Working people "should" live in dormitories

Mrs OBumble

Crusades wrote: »

People used to think people still house sharing past 25 was a bit strange. Then it was 30. Now it's 35? 40 year-olds house sharing next? (I have no doubt that there are countless 40 year-olds who've ended up house sharing).

And before that no one left home before they got married, living alone was very rare
rare. Arguably it still should be, because it has a number of disadvantages and is inefficient use of housing stock.

shruikan2553

Crusades wrote: »

So someone else "should" do his job then? Pass his problems on to someone else to deal with? A very Irish solution.

What will we (as a society) do about the ineffective work-reward system for the next guy? This is what I'm trying to get at.

It is a low paid job that requires little to no qualifications as far as I know. You can hardly expect someone who is just after their leaving cert working in aldi to be able to afford to live beside the software engineer with 10 years experience and a masters.

His "problems" are that he wants a lifestyle he cant afford. It is something everyone faces. He has choices but he decided to take the most expensive. Living in the capital city of a country is always expensive. I would like to avoid living in Dublin for the exact same reason. Affording it is one thing but I want to be able to save, hence living in Galway, Limerick or Cork.

There is a problem with a lack of housing but it's not like he is living in poverty either.

Crusades wrote: »

Do you think Joan Burton is going to do that?

She's been talking about a €250m Xmas bonus recently.

She wouldnt do anything unless it can be bent to make her look good.

Marcusm

Crusades wrote: »

Where would that fit on Maslow's hierarchy of needs?

Self actualisation or self abuse depending on your perspective.

Marcusm

Crusades wrote: »

Never ceases to amaze me how people can say (with a straight face - nothing is wrong) that workers with full time jobs should be provided with State housing.

I doubt Mr McNamara wants public housing - he clearly wants to be his own man. Do his own thing, have his own private life. Be independent, not dependent on "the State".

There is actually a social purpose and societal benefit to the retention of some centrally located state housing for low paid workers as opposed to solely housing those entirely dependent on state benefits.

There was a time when this (working status) was a significant factor in determining the availability of local authority housing and the cost thereof was income related.

In the not so distant past, a not at all left wing UK local authority (the City of London Corporation) built large amounts of social housing (including the Barbican complex now much loved of partner level solicitors and accountants) to ensure that lower income city workers (and there are many multiples of those when compared with high paid workers) had housing suitable for families and within reasonable striking distance of their employers.

Saipanne

Crusades wrote: »

Where would that fit on Maslow's hierarchy of needs?

Living alone is not a need. It's a preference.

sabat

shruikan2553 wrote: »

You can hardly expect someone who is just after their leaving cert working in aldi to be able to afford to live beside the software engineer with 10 years experience and a masters...

His "problems" are that he wants a lifestyle he cant afford. It is something everyone faces. He has choices but he decided to take the most expensive. Living in the capital city of a country is always expensive.

Living in the most basic 1 bed apartment in a run-of-the-mill area is hardly a lifestyle choice and every city needs workers of all skill levels to function. And as for the well educated, well paid people-they hardly have it so good at the moment either- a single person earning 70k in Dublin and renting a bog-standard apartment will hardly have anything left over every month if they plan to have some basic "luxuries" like running an ordinary car or taking out health insurance.

Frank Lee Midere

MouseTail wrote: »

Other than sitting round having a debate, what is your policy solution to ensure that all workers, including those on minimum wage can live alone in centres of high housing demand?

Build more houses. It's been done before.

I think the entire housing market is a sham anyway.

sabat wrote: »

Living in the most basic 1 bed apartment in a run-of-the-mill area is hardly a lifestyle choice and every city needs workers of all skill levels to function. And as for the well educated, well paid people-they hardly have it so good at the moment either- a single person earning 70k in Dublin and renting a bog-standard apartment will hardly have anything left over every month if they plan to have some basic "luxuries" like running an ordinary car or taking out health insurance.

Yep. So much so that my company lost a worker who went back to Croatia ( still contracting occasionally for us) because he could live like a King over there and would have to spend 2000 a month to get a similar place here. He was paying 1.3k for a bung hole in the city centre.

Amazing that the muppets who run this country once again allow a country bankrupted by housing to have another bubble. As policy.

Saipanne wrote: »

Living alone is not a need. It's a preference.

