Leo is the new king of Ireland.

Edward M

charlie14 wrote: »

Water charges were a complete clusterf**k from the word go.
The fixed charges were a it of a con in that even if everyone paid then the revenue gathered would not of even cover Irish Water`s overheads never mind do anything to improve the water and waste water services.
The whole fiasco was a cart before the horse where rather than use tax money to bring the service up to some decent standard (Kenny`s promise of a world class service before any charges), we got over half a billion euro worth of meters buried with an intended spend of the same again to bury more.
Even now there are plans for Irish Water to pipe water from the Shannon to Dublin, again at huge cost, so that 60% plus of it can leak from Dublin mains.

I`m not that sure if a government would not get more than 5 years if they did increase taxes by a few percent if they clearly stated what specifically those taxes were for and that they would be ring-fenced.
GE 2016 politically much was made off reducing the USC and reducing taxes, yet it was only the primary consideration of 5% of voters when casting their first preference votes.

I wouldn't agree about the charges, Irish Water was I would agree.
But no matter, it was the charges that caused the rebellion, of course we were already paying for it!
Councils could have charged for it, the same rebellion would have taken place.
Its old news now anyway and detracting from what needs to be done from here and now.
Enda, Leo and FG, previous and current govt haven't come to grips with the crisis in health or housing, moving on both need substantial investment, no one believes realistically that current exchequer funding can solve either problem.
Harsh reality, I don't think any govt can solve these issues, I don't believe FG that they are getting on top of either or that they have a plan, they will continue to throw what they can at both problems, but no specific plan that can have an overall guarantee of success.
I don't believe any other party or govt can do it either continuing with our system status quo.
If we want the exchequer to keep and upgrade our services then we can only expect to have to pay more taxes or perhaps charges for the services.
Water charges were the rallying call for the state should provide it merchants, but the state can't provide for all as we are now, simple as that.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

Fine Gael got 25.5% in the last general election.

They have consistently polled over 30% for the last six months. It will take a big swing to some unknown political force for them to do worse next time out than they did last time out.

What were they polling in the weeks leading up to the election?

I (honestly) don't recall them at the time, but according to this Wiki article, seems that they were getting up around the 30s in the polls then too, right up to a few days before the actual election.

Regardless, I was pointing out the blatant distortion of fact to fiction in mattsers post.

charlie14

Edward M wrote: »

I wouldn't agree about the charges, Irish Water was I would agree.
But no matter, it was the charges that caused the rebellion, of course we were already paying for it!
Councils could have charged for it, the same rebellion would have taken place.
Its old news now anyway and detracting from what needs to be done from here and now.
Enda, Leo and FG, previous and current govt haven't come to grips with the crisis in health or housing, moving on both need substantial investment, no one believes realistically that current exchequer funding can solve either problem.
Harsh reality, I don't think any govt can solve these issues, I don't believe FG that they are getting on top of either or that they have a plan, they will continue to throw what they can at both problems, but no specific plan that can have an overall guarantee of success.
I don't believe any other party or govt can do it either continuing with our system status quo.
If we want the exchequer to keep and upgrade our services then we can only expect to have to pay more taxes or perhaps charges for the services.
Water charges were the rallying call for the state should provide it merchants, but the state can't provide for all as we are now, simple as that.

I don`t think water charges were per se the reason for the revolt against them. The Kenny promise of a world quality service before charges, the strong whiff of favours for friends, threats of a "trickle" and the sheer ineptitude of Irish Water being nothing much more than another expensive layer of bureaucracy not only killed the idea, but killed any other such tax gathering scheme for the foreseeable future.
Their is no other way of sorting the housing crisis without state involvement. The present plan of the markets sorting it out are not working and we are bleeding tax revenue on stop gap measures that are achieving nothing.
Some government at some point is going to have to bite the bullet on the realisation that it is a damned if you don`t and a possible damned if you do on being re-elected if they do not raise taxes.

Idbatterim

They don’t need to raise taxes. They can stop sending fortunes up in smoke in welfare increases ... they will have billions to giveaway in budget 2019

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Others have already pointed out to you the link between revenue-raising through instruments like water charges and expenditure on housing.

However, the water charges issue has a more direct relevance to housing than any other issue. The introduction of water charges was designed to take pressure of the Local Authority funding mechanism and free up expenditure for items such as.......let me see........housing.

So Fine Gael share the blame for some of the woes in housing, their abandonment of water charges reduced the ability to spend money on housing.

