The cost of travelling to work is becoming unsustainable

TheAnalyst_

magicbastarder wrote: »

why would you even bother driving 1.5km?

It's a nicer way to start the day cocooned in my expensive sports car. I also like to have my car at work if I want to drive to the beach for lunch.

Ave Sodalis

TheAnalyst_ wrote:

It's a nicer way to start the day cocooned in my expensive sports car.

Aongus?

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It absolutely is. It adresses issues of homelessness, poverty, social exclusion.

How many houses are needed for this 3rd option that addresses the issues you mention?

(we'll ignore there are underlying issues that result in homelessness in most cases)

lucernarian

Augeo wrote: »

Enough social housing as a 3rf option will never be built.
If we resort to that too many will get on the gravy train.

As you say there's a huge number of low income workers. Being on low income & being handed a council house isn't a solution to anything from a big picture viewpoint.

Except commoditising homes as though they were a thing of value is not very sensible and isn't serving us well. A greater proportion of public-owned social welfare housing, where its appropriately built (NOT what Ballymun was built as), would be very good IMO. It should also tie in with very good public transport and amenities, and also not be too far from employment generators.

All well and good in theory but people forget that Ireland has a large amount of people that are experts at putting the hand out.

If being on low income gets a house handed to you than the numbers requiring housing will be vast.

"Except commoditising homes as though they were a thing of value is not very sensible" - as long as most people have to pay rent or a mortgage a home is a thing of value.

lucernarian

Augeo wrote: »

All well and good in theory but people forget that Ireland has a large amount of people that are experts at putting the hand out.

If being on low income gets a house handed to you than the numbers requiring housing will be vast.

"Except commoditising homes as though they were a thing of value is not very sensible" - as long as most people have to pay rent or a mortgage a home is a thing of value.

Sorry - should have fleshed out what I meant by "value". IMO homes shouldn't be regarded as commodities. I think the concept of purely-private and for-profit leasing of housing is actually rather bad for society and the people who have to endure such conditions. The facilitation of this is almost like a transfer payment from people who have no choice but to pay this money, into the hands of private investors of one kind or another.

As for the actual subject of this thread, we really ought to look towards reducing or eliminating car taxes and shift it to fuel taxation. The costs should be even more closely linked to usage and less for simply having it and using it infrequently.

Alas, unless our counterparts up north and in London move similarly, there'll only be more fuel smuggling.

Grandeeod

lucernarian wrote: »

Sorry - should have fleshed out what I meant by "value". IMO homes shouldn't be regarded as commodities. I think the concept of purely-private and for-profit leasing of housing is actually rather bad for society and the people who have to endure such conditions. The facilitation of this is almost like a transfer payment from people who have no choice but to pay this money, into the hands of private investors of one kind or another.

As for the actual subject of this thread, we really ought to look towards reducing or eliminating car taxes and shift it to fuel taxation. The costs should be even more closely linked to usage and less for simply having it and using it infrequently.

Alas, unless our counterparts up north and in London move similarly, there'll only be more fuel smuggling.

A home should be a home. My first experience of this was in the mid/late 90s in a Dublin "Suburb" - AKA in a different county. I listened to all the new home owners talking about how their houses had increased in value. I asked them if they sold up where would they move to? Further out they replied, to make a killing. Then I asked about quality of life? Blank looks. Hadn't a clue what I was talking about. Some moved on and some stayed and cashed in via a remortgage. Neither has any quality of life now for a variety of reasons. Circa 2009 and negative equity. Moan moan and moan. What does it matter, if that little house is your home. But we stopped doing "homes" in Ireland. We started doing "property projects".

The obsession with owning land/house/property in Ireland is perhaps the reason we are at the title of this thread. The irish themselves created this "unsustainability".

lucernarian

Again, sorry for going off topic. I've no problem with individuals owning a home and treating it as an investment for life. My issue is with private landlords making money off the backs of people needing a home, who have no chance of social housing due to the poor way this country has been run, or haven't enough money to buy their home full stop.

ted1

TheAnalyst_ wrote: »

Ultimately if you have only yourself to blame. You have the power to change yoru situation. If a 2 hour commute each way to the midlands is your only solution then suck it up.

I drive 1.5km to my job. It takes a few minutes in city traffic. I have free parking and pay no motor tax or tax on my fuel. It makes my life a daily pleasure.
I did the sums and left Ireland years ago and I always crack a smile when my old mates whatsapp group is alight about 3 hour delays on the m50.

