Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

COOLOCK residents are moving to try to block plans

Options
245

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    sdanseo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    kona wrote: »
    **** that ****. They need to accept that theres loads of places other than dublin, which would benefit greatly from some ****in investment and employment.

    Sucking the life out of the country to flog overpriced high rise kips to people who have to leave the rest of the country to find work.

    Society is evolving and global popultion rapidly increasing, and the majority of those people now live in cities or their metropolitan areas. There are more urban than rural dwellers in Ireland so we are no different.
    Source: CSO
    62.7% of the population lived in urban areas in April 2016.

    Again, we need to start accepting hard facts and dealing with their consequences rather than reverting to our backward ideals of making Ballyjamesduff the new centre for excellence of something or other. It's delusional.
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Many have accepted they will never own their own home, however if proper tenant rights were implemented that exist in other European countries ownership would not be as important an issue to people.

    You have included some words that aren't mine in your quote in this post. You might correct them please.


  • Options
    #33
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    lola85 wrote: »
    We’re going off the topic.

    NIMBYS backed by councilors are just as big a problem in the housing crisis.

    Plenty of NIMBYS are also backed by sitting TD's nothing new there although more insidious as they have the clout to affect decisions. Politicians will usually back the people that return them to office.


  • Options
    #34
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    sdanseo wrote: »
    We did that before, it didn't work. It creates areas of perpetual low income and costs the state billions in the long run. We need to encourage people to own their own homes or rent.
    They can't afford their own homes, and they are unable to pay the rent themselves. Why should private landlords take the risk?
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Security of tenure is the most obvious, and at present only exists in a council house.
    So the landlords should take the risk, and be unable to take their home back?
    kona wrote: »
    **** that ****. They need to accept that theres loads of places other than dublin, which would benefit greatly from some ****in investment and employment.
    No, actually, they don't. They can go looking elsewhere, such as Poland, though.


  • Options
    #35
    kona
    Registered Users Posts: 7,525 ✭✭✭kona


    the_syco wrote: »
    No, actually, they don't. They can go looking elsewhere, such as Poland, though.

    Why would you come to the conclusion that poland is a better place for investment and job creation than say for example carlow or portlaoise?


  • Options
    #36
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    the_syco wrote: »
    They can't afford their own homes, and they are unable to pay the rent themselves. Why should private landlords take the risk?


    So the landlords should take the risk, and be unable to take their home back?
    .

    The accidental landlord should be separated out from the business landlord. Amazing how other European countries have security of tenure but it can't be done here.
    If you are renting a house to someone it is not your home it is your business, although I do understand the reason why people insist on referring to it as 'rheir home'.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    sdanseo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    the_syco wrote: »
    They can't afford their own homes, and they are unable to pay the rent themselves. Why should private landlords take the risk?

    Why can't we incentivise people to rent in the same way as we do through help to buy?

    Force landlords to accept rent allowance. There is no reason not to do this, legislation can protect against both troublesome landlords or troublesome tenants. Why should a landlord care where the revenue comes from provided the tenant is respectful and pays on time?
    Commercial built to rent developers will not be disenfranchised either if this is done right and can still make a significant profit while abiding by rent pressure rules. If anything it would open up more customers for them, bringing people who cannot afford to rent into the fold.

    Provide tax relief for long term rent, subject to logical restrictions. Currently if you buy a home you can get up to €20,000 back in tax relief. You get nothing for rent unless you qualify for social housing, in which case most people arguably get too much. When they eventually get housed, that is.

    Either are a better alternative than throwing a few billion into mass social housing projects (the American use of the term "projects" describes how they generally turn out). Rather than create ghettos, help existing communities grow with a better standard of living.

    There are simple, logical, workable solutions that can help the average person until the market stabilises - which will only ever happen completely after a sustained period of proper planning, significantly higher investment in infrastructure, and social change.

    We are incapable of comprehending the scale of social and infrastructural development needed here because of a terrifyingly potent backward national attitude, which itself is perpetuated because politicians are terrified of change. The back of this issue must be broken before we will get anywhere.


  • Options
    #38
    Fritzbox
    Registered Users Posts: 488 ✭✭Fritzbox


    kona wrote: »
    Why would you come to the conclusion that poland is a better place for investment and job creation than say for example carlow or portlaoise?