No. It's a very real need. I believe it might be a human right in some countries. Certainly for a family. It's also simple to implement. Build enough housing. Stop transferring money from workers to parasites. Stop taking taxes from renters to subsidise rentiers.

Saipanne wrote: »

I will always live within my means. Not make stupid decisions like paying way more rent than I can afford, then go crying about it in a national newspaper.

That's great. But you are a fool. Because people who clearly didn't and don't live within their means are living in houses bought for massive amounts of money in the boom are living on your dime.

And why wouldn't you prefer to spend that money and live well?

The_Morrigan

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

That's great. But you are a fool. Because people who clearly didn't and don't live within their means are living in houses bought for massive amounts of money in the boom are living on your dime.

And why wouldn't you prefer to spend that money and live well?

Please don't insult other forum users - attack the post, not the poster.

Frank Lee Midere

Ok. To do that is foolish. To congratulate yourself on living badly when others live well is foolish. To think that a major cost of living being high is a good thing is foolish.

It would he foolish in 2006. It's madness now.

Saipanne

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

No. It's a very real need. I believe it might be a human right in some countries. Certainly for a family. It's also simple to implement. Build enough housing. Stop transferring money from workers to parasites. Stop taking taxes from renters to subsidise rentiers.

No, it isn't a need. Shelter is a need. But living in your own place is a luxury. You'd swear sharing is a miserable situation. I share a lovely place in a nice area for 300 less than our cleaner friend. It's a luxury. Not a need. Not a right. A privilege.

timetogo

Well if people want to subsidise the lower paid the money will have to come from somewhere.
It'll be another tax. I don't know what the sums are but I'd guess it'd be a % or 2% on top of our current rates.

The alternative is that people use these low paid jobs as starting off jobs. Most of us started off on the minimum legal wage. It's not designed to let you have an apartment in the middle of the city. It's normally used for people with minimum qualifications so they can start their careers. It should be a job you use while studying and working towards your next job.

In the perfect world we'd all have great houses / apartments. In the real world the better the quality the higher the cost. You either compromise by sharing or compromise on quality. We all have to do that. This guy doesn't want to share. That's absolutely fine. In that case it costs him more.

Saipanne

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Ok. To do that is foolish. To congratulate yourself on living badly when others live well is foolish. To think that a major cost of living being high is a good thing is foolish.

It would he foolish in 2006. It's madness now.

I live in a very nice area of Dublin in a large modern apartment. All while building up a nice nest egg. Yeah. A real fool.

ted1

Crusades wrote: »

So someone else "should" do his job then? Pass his problems on to someone else to deal with? A very Irish solution.

What will we (as a society) do about the ineffective work-reward system for the next guy? This is what I'm trying to get at.

Someone who lives at home, whose partner has a job, who chooses to live in a house share can all do the job.

Mrs OBumble

Crusades wrote: »

Never ceases to amaze me how people can say (with a straight face - nothing is wrong) that workers with full time jobs should be provided with State housing.

I doubt Mr McNamara wants public housing - he clearly wants to be his own man. Do his own thing, have his own private life. Be independent, not dependent on "the State".

Oh it kills my sensibilities as well. If life was fair, low paid workers would be able to get housing benefit, and then make their own choices about where to live. But that's not current policy in Ireland.

Like it or not, welfare is part of life for many working people in our economy: Child Allowance, Family Income Supplement, social housing, medical cards, state pensions - between them, low income working people are hugely supported by welfare.

Crusades

I will argue that privacy is a right. The right to keep a domain around us is fundamental.

I am totally against the concept of the Big Welfare State. I would regard any policy maker who believes that full-time workers should get housing benefit from the Welfare State to be stupid and shortsighted.

Regarding 30 and 40 year-old single people still stuck in house shares. Some people don't marry. Some people get divorced. Some people want to live alone. Living in communal dwellings is not conducive to family life (you can't have intimate family relations when strangers have the right to walk around). You can't live life not knowing who is going to be talking to you over breakfast from month to month.

Saipanne wrote: »

I live in a very nice area of Dublin in a large modern apartment. All while building up a nice nest egg. Yeah. A real fool.

Did you not have your nest egg ready to go in 2011/2012?

You are now 33 years old and you are still house sharing. I assume from your posts that you are also still traveling around on public transport.

I hazard a guess that you will still be paying someone else's mortgage when you're 43. When you can no longer work; your room will be rented to someone else and you will become the State's problem.

shruikan2553 wrote: »

It is a low paid job that requires little to no qualifications as far as I know. You can hardly expect someone who is just after their leaving cert working in aldi to be able to afford to live beside the software engineer with 10 years experience and a masters.