Why would you drive 1.5km? Your may laugh at your mates now but it sounds like your on track for a heart attack

ted1

lucernarian wrote: »

Again, sorry for going off topic. I've no problem with individuals owning a home and treating it as an investment for life. My issue is with private landlords making money off the backs of people needing a home, who have no chance of social housing due to the poor way this country has been run, or haven't enough money to buy their home full stop.

Private landlords provide a service and give people homes, how do you feel about shop keepers making a profit off people's needs to eat or utility companies making s profit off people who need to keep food frozen etc

BuffyBot

Let's try to veer back towards the topic..

Cookie_Monster

The thing a lot of people never account for when commuting is their time value as well. Driving for 90 minutes (say) is expensive enough as it is but if you value your time it starts getting really off the wall. At least with PT you can read a book or do a crossword and get some entertainment value, or cycling can count as exercise time as well but even if you value you time at minimum wage (never mind any more) commuting time starts adding up very quickly!

afatbollix

My brother in law commutes into London each day. A 90 min trip each way and costs over £500 a month or about £6K a year. He says its hard to get a seat on the train in the morning its that busy!

They are thinking of selling up and moving up north. We sometimes don't know how good we have it.

ClovenHoof

This government seems to be hell bent on destroying rural Ireland and locating as many jobs in Dublin as possible

I hope this is a joke. I really do.

Grandeeod

ClovenHoof wrote: »

I hope this is a joke. I really do.

You'd swear rural Ireland was back in famine times the way some go on.

Heisenberg1

OP do you have taxsaver train ticket? I seen somewhere that you can avail of station car parking for a cost of €220 per year if you have one of those tickets would that help you out?

https://www.taxsaver.ie/Taxsaver-Car-Parking-Offer-2016/

magicbastarder

Grandeeod wrote: »

You'd swear rural Ireland was back in famine times the way some go on.

just one example - the government have announced they are using public money to provide broadband to people who have chosen to live in places where provision of services is going to be more expensive. certainly not all those people have chosen to live a mile from the nearest village, but many have, and the rest of us have to subsidise that choice.

mikeym

Deleted User wrote: »

You don't get free travel on the dole. Only if you are an OAP, disabled or a carer for either.

Theres plenty of scumbags on the Luas that have free travel passes that dont look disabled.

Some of them make a bit of money on the side dealing drugs on the Luas.

Total slap in the face to the honest worker.

Nomis21

magicbastarder wrote: »

just one example - the government have announced they are using public money to provide broadband to people who have chosen to live in places where provision of services is going to be more expensive. certainly not all those people have chosen to live a mile from the nearest village, but many have, and the rest of us have to subsidise that choice.

By choosing to move out of the city and go live in a remote place these people free up space in the city for people who need to live there for work.

We would not deny them electricity or water. Broadband makes it possible to live in a remote place. I would not be living where I am now without a broadband connection as I am 100 kilometres from the nearest city and knew no one around here when I moved.

Grandeeod

mikeym wrote: »

Theres plenty of scumbags on the Luas that have free travel passes that dont look disabled.

Some of them make a bit of money on the side dealing drugs on the Luas.

Total slap in the face to the honest worker.

Junkies are considered disabled. I know how you feel, but that's the reality of it. For example, one day you could consider yourself fine. Then you could decide to present at a psychiatric wing of a hospital claiming you are suicidal. Sign yourself in. Tell the doc how you apparently or actually feel. Done deal for social and FTP.

I only use a local bus now and again. Im the only one paying. The rest are OAPS and those that are "disabled". It ranges from the obvious to lots of youngsters with iPhones, Smart phones and bag loads of shopping. There is a wanton waste of money within the social welfare system.

magicbastarder

Nomis21 wrote: »

By choosing to move out of the city and go live in a remote place these people free up space in the city for people who need to live there for work.

and those who work in the city pay for them to do so.
i've no issue with people who need to live in the countryside doing so. but if you choose to do it, the rest of us are subsidising that choice.

Nomis21

magicbastarder wrote: »

and those who work in the city pay for them to do so.
i've no issue with people who need to live in the countryside doing so. but if you choose to do it, the rest of us are subsidising that choice.