    If wages, property prices and other overheads are significantly cheaper in Poland, as I believe they are - it wouldn't be hard to come to that conclusion, would it?


  • Options
    #39
    kona
    Registered Users Posts: 7,525 ✭✭✭kona


    Fritzbox wrote: »
    If wages, property prices and other overheads are significantly cheaper in Poland, as I believe they are - it wouldn't be hard to come to that conclusion, would it?

    Significantly cheaper yes but i dont think it has the infrastructure and the type of workforce suited to the types of jobs which ireland would attract.


  • Options
    #40
    Varik
    Registered Users Posts: 12,497 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    The accidental landlord should be separated out from the business landlord. Amazing how other European countries have security of tenure but it can't be done here.
    If you are renting a house to someone it is not your home it is your business, although I do understand the reason why people insist on referring to it as 'rheir home'.

    Because in other countries those business can act like one and stop providing a service when they stop paying for it.

    The government is doing a great job driving small landlords out of the market but no one wants to take their place.


  • Options
    #41
    Jimbob1977
    Registered Users Posts: 2,239 ✭✭✭Jimbob1977


    friendlyfun wrote: »
    "Residents are also concerned the development may interfere with important archaeological artefacts that may lie underground"

    They're really scraping the barrel

    Archaeological artefact.

    Someone's payslip?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Liberta Per Gli Ultra
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭Liberta Per Gli Ultra


    sdanseo wrote: »
    Either are a better alternative than throwing a few billion into mass social housing projects (the American use of the term "projects" describes how they generally turn out). Rather than create ghettos, help existing communities grow with a better standard of living.

    Your use of the word "throwing" says it all and it is that right-wing ideology which turned many social housing schemes into failed projects in the past. You'll get a ghetto if you "throw" a group of people into a housing scheme with no facilities and no support.


  • Options
    #43
    Fritzbox
    Registered Users Posts: 488 ✭✭Fritzbox


    kona wrote: »
    Significantly cheaper yes but i dont think it has the infrastructure and the type of workforce suited to the types of jobs which ireland would attract.


    Some jobs which need the English language, perhaps. But I suspect that Ireland's advantage in this regard is decreasing - they speak English very well in many other EU countries as well - but the multinationals seem to love Dublin anyway. Other than the big tax concessions, I am not sure what else Ireland has to offer in particular?


  • Options
    #44
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,632 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    lola85 wrote: »
    But lack of supply is an issue too?

    The more houses for everyone the more prices go down.

    You'd think so, but not in this country for some reason.

    Not once in 30 years has building more houses led to cheaper houses.

    Except for when the economy collapses and then that just makes the problem worse.

    The main problem most certainly is affordable housing combined with supply.


  • Options
    #45
    lola85
    Closed Accounts Posts: 667 ✭✭✭lola85


    Boggles wrote: »
    You'd think so, but not in this country for some reason.

    Not once in 30 years has building more houses led to cheaper houses.

    Except for when the economy collapses and then that just makes the problem worse.

    The main problem most certainly is affordable housing combined with supply.

    Think I read house prices down last month?


  • Options
    #46
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,632 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    lola85 wrote: »
    Think I read house prices down last month?

    Nothing to do with Supply. We are not building next to near enough.

    More than likely consumer sentiment and the looming dreaded Brexit.


  • Options
    #47
    Topgear on Dave
    Registered Users Posts: 4,529 ✭✭✭Topgear on Dave


    Didn't we build a shed load of houses round 04 to 08 and the ass fell out of the prices.

    Edit: a great time to be renting by the way, my rent never changed for years and years.:D


  • Options
    #48
    MOH
    Registered Users Posts: 6,464 ✭✭✭MOH


    sdanseo wrote: »
    These people complaining need a slap across the face.
    Wow. Sure, why not beat people into submission!
    ...Describing 5 and 6 stories as high rise is as stupid as is it ignorant: we're talking about the middle of a capital city.
    Not as ignorant as your complete lack of basic geography - try looking at a map.
    Jesus (if he ever existed) wept.
    At least we agree on one thing.


