Social houses in my estate

taytoRking?

how many people would be getn social houses if the goverment got off thier backsides and made unemployed people do min 6 hrs a day doing courses to upskill????

4/6 hrs a day = 188 a week

or

8 hrs a day working honestly = 400 a week.....a no brainer something sadly our yellow skinned td's dont have the neck to put in place..........

and b4 people slag me off im unemployed since feb and dont think i should get money for nothing....

MagicMarker

taytoRking? wrote: »

how many people would be getn social houses if the goverment got off thier backsides and made unemployed people do min 6 hrs a day doing courses to upskill????

4/6 hrs a day = 188 a week

or

8 hrs a day working honestly = 400 a week.....a no brainer something sadly our yellow skinned td's dont have the neck to put in place..........

and b4 people slag me off im unemployed since feb and dont think i should get money for nothing....

You think the government should provide a minimum of 6 hours of courses for half a million people every day?

I'm afraid I can't make head nor tail of the rest of your post, are you saying we should spend the 188 per week on the courses instead giving it to people, or we should give people the choice of courses for 6 hours or working for 8?

Really, I have no clue what you're on about.

PickledLime

crimebuster wrote: »

nope no Karma here, can afford what i bought

Er, that's not what i mean. Your circumstances are NEVER guaranteed.

I'm sure there's a lot of people living round the country that would never have dreamt of having to exist on social welfare, but such is the current state of affairs.

PickledLime

taytoRking? wrote: »

how many people would be getn social houses if the goverment got off thier backsides and made unemployed people do min 6 hrs a day doing courses to upskill????

4/6 hrs a day = 188 a week

or

8 hrs a day working honestly = 400 a week.....a no brainer something sadly our yellow skinned td's dont have the neck to put in place..........

and b4 people slag me off im unemployed since feb and dont think i should get money for nothing....

So let's all upskill so there's even more educated unemployed, just super.

kildare.17hmr

MagicMarker wrote: »

You think the government should provide a minimum of 6 hours of courses for half a million people every day?

I'm afraid I can't make head nor tail of the rest of your post, are you saying we should spend the 188 per week on the courses instead giving it to people, or we should give people the choice of courses for 6 hours or working for 8?

Really, I have no clue what you're on about.

How much do you think thats gonna cost????!!!!

busymom31

training is very expensive

tutors dont come free
rent for classrooms
heat for classrooms
materials to teach with

even a part time training course costs 1000's a month. nothing is free

Victor

scrounger

nackers

scumbags

Can we ease off on such comments please?

Graces7

Zamboni wrote: »

Of course I realise that but do they really need to be in the same level of accomodation?
Because by doing so, we remove one of the incentives to work and have a career.

What utter rubbish.... So because I am old and disabled I should have junk accommodation? Punish the sick? ( I do have that anyways!!!)

SAME LEVEL!!! Jeepers!

Penalise the many who cannot get a job in these hard times?

Well, thanks to lls who refuse RA that is what many of us have.

Wondering how YOU would feel if you were disabled, out of work etc? Have your tried managing on what the sick and unemployed get?

Work these days is a privilege.

Graces7

Zamboni wrote: »

Control yourself. It's embarrassing.
I haven't made any statement on pensioners or homeless people.
There is no begrudegery from me either. I hate the game, not the player.

Funny guy! I am perfectly in control thank you.

And you generalise also... We are all on social welfare after all.

NB there is no game without the players... We are the game.

And your posts reek of begrudgery. Reminds me of the old days when anyone asking V de P and others for help ahd to hide even the blankets off the beds as they would be told no money when you have something left to sell.

Tordelback

Dades wrote: »

It's more about protecting the mortgage holder's investment, which to be fair, is not the job of the government.

It is now.

Graces7

Oddjob wrote: »

He was a 46 year old alcoholic who got drunk and fell asleep. As he was homeless and Slovakian, I have no idea if he was entitled to any help from the welfare in this country

Poor old soul; poor man. To die alone in a strange country with no one to help him... shame on Ireland. Yes he was entitled as he was EU. Shame on Dublin.

