Breaking News: People want free houses. Can I have one too?

Idbatterim

because its their fault you're miserable.

you say that tongue in cheek, when in fact, you are actually correct! If the wasters were living on what they would be on welfare in germany or the uk etc, taxes could be cut for those working, so that they could have a more comfortable lifestyle that reflects their hard work and dedication, not one where they are breaking their balls to provide this for themselves IN ADDITION to the massive cohort of wasters in this country...

Calhoun

Calhoun wrote: »

I agree if we have the houses they should be used but i feel we should follow the housing list, i would hope that we dont reward folk for courting the media and its done in a fair way.

I agree. I think the housing list really needs to be looked at. If you apply for rent allowance, no matter whether you're single, coupled, married or a family, you have to go on the housing list. I know an awful lot of people who went on the housing list to get their rent allowance, got jobs, moved off RA, but are more than likely still on the housing list as I know no-one who has taken themselves off the list. I'd love to know how many people on the housing list are actually in need!

Calhoun wrote: »

On the quoted portion i don't see why folk who are paying their way should have to move either but most do as they have to. Why should it be any different for folks in social housing?

Good question. I don't think people paying their way should have to move either! How is this possible if you're from Foxrock, Blackrock, D4 etc? More Social Housing! Social Housing shouldn't just be for what people perceive as unemployed "wasters". Social Housing is should be a benefit to society. Removing people from their communities against their will doesn't benefit society as a whole, but brushes a lot of problems under the carpet.

Mrs OBumble

BailMeOut wrote: »

Are council houses 'free'? I always thought the occupier still pays the council to live and eventually own one. How does it work?

All indigent housing in this country (provided by either council or voluntary-association) comes with a rental charge. But no deposit, and not necessarily one-month-in-advance.

For most of it, the rent is income related. As a very broad brush, about 25% of the adult occupants income (mmm, maybe that's nett income), subject to an upper limit. For every poor people, it can be an even lower rate.

There are a few cases (mainly? only?) with the voluntary associations where the rent is market related. People on benefits can get rent-allowance for these ones, but there's no help for low income workers.




Someone asked why houses are boarded up instead of being rented out. The short answer is that it costs quite a bit to bring a house up to the private-sector rental standard: fittings, floors, curtains, appliances, furniture, etc. Bringing it up to council standards is cheaper (flooring not required!) - but the councils don't have cash to buy (even partially-completed) houses at the moment.

petes

RobbingBandit wrote: »

OP did you pay €250,000 for your house or did the bank pay €250,000 or even part there of? I have been homeless more than 6 months now, I am staying in a room with no toliet or cooking facilities that is costing me €600+ a month of which I am paying for from my disability allowance, I am left with just €34 a week to live off, to pay for food and what ever else. Don't bitch and moan about people wanting free houses, nothing in life is free, nothing.

This post does not make sense to me!

Rory28

Idbatterim wrote: »

you say that tongue in cheek, when in fact, you are actually correct! If the wasters were living on what they would be on welfare in germany or the uk etc, taxes could be cut for those working, so that they could have a more comfortable lifestyle that reflects their hard work and dedication, not one where they are breaking their balls to provide this for themselves IN ADDITION to the massive cohort of wasters in this country...

It still sounds like sour grapes to me. Maybe my mind will change when I go about getting my own mortgage, but I doubt it. While i'm sure there are people abusing the system it should not be abolished because of the few. Not everyone on the housing list is a waster.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Someone asked why houses are boarded up instead of being rented out. The short answer is that it costs quite a bit to bring a house up to the private-sector rental standard: fittings, floors, curtains, appliances, furniture, etc. Bringing it up to council standards is cheaper (flooring not required!) - but the councils don't have cash to buy (even partially-completed) houses at the moment.

I did.

I know a family (my landlord actually!) who had to move out of his family home into the house they're currently renovating. That is definitely not up to private sector standard!

There should be a lower rental standard with a lower rent than the one and only private rental standard. I'm sure there are many families that would love to move in to a house even if they had to do up to livable condition in lieu or part payment of rent.

But the question we have to ask is, "Would landlords trust someone to do this?" It could be a great form of community service as well. No jobs being taken away, a grateful family and a happy (as happy as they get! :P) landlord

Frank Lee Midere

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't read/see the report.

But surely the question has to be, "What is the point in boarding houses up when we have such a crisis?"

It costs money to leave a house vacant. There's also work to be done when "unboarding" the house again. Damp, mould, possibility of rats, dead animals/birds etc.