His "problems" are that he wants a lifestyle he cant afford. It is something everyone faces. He has choices but he decided to take the most expensive. Living in the capital city of a country is always expensive. I would like to avoid living in Dublin for the exact same reason. Affording it is one thing but I want to be able to save, hence living in Galway, Limerick or Cork.

There is a problem with a lack of housing but it's not like he is living in poverty either.



She wouldnt do anything unless it can be bent to make her look good.

An army has generals, colonels, lieutenants, sergeants, corporals, privates.

Not everyone can be an officer - for lots of perfectly valid reasons.

Men and women who sign up never make it to sergeant - they work hard, are loyal, honest and do their best. They are not failed people, they are the engine room of the army.

What I'm saying is that everyone who works hard is loyal and believes in the system should be afforded a decent standard of living.

This is not communism. In a free and functioning democracy, people are rewarded for their effort and are socially and economically mobile. Participating in the economy is bit like the game of snakes and ladders - there are winners and losers, but anyone can play. What we have in Ireland is a game of snakes and ladders that is 99% snakes due to cronyism and poor policy making.

The result is an ineffective work-reward system that is breeding resentment and despair. What we are witnessing is a breakdown of the social contract.

Housing people who don't work in very high standard dwellings that working people can't afford
and telling hard working unskilled people that they're not good enough to have privacy and should live in dormitories is not good enough IMO.

Only the "chiefs" (i.e. those earning about €50k+) get to live private lives?

The_Morrigan

Saipanne & Crusades - quit the sniping and squabbling; you are not to personalise your posts here. If you want to have an argument about personal circumstances take it to pm. No more warnings, next action will be a ban.

Crusades

shruikan2553 wrote: »

His "problems" are that he wants a lifestyle he cant afford. It is something everyone faces. He has choices but he decided to take the most expensive. Living in the capital city of a country is always expensive. I would like to avoid living in Dublin for the exact same reason. Affording it is one thing but I want to be able to save, hence living in Galway, Limerick or Cork.

There is a problem with a lack of housing but it's not like he is living in poverty either.

His monthly take home after transport + rent is €600.

People on the basic dole rate have more income (€814.67 for 0 hours work). People on the dole get most/all of their rent paid for. Many live in council houses.

Also, please stop pretending the man in question is "living in the capital city of a country". He isn't. He commutes in and out every day. You will get nowhere in Dublin city on the open market for €800 per month.

shruikan2553

Crusades wrote: »

An army has generals, colonels, lieutenants, sergeants, corporals, privates.

Not everyone can be an officer - for lots of perfectly valid reasons.

Men and women who sign up never make it to sergeant - they work hard, are loyal, honest and do their best. They are not failed people, they are the engine room of the army.

What I'm saying is that everyone who works hard is loyal and believes in the system should be afforded a decent standard of living.

This is not communism. In a free and functioning democracy, people are rewarded for their effort and are socially and economically mobile. Participating in the economy is bit like the game of snakes and ladders - there are winners and losers, but anyone can play. What we have in Ireland is a game of snakes and ladders that is 99% snakes due to cronyism and poor policy making.

The result is an ineffective work-reward system that is breeding resentment and despair. What we are witnessing is a breakdown of the social contract.

Housing people who don't work in very high standard dwellings that working people can't afford
and telling hard working unskilled people that they're not good enough to have privacy and should live in dormitories is not good enough IMO.

Only the "chiefs" (i.e. those earning about €50k+) get to live private lives?

If you want to live closer, in a nicer area/house or with less people you pay more. The vast majority of people do have a decent standard of living. As long as you have your own room then you have some privacy. Should only the rich have private swimming pools?

Crusades

shruikan2553 wrote: »

If you want to live closer, in a nicer area/house or with less people you pay more. The vast majority of people do have a decent standard of living. As long as you have your own room then you have some privacy. Should only the rich have private swimming pools?

You can't invite your nephews/nieces over for a birthday party (for example) with strangers walking around.

Unless you have a birthday party in your bedroom?!

I wonder how house sharers do Xmas dinner? Back to mum and dad's bedroom in a multiple occupancy dwelling?

