. Migrants coming from outside the EU excluding the US have infinitely lower participation rates than irish workers

Boggles · 07-11-2019 9:59am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

That ‘migrant participation rate’ is a myth, thise stats count people brought in to work. Migrants coming from outside the EU excluding the US have infinitely lower participation rates than irish workers

Negative. Workers from outside the EU have a higher work participation rate than the national average.

Eric Cartman · 07-11-2019 10:03am

Boggles wrote: »

Negative. Workers from outside the EU have a higher work participation rate than the national average.

Id love to see these figures please and a study that breaks apart eu and non eu migrants please because every study ive found says non eu migrants are net receivers from the economy, african migrants boast a 78% unemplpyment rate and those in DP cant work

Beta Ray Bill · 07-11-2019 10:12am

LillySV wrote: »

Increase welfare will only encourage more vermin ... if they want more kids that will work, cut back on the welfare privileged and provide more subsidized childcare for workers

I'm sorry, but that is a disgusting way to refer to children.
They're just kids, it's not their fault they were born into that.

Childcare is so expensive in Ireland because of insurance, it's nothing to do with the wages of childcare workers themselves, they are paid sweet f**k all.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Convert child benefit to a tax credit , introduce a childcare tax credit and thatll flip the tables on that.

That's a good idea.
But it needs to be incentivised.
IE keep child benefit at X but make available a tax credit valued at X+Y, so you get more if you're working.

The childcare model in Ireland is a remnant of a time when the Catholic church ruled. IE It's the woman's job to look after the kids and it's the mans job to work and there is to be no kids outside of marriage.
This doctrine is completely incompatible with the way Ireland is today.
The way we think about parenting has to change.
In Nordic countries for example everything is usually (50/50) If a couple have kids and a house and the relationship breaks down, what they usually do is rent a 2nd 1 bed apartment between them, and rotate parenting duties, so the kids stay in their home.
This is so different to what we do here which is:
Man goes and works, has the kids on the weekend. Woman goes on the HAP, or council house or homeless list or what ever you want to call it, because there is no way she can earn enough to pay for childcare, a house, food etc

I think it's also important to remember that there isn't a €50k P/A job for everyone.
There are jobs out there that just don't pay that, yet the middle class use the service they provide heavily (Fast food is a great example of this)

Boggles · 07-11-2019 10:12am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Id love to see these figures please and a study that breaks apart eu and non eu migrants please because every study ive found says non eu migrants are net receivers from the economy,

Which studies?

My figures are coming from the CSO.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

african migrants boast a 78% unemplpyment rate and those in DP cant work

Hang on now, you said all migrants apart from Americans outside the EU.

Now you are focusing on asylum seekers and refugees I guess from Africa?

Sneaky shift of goal posts to go down deplorable avenue. Tut Tut.

African participation rates are about 45%, The Irish are up around 66%.

The new study from the Economic and Social Research Institute has examined how well migrants are settling in the country.

It has found that 16% of Africans living in Ireland are out of work, compared with 4% of people from western European countries.

The employment rate for Africans in Ireland was also very low at 45%, while 66% of Irish nationals were working.

Eric Cartman · 07-11-2019 10:15am

Boggles wrote: »

Which studies?

My figures are coming from the CSO.

Hang on now, you said all migrants apart from Americans outside the EU.

Now you are focusing on asylum seekers and refugees I guess from Africa?

Sneaky shift of goal posts to go down deplorable avenue. Tut Tut.

African participation rates are about 45%, The Irish are up around 66%.

Ok can you show me the CSO figures that split EU and non EU migrants and show me a higher labour participation rate among non eu

Eric Cartman · 07-11-2019 10:21am

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

I'm sorry, but that is a disgusting way to refer to children.
They're just kids, it's not their fault they were born into that.

Childcare is so expensive in Ireland because of insurance, it's nothing to do with the wages of childcare workers themselves, they are paid sweet f**k all.

That's a good idea.
But it needs to be incentivised.
IE keep child benefit at X but make available a tax credit valued at X+Y, so you get more if you're working.