Irish Water if everyone had of paid the charges would have been lucky to pay their own overheads, with nothing left for water services let alone for such as .....let me see.......housing.

Neither did it take pressure off the Local Authorities
It created pressure by collecting the connection charges for new homes that previously went to the LA`s resulting in LA`s having to come up with scams under the heading of health and safety over connections, thus doubling the connection charge.

In fact in such cases with new homes, Irish Water were responsible for an increase in house prices.

But then you know all. that already

Dyr

emo72 wrote: »

Don't see anything but a mauling for FG. Those lads seriously have an empathy deficit.

It's always been their problem, they just don't like or understand people outside of a fairly narrow demograph in rural areas and leafy suburbs. Even when an economy is on the up they have a history of getting on the wrong side of the voter.

That said though, that was then and this is now. MM is nowhere to be seen while Leo is pumping the press every day.

James Brown

Edward M wrote: »

Nice little soundbite, how'd Ballymun workout?
Of course its possible too, if you bury your budget in to it, how much do you think and where do you get it from?
Homeless is a bit of a misnomer really, sheltered accommodation, albeit not ideal is better than being on the street.
Maybe we should have a housing stock in place, ready for them as soon as they become homeless.
Hurling on the ditch is easy, come up with a plan and costs or some sort of a figure that could just make all this happen.

What do you mean by the 'nice little soundbite' remark?
I post my opinion. If you read my previous few posts on this I mentioned smaller was better as big sprawling estates was were the problems lay.
Also, are you suggesting, even with Ballymun, Fatima etc. we were not better off with social housing after the slums?

Talk about hurling from the ditch, answer my queries, it's all very well placing barriers and picking holes, my idea is not new, it's been done and can be done. Do you suggest we stay as is with a doubling of child homeless figures, which Varadkar and FG accept, even if you don't, and spiraling costs, or do you have an alternative? It's all very well to keep you head down, but it doesn't provide any answers.
Where would the money come from? the same place they found it for their housing strategy. Simply make it social housing heavy. They have proven that they can get money if they are interested. My route will save us money over time. The current route costs us more over time and looks like making the problem worse.

All the crises have worsened under FG, since the 'bad times' of their unofficial coalition partner FF.
We can continue as is, wasting money on a short term(?) emergency fix or 'change the way we do business' as a man from Mayo once put in his manifesto.

Dyr

Edward M wrote: »

Nice little soundbite, how'd Ballymun workout?

Nice Soundbite

How did Marino work out?

How did Cabra work out?

Most places in Ireland have housing that exists due to Government intervention. Worth remembering that a lot of the lads who decry public housing are doing it while sitting on land that the government of the day bought for their forefathers

Good loser

charlie14 wrote: »

You really need to genoer Charges you showt over Water Charges.
That ship sailed long ago.
It started out its voyage the day of the first marches when Fine Gael back bench T.D`s saw so many of their own supporters out marching in protest.
It sailed off over the horizon after that.
The next ship waiting to dock is the housing crisis.
This governments policy on housing, no matter how they have tried to massage the figure, has been shown to been an failure.
Unless they change tact, and swiftly, then Fine Gael are going to suffer come the next GE.
They would be wise mind you to keep a weather eye on that other ship heading toward the docks, the health services.
Record numbers on trolleys is not a great vote-getter.

That's amazing and pretty typical of your uniformly useless contributions.
Why don't you post less and give some thought to the topics you write so much about?

On the Water Charges the connection between cause and effect, action and consequence apparently means nothing to you.

To repeat, anyone who supported the abolition of Water Charges and wants more Govt spending on housing, health etc is nothing more than a waffling hypocrite.

Good loser

Matt Barrett wrote: »

What do you mean by the 'nice little soundbite' remark?
I post my opinion. If you read my previous few posts on this I mentioned smaller was better as big sprawling estates was were the problems lay.
Also, are you suggesting, even with Ballymun, Fatima etc. we were not better off with social housing after the slums?

Talk about hurling from the ditch, answer my queries, it's all very well placing barriers and picking holes, my idea is not new, it's been done and can be done. Do you suggest we stay as is with a doubling of child homeless figures, which Varadkar and FG accept, even if you don't, and spiraling costs, or do you have an alternative? It's all very well to keep you head down, but it doesn't provide any answers.
Where would the money come from? the same place they found it for their housing strategy. Simply make it social housing heavy. They have proven that they can get money if they are interested. My route will save us money over time. The current route costs us more over time and looks like making the problem worse.