Why not rent out these houses at bottom rung prices and get something for them instead of letting them waste away?

Yes, but the Government has clearly decided to manipulate the housing market again. This, the FTB's allowance, and the capital gains tax removal for cash.

Utter idiocy.

Frank Lee Midere

Idbatterim wrote: »

you say that tongue in cheek, when in fact, you are actually correct! If the wasters were living on what they would be on welfare in germany or the uk etc, taxes could be cut for those working, so that they could have a more comfortable lifestyle that reflects their hard work and dedication, not one where they are breaking their balls to provide this for themselves IN ADDITION to the massive cohort of wasters in this country...

The actual cost of social welfare unemployment payments is tiny compared to say pension payments. And we really are never going to get tax cuts, this year we are about 8 billion or so overspending. Ignore the nonsense from the politicians these days.

Frank Lee Midere

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

The actual cost of social welfare unemployment payments is tiny compared to say pension payments. And we really are never going to get tax cuts, this year we are about 8 billion or so overspending. Ignore the nonsense from the politicians these days.

And the oft forgotten ex-ministers, ex-taoiseagh, ex-t'ds pensions all coming out of the social welfare pot too!

Eric Cartman

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

The actual cost of social welfare unemployment payments is tiny compared to say pension payments. And we really are never going to get tax cuts, this year we are about 8 billion or so overspending. Ignore the nonsense from the politicians these days.

social welfare payments make up 21 billion euro a year, its our single biggest expense. would be very very easy to cut taxes if we tightened the purse strings there.

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

social welfare payments make up 21 billion euro a year, its our single biggest expense. would be very very easy to cut taxes if we tightened the purse strings there.

Can anyone find a breakdown of the 21bn spent on social welfare?

Can we all be adult enough to accept that that figure is not all going to unemployed people?

ivyQ

I know of Housing associations asking for deposits from tenants as it happens ...whether their working or not and these deposits are not means tested ,

Also I find it funny how ppl always immediately attack the poor and throw out derogatory comments , what about the people in Social Housing on big incomes paying the same rent as a the poor low payed tenant ?

Why is the RICH tenant still in social housing ? Social housing should be used as long term transitional housing not tenancy for life

Eric Cartman

Deleted User wrote: »

Can anyone find a breakdown of the 21bn spent on social welfare?

Can we all be adult enough to accept that that figure is not all going to unemployed people?

according to figures found from this indo article http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-drennan/john-drennan-a-third-of-governments-expenditure-now-goes-on-social-welfare-26754688.html (trying to find a better source)

24-25% is unemployment benefit
22% is all pensions
2.5% is administration
5% is single parents benefit
10% is child benefit

Older people -- €4,614,970,000
widows, widowers, one parent families -- €2,570,345,000
child benefit -- €2,650,751,000
Illness and disability-- €3,469,550,000
employment supports -- €597,095,000
job-seekers supports -- €4,094,732,000 (Dole)
Supplementary welfare allowances -- €950,919,000
miscellaneous payments -- €1,324,101,000
administration -- €575,567,000


These include: deserted wives benefit -- €93,388,000;
deserted wives allowance -- €5,020,000;
one parent family payment -- €1,110,350,000;
family income supplement -- €186,001,000.
Invalidity pension -- €640,007,000;
illness benefit -- €942,386,000;
farm assist -- €110,931,000;
supplementary welfare -- €950,919,000.
Carers' allowance -- €501,822,000;
carers benefit -- €26,305,000;
respite care -- €128,114,000;
household benefits and free travel -- €670,766,000.
€516,861,000 in rent supplements
€65,654 in mortgage interest payments to the unemployed.

do there is an awful lot of that budget thats going to the unemployed / single mothers etc... that could be trimmed, pensions and the elderly make up less than half the spend.

Idbatterim

And we really are never going to get tax cuts

oh we will, I reckon this year and certainly next year and I cant see them increasing welfare any time soon... I dont know if they are going to decrease the income tax rates or threshold to win votes or out of decency if they have any left (to help the working poor screwed) either way, I dont care less once they do it... Even Pat Rabitte was quoted yesterday as saying its a ridiculous situation where you pay the marginal rate of tax below the average industrial wage, bit of an understatement there...

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/tax-cuts-on-cards-if-economy-continues-to-grow-says-enda-kenny-30267833.html

And the oft forgotten ex-ministers, ex-taoiseagh, ex-t'ds pensions all coming out of the social welfare pot too!

yeah agreed, dont forget Patrick Neary €630,000 tax free lump sum and €175,000 a year pension IIRC... The waste here goes all the way from the bottom, right to the top... Kerins etc...

