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

Council Housing Lists dissolved... No chance of council house. Mod Note in 1st post

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    desertcircus
    Registered Users Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭desertcircus


    No Pants wrote: »
    Three months? No way. Anyone could be made unemployed on Monday and it could take a year or two to get back into paid employment. I was referring to "Johnny" on the dole for twenty years. He should get a notice period to become productive or ship out.

    So you want medium-scale riots and forced ghettoisation. Gotcha.


  • Options
    #63
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    desertcircus wrote: »
    So you want medium-scale riots and forced ghettoisation. Gotcha.
    Didn't say that. I want the housing in economic centres used for people who actually need to be there and contribute. Johnny No-mark who doesn't contribute anything bar methane can live wherever he likes. He just can't expect to be housed where he likes for free.


  • Options
    #64
    miss no stars
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,957 ✭✭✭miss no stars


    The problem with the suggestions above is that these areas have been home to many of the people in them for generations of their families. They're extremely deeply rooted.

    If you put a condition in that they must find work by a certain time it's incentive to find work. If you add in a condition that if income goes above a threshold they lose the house, that just encourages people into not declaring income or deliberately becomming unemployed or deliberately not striving to achieve as much as possible.

    So I think the best thing is that when someone is allocated housing, it's for a fixed term only. Simple as. Assess for how long the person is likely to require a stable home. If the person is single with no dependents that might be until they've retrained, improved their lot and can move into the private rental sector or home ownership. 5 years max. If their situation changes - back to the bottom of the list when their situation changes for reassessment. If they have 3 kids and the youngest is say, 2 when they're allocated the house allocate the house for 22 years - a 2 year old should be out of full time education by about 23-24. Until then they need a home. So the family is allocated a lease of 22 years. Where the family are completely dependent on state benefits, require that in a 2 parent family, 1 parent must have obtained work providing enough income to pay some rent out of their own pocket within 2 years (enough time to retrain/upskill and spend time jobhunting). In single parent families, the parent must have found work by the time that the youngest child at the time of being assigned the house has reached the age of 10. After that point the family must not spend more than 1 year unemployed in every 5 years. If the parents do not fulfill these conditions, they are offered rent allowance at the rate for the area and must surrender the house.

    I think it would encourage people to actually really try to find work and to find good work. Cap the maximum rent at the market rate for a house of that type in the area. If they don't find work, they lose their home just like anyone else. If they do find work and improve their skills and earn well, they won't end up paying over the odds for a council house. And ultimately, nobody gets to keep their council house so people will know WHEN they have to move out and will have to plan for that. They'll have to maybe save up enough for a deposit or to rent privately and be in steady employment by the time their lease ends.

    Employment has to be incentivized without disincentivizing people from earning as much as they can. And nobody should be able to buy out a council house. It's a crazy scheme that just means future generations are worse off and either can't be housed or have to be housed in areas that don't have as good quality employment prospects and transport links.


  • Options
    #65
    Sleepy
    Registered Users Posts: 24,249 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    TheBandicoot wrote: »
    The problem is that you can't just do this, politically or socially. After all the Johnnys have been living in this area for 20 years, it is their home, it has its own culture and environment, it is a living community. These community members will not be happy to be moved on and separated.
    So if I were raised in Clontarf/Malahide/Foxrock but can't find work should I have the right to demand that the government to house me there?

    **** that.

    If you're not prepared to pay your own way in life, you shouldn't have any right to decide where or how you're provided for by your betters.

    Dublin City centre is being destroyed both as a tourist destination and as a social environment by the fact it contains so much social housing and methodone clinics. In no other European city can you go from main boulevard to hell-hole in 500 yards.


  • Options
    #66
    desertcircus
    Registered Users Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭desertcircus


    Sleepy wrote: »
    So if I were raised in Clontarf/Malahide/Foxrock but can't find work should I have the right to demand that the government to house me there?

    **** that.

    If you're not prepared to pay your own way in life, you shouldn't have any right to decide where or how you're provided for by your betters.

    Dublin City centre is being destroyed both as a tourist destination and as a social environment by the fact it contains so much social housing and methodone clinics. In no other European city can you go from main boulevard to hell-hole in 500 yards.

    How is social housing destroying Dublin?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    desertcircus wrote: »
    How is social housing destroying Dublin?
    Social housing isn't destroying Dublin. What I think he means is that social housing crammed full of expensive no-marks is.


  • Options
    #68
    makeorbrake
    Registered Users Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭makeorbrake


    No Pants wrote: »
    Social housing isn't destroying Dublin. What I think he means is that social housing crammed full of expensive no-marks is.
    As a country, we should use our resources to secure the greatest value for ALL citizens of the state.


  • Options
    #69
    TheBandicoot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 879 ✭✭✭TheBandicoot


    Sleepy wrote: »
    If you're not prepared to pay your own way in life, you shouldn't have any right to decide where or how you're provided for by your betters.

    Sorry, I just don't agree at all with this libertarian viewpoint, and traditionally Ireland never has leaned that way- and I hope we never do.


  • Options
    #70
    quadrifoglio verde
    Registered Users Posts: 3,670 ✭✭✭quadrifoglio verde


    TheBandicoot wrote: »
    Sorry, I just don't agree at all with this libertarian viewpoint, and traditionally Ireland never has leaned that way- and I hope we never do.

    So those who slave away working 40 hours a week and can't afford to live close to work so have to get the train from kildare town every morning and evening should be punished in order to maintain the status quo....yeah thats fair:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #71
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    quadrifoglio verde wrote: »
    So those who slave away working 40 hours a week and can't afford to live close to work so have to get the train from kildare town every morning and evening should be punished in order to maintain the status quo....yeah thats fair:rolleyes:

    Along with those that work 40 hour weeks but have to move away from the community in which they were brought up since they can't afford to rent or buy. Whilst those that don't work expect to be able to stay in that community, and go on about their 'right' to do so.

    Something rotten with that scenario


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    TheBandicoot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 879 ✭✭✭TheBandicoot


    quadrifoglio verde wrote: »
    So those who slave away working 40 hours a week and can't afford to live close to work so have to get the train from kildare town every morning and evening should be punished in order to maintain the status quo....yeah thats fair:rolleyes:

    I too work 40 hours a week, can't afford to live close to work and have an hour and a bit commute. I don't feel at all punished, I gladly pay my tax to support others and keep the country stable and as many citizens as possible provided for- I recognise that in the long run a strong social protection system is essential and we must maintain it.

    However I don't think destroying communities like what is proposed by hardliners here is a good idea, and will just cause more social and human problems to deal with in future.


Advertisement