Your final comment about "swimming pools" is ridiculous. But I will respond: Where on Maslow's hierarchy does a swimming pool fit in? Up there with water?

shruikan2553

Crusades wrote: »

You can't invite your nephews/nieces over for a birthday party (for example) with strangers walking around.

Unless you have a birthday party in your bedroom?!

I wonder how house sharers do Xmas dinner? Back to mum and dad's bedroom in a multiple occupancy dwelling?

Your final comment about "swimming pools" is ridiculous. But I will respond: Where on Maslow's hierarchy does a swimming pool fit in? Up there with water?

In a shared house you tend to inform the others if you are planning on having a party and are capable of using the rest of the house.

Most people in a shared house wouldn't have a family so would go elsewhere for Christmas. They could all band together and have Christmas dinner too.

It is around the same place as having an entire house or apartment to yourself.

MouseTail

Crusades wrote: »

You can't invite your nephews/nieces over for a birthday party (for example) with strangers walking around.

Unless you have a birthday party in your bedroom
?

Seriously?

Crusades

shruikan2553 wrote: »

In a shared house you tend to inform the others if you are planning on having a party and are capable of using the rest of the house.

Most people in a shared house wouldn't have a family so would go elsewhere for Christmas. They could all band together and have Christmas dinner too.

It is around the same place as having an entire house or apartment to yourself.

I've never heard of being able to legally reserve a MOD for a period.

There is no protection for preventing one of your neighbours barging in drunk in the middle of your family moment. He has as much right to be there as you do and there is nothing you can do about it.

If a drunk barges in to your own private home, you can call the police and/or use reasonable force to remove him.

MouseTail wrote: »

Seriously?

Do you believe you can have a private family and social life living in an MOD?

I will argue that you cannot. You can't have a private family life in a dormitory, where you are denied the ability to keep a domain around you.

Have a look at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy#Right_to_privacy

meeeeh

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Yep. So much so that my company lost a worker who went back to Croatia ( still contracting occasionally for us) because he could live like a King over there and would have to spend 2000 a month to get a similar place here. He was paying 1.3k for a bung hole in the city centre.

Right and to prove your point you picked somebody from a country with nice big deficit, I think they are still in recession and have about 20% unemployment and a lot lower wages. And you wonder how that accommodation there is so much cheaper? Ask people who live there how many can afford their own place.

shruikan2553

Crusades wrote: »

I've never heard of being able to legally reserve a MOD for a period.

There is no protection for preventing one of your neighbours barging in drunk in the middle of your family moment. He has as much right to be there as you do and there is nothing you can do about it.

If a drunk barges in to your own private home, you can call the police and/or use reasonable force to remove him.

Tip: Don't live with dicks. Problem solved.

Sure it is preferable to live on your own in some situations but you have yet to explain why it is such a serious issue that it requires something to be done about it.

Crusades

meeeeh wrote: »

Right and to prove your point you picked somebody from a country with nice big deficit, I think they are still in recession and have about 20% unemployment and a lot lower wages. And you wonder how that accommodation there is so much cheaper? Ask people who live there how many can afford their own place.

The economy of Croatia is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion on how we treat unskilled workers in Ireland.

The_Morrigan

Crusades wrote: »

The economy of Croatia is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion on how we treat unskilled workers in Ireland.

....and the treatment of unskilled workers in Ireland is a topic for work & jobs or politics, not A&P.

Crusades

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Tip: Don't live with dicks. Problem solved.

Sure it is preferable to live on your own in some situations but you have yet to explain why it is such a serious issue that it requires something to be done about it.

Could you please explain how a MOD tenant vets who lives in the room next to him?

Would you be comfortable leaving your niece/nephew in a shared living room while you make tea, with strangers coming and going at will?

shruikan2553

Crusades wrote: »

Could you please explain how a MOD tenant vets who lives in the room next to him?

Would you be comfortable leaving your niece/nephew in a shared living room while you make tea, with strangers coming and going at will?

What is a MOD? You may have decided to move away from groups of people renting a house together.

Crusades

shruikan2553 wrote: »

What is a MOD? You may have decided to move away from groups of people renting a house together.

Multiple occupancy dwelling.

Sorry, it's a UK term.

Popular with divorced men, washed up singletons and people sent there by housing officers.

meeeeh

Crusades wrote: »

The economy of Croatia is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion on how we treat unskilled workers in Ireland.

Not if Croatia is mentioned as example of how much better are things there. They are not.