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/patrick-neary-tees-off-as-banking-probe-finalised-30246199.html

Mrs OBumble

ivyQ wrote: »

I know of Housing associations asking for deposits from tenants as it happens ...whether their working or not and these deposits are not means tested

Good - I'm delighted to hear it!

ivyQ wrote: »

what about the people in Social Housing on big incomes paying the same rent as a the poor low payed tenant ?

Why is the RICH tenant still in social housing ? Social housing should be used as long term transitional housing not tenancy for life

I agree totally - but unfortunately the "home for life" idea is very strong in the Irish psyche.

What's more the rich "social" housing tenants are particularly well-off compared to middle-incomes ones, because often the rent is capped: effectively someone whose income raises from E350/week to E600/week has a far bigger proportional rent-increase than someone whose income raises from E600 to E850/week. And while you might think that the higher income people will get caught separately by the tax-system, that only applies if it's the one individual earner. If the income is coming from several working-age adults, then they're likely to still be on the lower tax rate, despite having hit the rent cap. The net effect is that there's almost no incentive for them to move out and so free up the house for someone in genuine need.

Eric Cartman

ivyQ wrote: »

Why is the RICH tenant still in social housing ? Social housing should be used as long term transitional housing not tenancy for life

Like Emmet Stagg, I would certainly agree that you should leave your council house once you reach a certain income threshold but some people just dont want to do that.

Frank Lee Midere

Eric Cartman wrote: »

according to figures found from this indo article http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-drennan/john-drennan-a-third-of-governments-expenditure-now-goes-on-social-welfare-26754688.html (trying to find a better source)

24-25% is unemployment benefit
22% is all pensions
2.5% is administration
5% is single parents benefit
10% is child benefit

Older people -- €4,614,970,000
widows, widowers, one parent families -- €2,570,345,000
child benefit -- €2,650,751,000
Illness and disability-- €3,469,550,000
employment supports -- €597,095,000
job-seekers supports -- €4,094,732,000 (Dole)
Supplementary welfare allowances -- €950,919,000
miscellaneous payments -- €1,324,101,000
administration -- €575,567,000


These include: deserted wives benefit -- €93,388,000;
deserted wives allowance -- €5,020,000;
one parent family payment -- €1,110,350,000;
family income supplement -- €186,001,000.
Invalidity pension -- €640,007,000;
illness benefit -- €942,386,000;
farm assist -- €110,931,000;
supplementary welfare -- €950,919,000.
Carers' allowance -- €501,822,000;
carers benefit -- €26,305,000;
respite care -- €128,114,000;
household benefits and free travel -- €670,766,000.
€516,861,000 in rent supplements
€65,654 in mortgage interest payments to the unemployed.

do there is an awful lot of that budget thats going to the unemployed / single mothers etc... that could be trimmed, pensions and the elderly make up less than half the spend.

And welfare makes up less than 25%. And thats with high unemployment. Also its odd to group housing benefits and free travel, one is for the unemployed or underemployed, the other is for old people.

Frank Lee Midere

Idbatterim wrote: »

oh we will, I reckon this year and certainly next year and I cant see them increasing welfare any time soon... I dont know if they are going to decrease the income tax rates or threshold to win votes or out of decency if they have any left (to help the working poor screwed) either way, I dont care less once they do it... Even Pat Rabitte was quoted yesterday as saying its a ridiculous situation where you pay the marginal rate of tax below the average industrial wage, bit of an understatement there...

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/tax-cuts-on-cards-if-economy-continues-to-grow-says-enda-kenny-30267833.html

yeah agreed, dont forget Patrick Neary €630,000 tax free lump sum and €175,000 a year pension IIRC... The waste here goes all the way from the bottom, right to the top... Kerins etc...

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/patrick-neary-tees-off-as-banking-probe-finalised-30246199.html

They just can't do it. We have to meet the Maastricht guidelines by next year and I bet the review of the Irish banks, later this year, will find about a 10B hole.

A lot of people think we will grow out of this like we did in 1992, but then interest rates were high and coming down, now they are low and going up ( at which stage we will have another crisis). Also in 1992-2006 we grew at astronomical rates - something like 7-10% for that 16 years on average. And inflation was high. If you grow at 10% a year and inflation is 5% you can have a deficit of 14% and see your debt lower as a percentage of GDP.

Now with deflation, pretty much, we actually need to have the deficit below the growth rate. Even if we hit maastricht guidelines at 3% the debt to GDP ratio is still going to grow.