Graces7

ElleEm wrote: »

OP, people in social housing are livin there as they cannot afford to rent privately. There are very little employment opportunities in Ireland at the minute. If these people weren't provided with a rent supplement, they would be homeless. That's the reality. Is this what you would prefer? Thousands and thousands of homeless men,women and children?

We have family who work with the homeless in Canada and this is the situation there because they stopped paying help.

In one town alone, they feed over 600 a day. Every day.

Sure if that is what you want to see here? Women raising their kids in cars? Men found on a winter morning curled up dead.

desertcircus

Zamboni wrote: »

MagicMarker wrote: »

You realise not everyone in social housing is a 'scrounger'? The majority of them also pay taxes and put in years of work.

Of course I realise that but do they really need to be in the same level of accomodation?
Because by doing so, we remove one of the incentives to work and have a career.

As opposed to taking everyone who's been dealt a lousy hand, sticling them in a ghetto and then wondering why they seem alienated and hostile twenty years later?

And it wasn't a "random emotive post", it was a highly specific demolition of patronising garbage.

saa

crimebuster wrote: »

there 120 euro is hard to pay, come out of the fog.

income 400 euro pcm

120 social housing or 200-280 single room rent
50 bills
40 internet
180 food*

=400
*cut back on food to spend on bus ticket and college expenses.


clothes ?
incidental cost?
college expenditure? (as little as possible 20-30)
travel? (82)
heat?
entertainment?
savings?
dental?

Such a gravy train

Oddjob

Graces7 wrote: »

Poor old soul; poor man. To die alone in a strange country with no one to help him... shame on Ireland. Yes he was entitled as he was EU. Shame on Dublin.

What? He never tried to get into a hostel, probably because he wanted to get drunk. It was his choice to move to Ireland where he had no accommodation, his choice to sit in a field to get drunk, his choice not to seek a hostel.

Should the homeless be rounded up every night and forced into hostels?

He made his choices, and there's nobody to blame but him.

kildare.17hmr

Oddjob wrote: »

What? He never tried to get into a hostel, probably because he wanted to get drunk. It was his choice to move to Ireland where he had no accommodation, his choice to sit in a field to get drunk, his choice not to seek a hostel.

Should the homeless be rounded up every night and forced into hostels?

He made his choices, and there's nobody to blame but him.

agree you Cant help someone if they dont want help. Its there for them but they must look for it

melekalikimaka

Tordelback wrote: »

It is now.

Its not and to think that is a perfect example of what a mammy state can do to peoples preception of social services

Zamboni

Graces7 wrote: »

What utter rubbish.... So because I am old and disabled I should have junk accommodation? Punish the sick? ( I do have that anyways!!!)

SAME LEVEL!!! Jeepers!

Penalise the many who cannot get a job in these hard times?

Well, thanks to lls who refuse RA that is what many of us have.

Wondering how YOU would feel if you were disabled, out of work etc? Have your tried managing on what the sick and unemployed get?

Work these days is a privilege.

I believe that anyone in genuine need of social housing should be treated with dignity and given safe accomodation that meets their needs.
There is nowhere in this thread I have said anything to the contrary.

PS: I would respectfully ask that you stop inferring what you think I mean.

kildare.17hmr

Zamboni wrote: »

I believe that anyone in genuine need of social housing should be treated with dignity and given safe accomodation that meets their needs.
There is nowhere in this thread I have said anything to the contrary.

PS: I would respectfully ask that you stop inferring what you think I mean.

but you have said they dont deserve as nice a house as yours. Really who gives a toss? You own yours and were lucky enough to be able to afford to buy, Thats great. These people dont own theirs they just rent. For someone who comes off as financially comfortable and in a good position them selves you are far to bothered about what other people are getting imo

Zamboni

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

but you have said they dont deserve as nice a house as yours. Really who gives a toss? You own yours and were lucky enough to be able to afford to buy, Thats great. These people dont own theirs they just rent. For someone who comes off as financially comfortable and in a good position them selves you are far to bothered about what other people are getting imo

The telepathy in this thread is becoming rather humorous.
How on earth have you come the conclusion that I
a) am well off?
b) own my own house?


Oh and

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

but you have said they dont deserve as nice a house as yours.