All the crises have worsened under FG, since the 'bad times' of their unofficial coalition partner FF.
We can continue as is, wasting money on a short term(?) emergency fix or 'change the way we do business' as a man from Mayo once put in his manifesto.

You're at it again, more verbose waffling. No figures as usual. Zero help towards making a contribution to the crisis.

From your first post on this topic you have advanced the issue not one whit.

Why not start from this base - to provide a single housing unit in Dublin will cost the Govt probably €350,000. Build on that.

Idbatterim

Echoing the post above this one. Most of my mates and family have typically voted for fg. Times up on their failure. Voting renua next time round or not voting is the current stance ...

Zubeneschamali

Idbatterim wrote: »

Voting renua next time round or not voting is the current stance ...

Chuck your vote in the bin if you want - makes my vote count for more.

Idbatterim

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Chuck your vote in the bin if you want - makes my vote count for more.

I’ll do that before I vote for more of the same ****e. I’m sure the runaway house prices are considered great if you are a homeowner. With near zero wage growth and over half of any salary increase you do get, thieved off you. Forgive my patience having run out ...

Also at least I’ll be able to say I didn’t vote for the other failure in Irish politics over the past hundred years ...

Zubeneschamali

Idbatterim wrote: »

I’ll do that before I vote for more of the same ****e.

Good - that makes my vote for more of the same ****e slightly more influential.

seamus

Idbatterim wrote: »

I’ll do that before I vote for more of the same ****e. I’m sure the runaway house prices are considered great if you are a homeowner. With near zero wage growth and over half of any salary increase you do get, thieved off you. Forgive my patience having run out ...

Wages have been increasing steadily since the end of 2015.

This is actually part of the problem with housing - mortgages are based on projected earnings, not past ones.

If you want house prices to stabilise, you want low wage growth.

Idbatterim

House price growth is significantly ahead of wage inflation ...

What happens with low wage growth and run away property prices? Damage to the local economy. People spending less on every other area to fund the Irish holy grail of property ...

charlie14

Good loser wrote: »

That's amazing and pretty typical of your uniformly useless contributions.
Why don't you post less and give some thought to the topics you write so much about?

On the Water Charges the connection between cause and effect, action and consequence apparently means nothing to you.

To repeat, anyone who supported the abolition of Water Charges and wants more Govt spending on housing, health etc is nothing more than a waffling hypocrite.

Not surprised to see you have not changed your posting style since we last engaged on water charges.
Attempting to play the man rather than the ball.

I have already dealt with some of the cause, effects, action and consequences of water charges in my post here #817.
If you wish to contradict any of those with specifics rather than waffle, then I am more than happy to engage with you.
Otherwise just accept that water charges were a very expensive policy disaster, financially for the taxpayer, and politically for the Fine Gael/Labour government.

Chips Lovell

We've had several warnings and people are still ignoring them. Cards have been handed out.

James Brown

Good loser wrote: »

You're at it again, more verbose waffling. No figures as usual. Zero help towards making a contribution to the crisis.

From your first post on this topic you have advanced the issue not one whit.

Why not start from this base - to provide a single housing unit in Dublin will cost the Govt probably €350,000. Build on that.

Hello,
I've provided figures in the past derived from FG housing plan (not to mention millions here and there wasted on vanity projects and Irish Water). You fall back on market pricing. You seemingly don't comprehend the idea. So the developers selling for €350,000 are breaking even, after they pay themselves, workers and for materials? No profit in there at all?

Once again you've neglected to answer my queries; do you think child homelessness doubling and 'emergency' accommodation costs spiraling is the course we should stay on? Do you have an alternative? Would you prefer tax paying working people on low incomes living in state owned property paying rent to the state/council or getting a hand out from the tax payer to pay private landlords, or grants from the tax payer to meet artificially maintained 'market' rates? Which is the best deal for the tax payer?

You just seem to want to close down the issue rather than comment on the current policies or suggest alternatives.

Have a read of this if you like:

“It was a prime moment in the 1930s when Simms started his work, there was a real political will to do something about housing,” Dr Ruth McManus, senior lecture at the department of History and Geography in DCU says. “There were also campaigns in the newspapers. The Irish Press ran campaigns around the housing crisis and it was seen as a slur on the nation to have people living in such appalling conditions.”
The provision of housing was also tied into ideals of nationalism and nation building. “Providing people with good homes would make people better citizens,” she says.
https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/heritage/remembering-herbert-simms-the-man-who-rebuilt-dublin-1.3447370

Back in the 1930's when we truly had nothing, mind we've since had decades of political parties dividing us into groups for blaming each other.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Good - that makes my vote for more of the same ****e slightly more influential.