If you wonder why yields have gone lower on Irish bonds, good point. Well made. It doesn't make any sense for Irish bonds to be not much higher in cost than German bonds. In fact any loss of confidence in the market - maybe that bank review - and we are up the creek again.

jmayo

spoke2cun wrote: »

AFAIK when the council offer you a house, You don't get to view it until you've already signed the 5 year tenancy contract! They are also trying to squeeze families of 5 and 6 into 2 bedroom + box room houses, called 3 bed semis! If families refuse this twice in a 12 month period, they are removed from the housing list for 12 months.

Ah perish the thought they might have to make do with what most people who buy a house have to make do with.

I sincerly hope you are pulling the pi** because otherwise this is prime example of the fooking sense of entitlement we hear about in our country.

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't read/see the report.

But surely the question has to be, "What is the point in boarding houses up when we have such a crisis?"

It costs money to leave a house vacant. There's also work to be done when "unboarding" the house again. Damp, mould, possibility of rats, dead animals/birds etc.

You are forgetting a hell of an amount of the boarded houses are in areas like Southhill or Moyross giving Limerick as prime example.
Substitute another city and area if you want.

And the reason they are boarded up is because of anti social behaviour, behaviour that is tolerated in this country (much like our neighbouring country), where the miscreants who visit destruction and crime on their neighbours should be ghettoised in some form of internment camp ala The Netherlands.

Lets be honest here if you were a normal honest hardworking, abeit in low paying jobs, family would you rent next door to druggies, criminals and leechers who are probably going to end up involved in feuds and the like ?

All we ever hear is about the disadvantaged and who do we see, but the long term or rather never employed, the chronic drug addicts, the born criminals who more than likely happen to come from certain areas.

Well the real disadvantaged in this country are those that try to be honest hardworking and get shag all in comparison to the multigenerational leeches above.

We have managed to create a society where those that wont get off their ars*s or are criminals are rewarded and those that do go out to work and act honestly are punished.

And it aint just one government or one party that has done it or wants it to continue.

jmayo

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

They just can't do it. We have to meet the Maastricht guidelines by next year and I bet the review of the Irish banks, later this year, will find about a 10B hole.

Expect it to be worse than 10billion in reality.

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

A lot of people think we will grow out of this like we did in 1992, but then interest rates were high and coming down, now they are low and going up ( at which stage we will have another crisis). Also in 1992-2006 we grew at astronomical rates - something like 7-10% for that 16 years on average. And inflation was high. If you grow at 10% a year and inflation is 5% you can have a deficit of 14% and see your debt lower as a percentage of GDP.

Totally different set of circumstances.
We got a lot of inward investment from the world's leading and growing high tech companies in the years leading up to 1992.
They are already here now.
We rode the beginning of the tech bubble.
We had the IFSC coming on stream.
In the late 80s we had to compete with Scotland and Far East.
Now we have China, India, all of the former Soviet block and even the likes of the UK.

We did not have the huge level of household and personal debt that we have now, which even if times improve will limit some people's spending for years and years.

And most importantly we had our own currency.

NickD

I kind of feel like I should defend the honest, hardworking people who through bad luck, find themselves in need of council housing. My husband lost his job in 2010 and after looking for a job for 9 months, went back to college to re-train, (he only has a year left, praise Jesus)

I lost my job in Jan this year and despite searching and applying for everything am still out of work.

We have 3 young children and had been renting the same house for 13 years. We were very, very lucky to be offered a house by our local county council and gladly took it. We moved in two months ago.


We consider this a stepping stone until we are back on our feet and are immeasurably grateful to be in it.

efb

I paid for my house, some of my neighbours are social housing renting from the council - I don't get het up about it. A lot of those boarded houses on the news are in v undesirable areas and you must be desperate to want to live there

RobbingBandit

petes wrote: »

This post does not make sense to me!

How so?

gaius c

spoke2cun wrote: »

AFAIK when the council offer you a house, You don't get to view it until you've already signed the 5 year tenancy contract! They are also trying to squeeze families of 5 and 6 into 2 bedroom + box room houses, called 3 bed semis! If families refuse this twice in a 12 month period, they are removed from the housing list for 12 months.

Radical idea but why don't people think about practical stuff like this before having 3-4 kids that they cannot afford?

AlekSmart

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

And welfare makes up less than 25%. And thats with high unemployment. Also its odd to group housing benefits and free travel, one is for the unemployed or underemployed, the other is for old people.