I think if someone retires from work at 66 years old and is occupying a property in the city centre of Dublin they should get every encouragement to move into a remote area as they are benefiting society in the city and also by moving to a remote area they contribute financially to an area which likely is in need of some financial input.

n97 mini

Nomis21 wrote: »

We would not deny them electricity or water. Broadband makes it possible to live in a remote place.

I would have no issue with people living in remote locations if they bore all the costs of doing so themselves. But they don't, instead they are subsidised by transfers from urban areas. One has to only look at the LPT system to see how one half of the population is funding the others half's living standards.

Carlos Orange

magicbastarder wrote: »

and those who work in the city pay for them to do so.
i've no issue with people who need to live in the countryside doing so. but if you choose to do it, the rest of us are subsidising that choice.

Most things in the country side are cheaper. For everything else there are urban residents to subsidise.

endacl

n97 mini wrote: »

I would have no issue with people living in remote locations if they bore all the costs of doing so themselves. But they don't, instead they are subsidised by transfers from urban areas. One has to only look at the LPT system to see how one half of the population is funding the others half's living standards.

Every person who chooses not to live in a remote location adds to the competition for accommodation in large urban centres. You can't have it both ways...

Carlos Orange

endacl wrote: »

Every person who chooses not to live in a remote location adds to the competition for accommodation in large urban centres. You can't have it both ways...

Who is having things both ways, the person who expects cheaper housing and subsidised internet or the person who expects cheaper housing and more expensive internet?

Annasopra

Nomis21 wrote: »

I think if someone retires from work at 66 years old and is occupying a property in the city centre of Dublin they should get every encouragement to move into a remote area as they are benefiting society in the city and also by moving to a remote area they contribute financially to an area which likely is in need of some financial input.

What? hive off old people into rural isolation?

Sounds like a horrendous policy

magicbastarder

psinno wrote: »

Most things in the country side are cheaper. For everything else there are urban residents to subsidise.

so it's cheaper to have old people living in out of the way places - where water, electricity, broadband, waste disposal, general transport, etc., are more expensive to provide?

n97 mini

endacl wrote: »

Every person who chooses not to live in a remote location adds to the competition for accommodation in large urban centres. You can't have it both ways...

The answer is to build more sustainable accommodation in urban areas, especially Dublin where there is ample opportunity to build upwards, not to move people out to locations needing subsidies.

The notion of moving retirees away from major hospitals at a time of their lives when they'll most need it is completely daft.

Annasopra

psinno wrote: »

Most things in the country side are cheaper.

What evidence have you for this?

magicbastarder

people seem to confuse the concepts of living in a rural town, with living a mile outside that town.
there's a hell of a difference between providing services to someone living in a rural village, and to someone who wants their half acre of land half a mile or a mile outside the village.

Nomis21

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What? hive off old people into rural isolation?

Sounds like a horrendous policy

They will not be isolated if they have internet, that's the point.

magicbastarder

n97 mini wrote: »

The notion of moving retirees away from major hospitals at a time of their lives when they'll most need it is completely daft.

and going by my own in-laws as an example, who are living 4km away from the nearest shop - making retirees so dependent on cars for transport is hardly a good idea, health wise. they can't go anywhere without the car; i suspect it's been years since either of them ever considered public transport.

magicbastarder

Nomis21 wrote: »

They will not be isolated if they have internet, that's the point.

i cannot take you seriously any more.

n97 mini

Nomis21 wrote: »

They will not be isolated if they have internet, that's the point.

The internet doesn't pave the road outside the house, provide healthcare, postal services, policing, a fire service, do the grocery shopping or go for a pint though.

old boy

n97 mini wrote: »

If you drive to the station in Carlow you could make your next car an EV. €120 tax and free parking *and* free electricity from the charge point in the Irish Rail car park.

but you have to buy an electric car and live in carlow, to advail of this

Annasopra

Nomis21 wrote: »

They will not be isolated if they have internet, that's the point.

Internet access isn't the answer to combating social isolation at all :rolleyes:

Firstly you are talking a demographic of people who would have higher numbers with limited technical abilities
Secondly social isolation is definitely not solved by shoving a screen in front of someone - it's solved by having opportunities for people to meet others, to volunteer, to take part in activities, to avail of services.