The childcare model in Ireland is a remnant of a time when the Catholic church ruled. IE It's the woman's job to look after the kids and it's the mans job to work and there is to be no kids outside of marriage.
This doctrine is completely incompatible with the way Ireland is today.
The way we think about parenting has to change.
In Nordic countries for example everything is usually (50/50) If a couple have kids and a house and the relationship breaks down, what they usually do is rent a 2nd 1 bed apartment between them, and rotate parenting duties, so the kids stay in their home.
This is so different to what we do here which is:
Man goes and works, has the kids on the weekend. Woman goes on the HAP, or council house or homeless list or what ever you want to call it, because there is no way she can earn enough to pay for childcare, a house, food etc

I think it's also important to remember that there isn't a €50k P/A job for everyone.
There are jobs out there that just don't pay that, yet the middle class use the service they provide heavily (Fast food is a great example of this)

Child benefit is an income stream at the moment, we need to convert it entirely to tax credits to stop the unemployed having kids and encourage only those who work to have children.

Boggles · 07-11-2019 10:25am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ok can you show me the CSO figures that split EU and non EU migrants and show me a higher labour participation rate among non eu

I never claimed that.

You claimed.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Migrants coming from outside the EU excluding the US have infinitely lower participation rates than irish workers

I will gladly provide you with the CSO link once you back up your claims, particularly the one above, it's only fair since you have made multiple claims first without citation.

Eric Cartman · 07-11-2019 10:36am

Boggles wrote: »

I never claimed that.

You claimed.

I will gladly provide you with the CSO link once you back up your claims, particularly the one above, it's only fair since you have made multiple claims first without citation.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp11eoi/cp11eoi/lfnmfl/

And it indicates that nigerian, indian, bangladesh and arab immigrants have far higher unemployment rates than irish or eu migrants.

Boggles · 07-11-2019 10:41am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp11eoi/cp11eoi/lfnmfl/

And it indicates that nigerian, indian, bangladesh and arab immigrants have far higher unemployment rates than irish or eu migrants.

Jesus, if you go any further with those goal posts you'll be in the car park. :pac:

No one is arguing that if you come here and spend years in DP, the work force participation rates are not lower, there has been multiple studies on it.

It's more nuanced then "dirty feckless fordiners".

There were 347,233 non-Irish nationals in labour force in April 2016 with a participation rate of 73.9 per cent. EU nationals had the highest participation rate at 76.8 per cent, whereas for those from countries outside the EU, it was 64.3 per cent.

Central Statistics Office's Labour Force Survey measures the labour force aged 15-74. Ireland's current LFPR is 62.1 per cent

Eric Cartman · 07-11-2019 10:45am

Boggles wrote: »

Jesus, if you go any further with those goal posts you'll be in the car park. :pac:

That stat includes the migrants for ireland though...
from the same cso page :

“Among the Irish group the labour force participation rate was 76.8 per cent while among non-Irish it was almost 10 percentage points lower at 67.4 per cent”

and in theory we cant kick out our own wasters but shouldnt let their ones in so the rate should be up around the 90s , for croatian men the participation rate is over 90%

s7ryf3925pivug · 07-11-2019 10:48am

Goal should be cheap, basic, high efficiency, high density apartments available to everyone, regardless of finances, property of the state. The private sector should cater to people who want to spend money in something better than that.

Boggles · 07-11-2019 10:49am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

That stat includes the migrants for ireland though... and in theorywe cant kick out our own wasters but shouldnt let their ones in so the rate should be up around the 90s , for croatian men the participation rate is over 90%

We should definitely be aiming to increase our work participation rate.

But that would involve increasing and revamping social protections and maybe someone taking an honest stab at fixing the health service.

Beta Ray Bill · 07-11-2019 10:49am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Child benefit is an income stream at the moment, we need to convert it entirely to tax credits to stop the unemployed having kids and encourage only those who work to have children.

I get what you're saying completely.

But the change needs to be fluid and transparent as opposed to being a blunt instrument.

IE we start off by saying something like:
In 11 months time, the government will only pay child benefit for the first two children, any 3rd+ child born after today+11 months will no longer be eligible for child support.

IE existing people are not affected by this, people who are currently expecting their 3rd+ child are not affected by this. People who want to have 1 or 2 kids are not affected by this.
Only those who plan to increase the number of kids they have to 3 or greater and are not currently expecting are affected by this.

This will slowly stem the tide, it will take about 5 years to see the change, but it would be the most effective long term change we've ever had.

Eric Cartman · 07-11-2019 10:51am

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

I get what you're saying completely.

But the change needs to be fluid and transparent as opposed to being a blunt instrument.

IE we start off by saying something like:
In 11 months time, the government will only pay child benefit for the first two children, any 3rd+ child born after today+11 months will no longer be eligible for child support.

IE existing people are not affected by this, people who are currently expecting their 3rd+ child are not affected by this. People who want to have 1 or 2 kids are not affected by this.
Only those who plan to have 3 or more and currently have less than 3 with no third child on the way are affected by this.