FLM,the term "Household Benefits" and "Free Travel" as used in DSP context may be somewhat different to what you or many others THINK they mean.

The "odd" HB "Packages" are outlined here....

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/extra_social_welfare_benefits/household_benefits_package.html

There are 2 allowances in the Household Benefits Package:

Allowance 1

The Electricity Allowance or
Natural Gas Allowance or
Cash Electricity Allowance or
Cash Gas Allowance

Allowance 2

The Free Television Licence

Also,it is worth noting that the "Free Travel Scheme",although originally concieved to benefit those over 66 years of age,has for some decades now been continually broadened in scope until it reached it's current status whereby less than 50% of Free Travel Pass recipients are of pensionable age.

The last statistical report was for 2012 and I recommend a thorough perusal...

http://www.welfare.ie/en/downloads/Social%20Stats%20AR%202012_Section%20G.pdf

The "Free Travel Scheme" figures are as follows...Total Number of Free Travel Pass recipients: 754,731
Total State Age related Pension recipients : 364,395.

It should be noted that these figures relate to Pass Holders,with an estimated further 288,000 persons entitled to Free Travel by virtue of Spouse/Partner/Companion status.

Biffo The Bare

NickD wrote: »

I kind of feel like I should defend the honest, hardworking people who through bad luck, find themselves in need of council housing. My husband lost his job in 2010 and after looking for a job for 9 months, went back to college to re-train, (he only has a year left, praise Jesus)

I lost my job in Jan this year and despite searching and applying for everything am still out of work.

We have 3 young children and had been renting the same house for 13 years. We were very, very lucky to be offered a house by our local county council and gladly took it. We moved in two months ago.


We consider this a stepping stone until we are back on our feet and are immeasurably grateful to be in it.

When you are back on your feet, and you again have the resources to afford your own place, will you hand it back to the council so they can give it to somebody who needs it more?
Before you knock me, this is a key question in the debate.

NickD

Biffo The Bare wrote: »

When you are back on your feet, and you again have the resources to afford your own place, will you hand it back to the council so they can give it to somebody who needs it more?
Before you knock me, this is a key question in the debate.

I think that's a fair question yes we are planning to hand in back. Our plan is to be out of here within 3 years at the most. 3 years is the absolute worse case scenario, otherwise it will be ASAP.

It seems only fair to hand it back when we don't need it anymore.

Kate!!!

Free housing is a joke so is handing someone 200 euro a week in social welfare payments ! No one should get anything for free if you need the dole because you are out of work I think you should be made to work doing community service Monday - Friday 9-5 . It's only fair unless of course you attend a training course/interviews etc

Plus people may gain skills on community service to help them get back into employment.

I believe there should only be payments to help those that work but are in low paid jobs and need some support . Not those that are on social welfare payments for years .

I know there are genuine cases of people losing their jobs and prehaps the community service should kick in after a certain period of time or mandatory retraining/courses.

Whats annoys me even more are those single mothers with every flipping social welfare payments under the sun driving new cars and going on a sun holiday once a year at least and have their boyfriend live with them but pretending they are not. They will never declare the boyfriend as living in the house or they lose money.

No wonder our country is f*cked !!!

The social welfare system needs some major reform and tight regulation !!!

riclad

ITS even worse than that, what happens is when someone gets a house,
when their incomes go,s up, they,ll buy the house at a 40-60 per cent discount on its value.
SO a single mother now will wait maybe 7 years plus to get a council house if she has 2 children.
The no of council houses is being reduced as every week they are being sold off.
I know a bloke 53 on disability ,living in a 3 bed house by himself.
HE tried to buy the house ,
council told him.
His 3 children left home 9 years ago.
WE cant sell it to you as you are married.
His wife lives in a council flat ,has 2 children from 2 different men.

Most people will stay in a council house when their income go,s up and just buy the house.
Some council estates are 90 per cent owned by the former tenants.

The council charges rent by the total income of everyone living in the house ,
not just the main tenant.

The council have limited funds to fix up empty units,
and there are limited funds to build new council houses.

I know 1 woman ,with 1 child , rented house on ra for 7 years,
rent 12k per rear.
total rent paid was 84 k.
After 7 years she got a 2bed apartment.

To the people saying Social Housing is a joke, or offering hyperbolic, non-verifiable, "I know a single mother... etc" stories.

Serious question time here.

A: Should everybody in a 1st world country (like ours) have shelter and accommodation as a basic right?

B: If someone cannot afford to rent privately, what should they do?

C: To what level should the government intervene?


Let's have a discussion on facts and not hyperbole