  • Options
    #49
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,632 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Topgear on Dave wrote: »
    Didn't we build a shed load of houses round 04 to 08 and the ass fell out of the prices.

    There was 92,000 built in 2005, prices went up 12%.

    The alarm bells were being rung for real in 2006.

    A couple had rung them before that but were told to go kill themselves. Good old Bertie.


  • Options
    #50
    lola85
    Closed Accounts Posts: 667 ✭✭✭lola85


    Boggles wrote: »
    There was 92,000 built in 2005, prices went up 12%.

    The alarm bells were being rung for real in 2006.

    A couple had rung them before that but were told to go kill themselves. Good old Bertie.

    The housing crisis goes back 40 years.

    Not Eoghan Murphy era.


  • Options
    #51
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    sdanseo wrote: »
    Force landlords to accept rent allowance. There is no reason not to do this, legislation can protect against both troublesome landlords or troublesome tenants.
    Legislation is doing a sh|t job at protecting against troublesome tenants.
    sdanseo wrote: »
    Why should a landlord care where the revenue comes from provided the tenant is respectful and pays on time?
    They don't. Except if HAP gets stopped, the LL is not told it'll be stopping; they find out it has stopped when is stops coming in. And they are paid in arrears by the councils.
    sdanseo wrote: »
    Rather than create ghettos, help existing communities grow with a better standard of living.
    The Irish government prefers to give people what is essentially a free house next to someone who will pay €400,000 for their house.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    sdanseo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,233 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    MOH wrote: »
    Not as ignorant as your complete lack of basic geography - try looking at a map.

    It's 8km (edit: I correct myself, 5.8km) from the centre of a city whose metropolitan area is 50km wide which is good enough for me.

    Not exactly in Kerry.


  • Options
    #53
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    What is considered Dublin City Centre?
    As I understand it, Dublin City Council defines the city centre as being the area bounded by the Royal Canal to the north, the Grand Canal to the south and the Phoenix Park to the west.

    Again, Coolock is nowhere near being in the middle of the city centre.


  • Options
    #54
    Liberta Per Gli Ultra
    Registered Users Posts: 258 ✭✭Liberta Per Gli Ultra


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Again, Coolock is nowhere near being in the middle of the city centre.

    Coolock is in the middle of the city and the Irish government is giving away free houses apparently. That's the right-wing Fine Gael government. The power of the internet.


  • Options
    #55
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Liberta Per Gli Ultra wrote: »
    Coolock is in the middle of the city and the Irish government is giving away free houses apparently. That's the right-wing Fine Gael government. The power of the internet.

    It's a cosmopolitan metropolis, don't you know.:cool:


  • Options
    #56
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    lola85 wrote: »
    The housing crisis goes back 40 years.

    Not Eoghan Murphy era.

    Utter nonsense, but you have form for this .


  • Options
    #57
    lola85
    Closed Accounts Posts: 667 ✭✭✭lola85


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Utter nonsense, but you have form for this .

    That’s it?


  • Options
    #58
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    lola85 wrote: »
    That’s it?

    Yeah basically you are talking rubbish , despite the runaway budgets and the bringing the country to the brink of bankruptcy the FF governments built more social housing than the present FG governments of a similar time span. The figures are available online yet you claim there has been a housing crisis for the last 40 years, utter bullsh*t on your behalf.


  • Options
    #59
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    the_syco wrote: »
    Legislation is doing a sh|t job at protecting against troublesome tenants
    this is a big issue and is the counter point to the even bigger issue of lack of security of lease tenure. you wont fix one without fixing the other.


  • Options
    #60
    NoteAgent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 103 ✭✭NoteAgent


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Actually it does, the housing crisis is not just driven by lack of supply, affordability is as much a problem.

    But if supply increases enough, prices will come down. It always comes back to demand vs supply. Always.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    NoteAgent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 103 ✭✭NoteAgent


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Building masses of social housing is the answer, relying on market forces to solve the problem is not working.

    But we're not allowing the market to do its thing with all this regulation against developers (ie the suppliers). You need to incentivise builders to build. But there is no incentive at the moment.

    Most government intervention proves itself to be a miserable failure time and time again.


Advertisement