Nah as I said - horrendous policy especially considering the lack of public transport in such areas

old boy

magicbastarder wrote: »

and going by my own in-laws as an example, who are living 4km away from the nearest shop - making retirees so dependent on cars for transport is hardly a good idea, health wise. they can't go anywhere without the car; i suspect it's been years since either of them ever considered public transport.

if they can advail of public transport, the majority cannot

old boy

Nomis21 wrote: »

They will not be isolated if they have internet, that's the point.

many oldies especially in country areas are have low standards of education, to use a mobile fone is beyond the comprenshion of some

Annasopra

old boy wrote: »

if they can advail of public transport, the majority cannot

Yep - ireland outside of Dublin is badly catered for there

n97 mini

old boy wrote: »

but you have to buy an electric car and live in carlow, to advail of this

Yup. If you are due a replacement car an EV would make perfect sense in this scenario.

magicbastarder

The usual example of cost of provision of services to my in laws that I make - at least twice a year, their phone line is pulled down by a farmer pulling a tractor, and my father in law gets on to eircom and reads then the riot act until an engineer comes out and splices the line. I suspect a single capt like this way more than wipes out the profit for eircom, this driving prices in general up. There's no need for them to live where they do, but most services provided to them are probably provided at a loss.

darlett

magicbastarder wrote: »

i've no issue with people who need to live in the countryside doing so. but if you choose to do it, the rest of us are subsidising that choice.

You flatter yourself if you think that those who live in the city are subsiding dwellers in the country.

Say you subsidise an internet connection to someone who has dug a well, yet by paying taxes subsides water connection to you; well which one of you is the real hero. Maybe neither needs to feel superior.

But if you feel good about the self-flattery continue, it does no harm. But remember if you choose to live and work in the city others have to deal with the problems you create by been there by putting up rents/house prices & congestion etc. Fair?

road_high

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No there isn't

Why on earth should there be?

To free up capacity at peak times to those that bring hard cash revenue to the business, not those who don't pay a cent. If they really need to use at peak times, charge them something at least. That way those that really need to travel can or else postpone their journey for an hour or two if not pressing.

n97 mini

darlett wrote: »

You flatter yourself if you think that those who live in the city are subsiding dwellers in the country

It's a fact, there's no debate. LPT transfers are from urban to rural, and even An Post just recently attributed the latest price rise on the cost of a stamp to rural deliveries. Just two of many examples.

magicbastarder

darlett wrote: »

You flatter yourself if you think that those who live in the city are subsiding dwellers in the country.

If I think this? Do some research. As n97mini points out, it's a fact. Cost of delivery of a letter in Dublin is half the price of a stamp. In rural Ireland, it's double the price. The ESB have three times as much wire per capita in Ireland than is required in England, and significantly higher than in Scotland. Many people in Ireland don't want to live in villages but want all the benefits of doing so.

Ave Sodalis

n97 mini wrote:

It's a fact, there's no debate. LPT transfers are from urban to rural, and even An Post just recently attributed the latest price rise on the cost of a stamp to rural deliveries. Just two of many examples.

Interesting that you picking An Post as an example. Are you privy in information we aren't? I mean, the USO includes a broad range of services, many of which can be attributed to rising costs. How do you know it's purely the delivery to rural areas that's been driving the cost of stamps up, not just this year but steadily over the last few years? Why could it not have been cross border deliveries, or the free postage for the blind, both of which come under USO?

darlett

magicbastarder wrote: »

Do some research. As n97mini points out, it's a fact. Cost of delivery of a letter in Dublin is half the price of a stamp. In rural Ireland, it's double the price.

Are you frigging kidding me? I mention rising rents/house prices and congestion. And you come back to me with something about half the price of...STAMPS? Because in rural Ireland it's double...

Congratulations, you are a thread winner. :pac:

appfry

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What? hive off old people into rural isolation?

Sounds like a horrendous policy

It really disgusts me when I hear people wanting to abuse old people like this.
People who have paid a few years of tax somehow think they get the right to move on all the people who have paid a lifetime of tax (with harder jobs and higher tax rates too) off to the edge of the country so that they can have a cheaper house or pay less tax themselves.

The entitled generation indeed.

Donal55

appfry wrote: »

It really disgusts me when I hear people wanting to abuse old people like this.
People who have paid a few years of tax somehow think they get the right to move on all the people who have paid a lifetime of tax (with harder jobs and higher tax rates too) off to the edge of the country so that they can have a cheaper house or pay less tax themselves.

The entitled generation indeed.

Careful now. All the elderly and those on the dole will be getting ready now to take all the seats on the trains, buses and Dart from those who are net contributors!