This will slowly stem the tide, it will take about 5 years to see the change, but it would be the most effective long term change we've ever had.

We should he saying “in 11 months time we’re not going to be handing out money for kids to the unemployed going forward, heres free condoms”
Having a child isnt a right and the unemployed shouldnt be having children

Beta Ray Bill · 07-11-2019 10:56am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

We should he saying “in 11 months time we’re not going to be handing out money for kids to the unemployed going forward, heres free condoms”
Having a child isnt a right and the unemployed shouldnt be having children

Aye, but now you've gone from my idea which was smooth a fluid and wouldn't be met with much resistance to your change which is blunt and will be met with a lot of resistance (And probably wouldn't get through any government)

In 5 years time my change will be able to be extended further to 1 child (if deemed necessary).

Changes like these take time, to introduce.
Good long term plans are far more effective than a slash grab approach.

We both want the same thing.

EDIT: Just to add, the problem we have now is about 30 years in the making. It's not going to be solved in a few months, it will take years to fix. It's extremely complicated and needs to be tackled on multiple fronts

markodaly · 07-11-2019 1:24pm

riffmongous wrote: »

Why can't the state build the houses themselves? It can be done successfully, *if it's done properly*

I've always been a fan of the Viennese approach to housing and only a few months ago there was an exhibition on it in Dublin too. It would require a huge change in practices across society of course (it was achieved in the 20/30s in Vienna) but it is proven to work

http://www.newsfour.ie/2019/06/revolutionising-housing-with-vienna-model/

No real issue with that but the issue is
a) we would need to implement Austrian type rents
b) we would need to implement Austrian type taxes
c) we would need to implement Austrian type rules

In other words, rents for social housing would be higher, property taxes would be higher to pay for it and we would need to be much more strict on nonpayments, fraud and anti-social behavior.

Can we do all those in Ireland? I would like to think so, but in reality, we wont and we are backward in some ways.

Palmach · 07-11-2019 1:27pm

Horsebox9000 wrote: »

Seriously... I'm baffled by this
https://twitter.com/ohnofalafel/status/1191471042109284352

What do people think?

https://twitter.com/1GaryGannon/status/1191344958286041089

I can hear all the skanger accents in the background. Clearly PBP and Solidarity supporters.

markodaly · 07-11-2019 1:30pm

bubblypop wrote: »

I grew up in social housing & while I'm not opposed to it at all, I believe social housing should stay property of the state.
Social housing is needed to house people who cannot house themselves for whatever reasons.
It should not be used to allow people to buy those houses at much reduced prices.
I say this as someone who grew up in it & my mother bought her council house.

Agreed. Social houses should NOT be sold off for a song after 10 or 20 years where a profit can be made on it.
It should remain the property of the LA or the state, where when or if the people living there can afford to a) move out or b) buy it for the market price or c) buy elsewhere once their financial position improves.

The idea of the state giving people forever homes is a cancer on the minds of the idle.
By all means give the people a roof over their heads if they are stuck but dont give them a capital windfall paid for by the taxpayer.

DeconSheridan · 07-11-2019 1:40pm

Affordable Housing €310,000 (what a joke) not to mention solicitor fees, taxes, getting the house furnished and gas, esb turned on, house insured etc.

07-11-2019 2:44pm

DeconSheridan wrote: »

Affordable Housing €310,000 (what a joke) not to mention solicitor fees, taxes, getting the house furnished and gas, esb turned on, house insured etc.

Prime city centre location. Right beside the Pheonix park / Luas / Heuston. Short walking distance to O'Connell street.

Its the bargain of a lifetime.

James Brown · 07-11-2019 3:26pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

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

That's not quite true.
You get three options when you apply. Too many refusals, you lose your spot. Of course they want to live where they are from.

Horsebox9000 wrote: »

This x100000000
My partner is German and works in social services here and she couldn't believe how self centred many of the people she encountered here have been. She's worked in this field in a few countries and says Ireland is definitely unique and not for good reasons

People availing of social services are doing so because they are eligible. What they do or want to do within that criteria is natural and legal. If you or her have issues it's with the system.

The big problem, as visible on this thread and many like it is people are looking to blame the most vulnerable or the chancer of the week in the Indo over and above the policy makers and government we have who created the need and are completely responsible. We are responsible for our own actions but we can only move within the criteria and environment they have set. All, IMO, to protect their interests while placating paddy. Any tax payer with a problem is looking at Margret Cash or who ever, perfect for the lads.