No I didn't.

melekalikimaka

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

but you have said they dont deserve as nice a house as yours. Really who gives a toss? You own yours and were lucky enough to be able to afford to buy, Thats great. These people dont own theirs they just rent. For someone who comes off as financially comfortable and in a good position them selves you are far to bothered about what other people are getting imo

i think you need to reread this thread and stop changing people comments to suit your arguement

kildare.17hmr

Zamboni wrote: »

The telepathy in this thread is becoming rather humorous.
How on earth have you come the conclusion that I
a) am well off?
b) own my own house?

From the way you were speaking i assumed you did and i never said you were well off i said you came accross to me as being comfortable.

Oh and

No I didn't

ok but you did say

There is nothing wrong with social housing to help those in genuine need but surely a citizen who has paid taxes, and put in years of work should have better accomodation than a citizen who doesn't work or pay taxes

do they really need to be in the same level of accomodation?

The only people who deserve a nice house are the people who put the graft in and earned one.

the first 3 imo are begrudging and imo who cares!? like i said before you should worry about yourself and what you have and not what anyone else has

I'm all for social housing.
I just believe the basics should be covered and no more.

explain basics? 4 walls and a roof????

They get what is available. if a 4 bed house in dalky happens to end up in state ownership for some reason and there is a family in the area that needs it why not let them have it???

If i got you wrong i apologise but thats just how you came across to me on this thread

bubbuz

Tigger wrote: »

i'm sorry but you should be on
unemployment....at 1/2 rate.......195/2=92
widowers.........................................193
childrens allowance...................280/4.3=60 something
so thats 340

check with social they are messing you around

Thank you Tigger, I will be in touch with them today and pray to god that you're right as all I am recieving is 160 widowers payment and 35 of that is used towards my rent leaving me 125 pw. I do however get the childrens allowance 0f 280 a month which I forgot to include. But if your correct in saying that I should be entitled to an extra 33 pw widowers AND 92pw half rate unemployment then that would be a life savour. Sure their are men I used to work with who still live with their parents, no kids, no bills or rent and getting 30 euro a week more than me . Really appreciate your post tigger, many thanks again.

SillyMcCarthy

crimebuster wrote: »

it must be nice paying 30 euro a week for the same house i pay over 1000 euro a month for, i take it that you are on the gravy train too!!

And you'll be asked to pay the household charge while those
in council housing won't!!
You'ld really wonder why you bothered buying your own
property & not being dependent on the state!

bubbuz

SillyMcCarthy wrote: »

And you'll be asked to pay the household charge while those
in council housing won't!!
You'ld really wonder why you bothered buying your own
property & not being dependent on the state!

Exactly why most people in other country's rent their homes rather than buy, because they're more sensible than to be throwing their money away at new government charges every time the governments feel fit to introduce another.
It's a known fact that Irish and English people are more hell bent on owning their own house than many other country's.

bubbuz

The only people who gain out of home ownership is governments,banks and builders, people really need to open their eyes to the big rosey " ownership " thing , it's the biggest scam ever.

bubbuz

bubbuz wrote: »

The only people who gain out of home ownership is governments,banks and builders, people really need to open their eyes to the big rosey " ownership " thing , it's the biggest scam ever.

And then you STILL have to ask permission if you want to carry out work on your property..... and PAY for that permission........it's mad as people still keep buying, lining the pockets of the rich and hanging themselves with a crippling mortgage....
Just so they can say....... Well I OWN my house

Guy:Incognito

desertcircus wrote: »

Because of course what we should do is take everyone who needs council housing and ghettoise them. Nothing ill can come of that.

They're renting, you've bought. You're not in the same situation, so don't bother comparing.

Surely its only a ghetto if the people make it in to one? If they are all lovely people that are fine to be housed in a private estate then what harm will them living next to each other do?

Jesus Shaves

crimebuster wrote: »

Bought a house in a estate, 4 bed detached home. Over the last week there has been 8 estate houses in my estate given out as social housing. These houses were originally down as affordable housing but the council have now given them out as social,

Is my house now worth less because of these social houses??

What a muppet you must be, why don't you go have a word with your new neighbours instead of having a wasted rant on the internet;)

ronan45

My thoughts exactly !