James Brown · 07-11-2019 3:31pm

markodaly wrote: »

Agreed. Social houses should NOT be sold off for a song after 10 or 20 years where a profit can be made on it.
It should remain the property of the LA or the state, where when or if the people living there can afford to a) move out or b) buy it for the market price or c) buy elsewhere once their financial position improves.

The idea of the state giving people forever homes is a cancer on the minds of the idle.
By all means give the people a roof over their heads if they are stuck but dont give them a capital windfall paid for by the taxpayer.

Flawed baloney as per MarkO.

People who buy are living in those homes. We don't have an extra family looking for social housing because the house gets sold.
The whole point is it's for people who can't afford the market rate, (I know you get confused at this bit).
How can you be idle and buying a house from anyone? You need a mortgage.
The housing crisis effects everyone, mostly, the majority, working tax payers on low incomes.

James Brown · 07-11-2019 3:32pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Child benefit is an income stream at the moment, we need to convert it entirely to tax credits to stop the unemployed having kids and encourage only those who work to have children.

Capped at two kids. After that you're on your own. And that's very generous.

LillySV · 07-11-2019 5:42pm

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

I'm sorry, but that is a disgusting way to refer to children.
They're just kids, it's not their fault they were born into that.

Childcare is so expensive in Ireland because of insurance, it's nothing to do with the wages of childcare workers themselves, they are paid sweet f**k all.

That's a good idea.
But it needs to be incentivised.
IE keep child benefit at X but make available a tax credit valued at X+Y, so you get more if you're working.

The childcare model in Ireland is a remnant of a time when the Catholic church ruled. IE It's the woman's job to look after the kids and it's the mans job to work and there is to be no kids outside of marriage.
This doctrine is completely incompatible with the way Ireland is today.
The way we think about parenting has to change.
In Nordic countries for example everything is usually (50/50) If a couple have kids and a house and the relationship breaks down, what they usually do is rent a 2nd 1 bed apartment between them, and rotate parenting duties, so the kids stay in their home.
This is so different to what we do here which is:
Man goes and works, has the kids on the weekend. Woman goes on the HAP, or council house or homeless list or what ever you want to call it, because there is no way she can earn enough to pay for childcare, a house, food etc

I think it's also important to remember that there isn't a €50k P/A job for everyone.
There are jobs out there that just don't pay that, yet the middle class use the service they provide heavily (Fast food is a great example of this)

What I meant was that If you continue paying more and more incentives to the unemployed to do nothin, they will continue to do nothing and a lot of their kids will follow the same path....

they should be trying to help the worker more and make the work pay.. one way is to reduce the cost of childcare for the worker .... make it worthwhile to work ...
in regard to why childcare is so expensive ... never mentioned anything about the reason ... all I want is to make the cost of childcare cheaper for the worker

Idbatterim · 07-11-2019 6:02pm

Stop increasing cash payment for the likes of child benefit. The pr*cks must forget who vote them in , it’s not Margaret cash , it’s not water charge protestors etc. they may be useless , but there isn’t another credible party ( many people feel ) just do it ! They’d be more likely to win votes and get respect rather then the pathetic , “ won’t somebody think of the children” politics that they all fall over themselves for !

Horsebox9000 · 07-11-2019 7:02pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's not quite true.
You get three options when you apply. Too many refusals, you lose your spot. Of course they want to live where they are from.

People availing of social services are doing so because they are eligible. What they do or want to do within that criteria is natural and legal. If you or her have issues it's with the system.

The big problem, as visible on this thread and many like it is people are looking to blame the most vulnerable or the chancer of the week in the Indo over and above the policy makers and government we have who created the need and are completely responsible. We are responsible for our own actions but we can only move within the criteria and environment they have set. All, IMO, to protect their interests while placating paddy. Any tax payer with a problem is looking at Margret Cash or who ever, perfect for the lads.

You completely misread my point. Nothing against people who avail of the services

James Brown · 07-11-2019 7:25pm

Horsebox9000 wrote: »

You completely misread my point. Nothing against people who avail of the services

Not entirely, I said 'if'.
What does 'and not for good reasons' mean so?

99nsr125 · 07-11-2019 7:42pm

maxsmum wrote: »

Yes and none of them need free or cheap housing in a prime city centre location. Nurses, guards, teachers working in the city should get priority for this housing. There is no inviolable right to be 'housed' where you grew up. I for one will never be able to buy a house where I grew up, let alone be given one.

What about the paramedics and firefighters and doctors ?

Or maybe public lands should be used for the public good. Providing security for the people that are not as lucky as us.

Councillor gets social and housing sorted. Met with protests.

Comments