Yet if enough of us do it, rather than believe the scaremongering from FF/FG...

Idbatterim

Say sf got into coalition and did something about housing. It would be far more beneficial to me financially, than fg giving a fiver a week usc cut! Like I said lads. Fg are fine and dandy if you’re one of the I’m alright jack brigade, which I m adding ther defenders on here are. Older homeowners or pensioners... if all they care about is power, remove them from it...

James Brown

Idbatterim wrote: »

Say sf got into coalition and did something about housing. It would be far more beneficial to me financially, than fg giving a fiver a week usc cut! Like I said lads. Fg are fine and dandy if you’re one of the I’m alright jack brigade, which I m adding ther defenders on here are. Older homeowners or pensioners... if all they care about is power, remove them from it...

If FG were true to their word, I'd vote for them, but they've proven to be one sided and it's not the tax payers side. Creating division and dismissing crises while the tax payer carries the ever increasing bill.

JCX BXC

Idbatterim wrote: »

Say sf got into coalition and did something about housing. It would be far more beneficial to me financially, than fg giving a fiver a week usc cut! Like I said lads. Fg are fine and dandy if you’re one of the I’m alright jack brigade, which I m adding ther defenders on here are. Older homeowners or pensioners... if all they care about is power, remove them from it...

Say they did, what would they do? SF don't seem to know themselves, they just like to give out with Mary Lou screaming that everything is an "utter disgrace".

And on your last point, that's just bizzare. In Ireland we have a very high minimum wage, excellent social welfare and tax system disproportionately benefitting low earners. Are you suggesting that FG treat these people like crap? If so, then I think we've highlighted exactly what the issue is with current political analysis among some of the lesser open-minded citizens (many of whom scream victim on social media).

Now, I don't particularly like FG, some of their policies are just downright imbecilic, and to call them a center right party would be incorrect. Every party is in essence center left, or at a push, just center (except Renua, although no real point counting them) You have the PPP which are an extremist left (yano, we'll imprision you in your car if we don't like a certain policy of your government), and you have the FF/FG/Labour which are more center left. Basically you won't find a policy that will be brave enough to cut social welfare or make everyone contribute to society.

Idbatterim

Matt you’ve hit the nail on the head. I’ll be taking those lying b*stards head off when they come to my door. Go into the renua page and look at the figures they post up, of just how staggering the burden of running this country is on mid to high income earners, nearly solely!

Zubeneschamali

Idbatterim wrote: »

Say sf got into coalition and did something about housing. It would be far more beneficial to me financially, than fg giving a fiver a week usc cut!

For SF to deliver on all their promises, they would have to tax you to the hilt. No-one earning a wage could possibly come out ahead.

James Brown

JCX BXC wrote: »

Say they did, what would they do? SF don't seem to know themselves, they just like to give out with Mary Lou screaming that everything is an "utter disgrace".

And on your last point, that's just bizzare. In Ireland we have a very high minimum wage, excellent social welfare and tax system disproportionately benefitting low earners. Are you suggesting that FG treat these people like crap? If so, then I think we've highlighted exactly what the issue is with current political analysis among some of the lesser open-minded citizens (many of whom scream victim on social media).

Now, I don't particularly like FG, some of their policies are just downright imbecilic, and to call them a center right party would be incorrect. Every party is in essence center left, or at a push, just center (except Renua, although no real point counting them) You have the PPP which are an extremist left (yano, we'll imprision you in your car if we don't like a certain policy of your government), and you have the FF/FG/Labour which are more center left. Basically you won't find a policy that will be brave enough to cut social welfare or make everyone contribute to society.

Working people can't rent or buy without state hand outs. People are averaging a six week wait to see their GP. It's all well to say these things are frustrating, but doing is a different matter.
Being brave enough to cut social welfare, (one of the things you seem to be commending FG for having 'excellent'), won't cut it. Aren't we nearly at full employment by the way? It's a nice distraction, but people on welfare aren't maintaining the housing market prices, government are. This 'economy' would tank if welfare/rent aid were cut.
When working people on 'very high minimum wage' can't make rent, somethings gone wrong. Supporting or standing by while this worsens because of fear of unproven alternative parties makes little sense. Might they crash the economy? Might they see the number of homeless children double, might they see in the reliance on tax funded emergency accommodation continuously break records? We are already there. The economy is a ponzi scheme waiting to either collapse or bleed the tax payer until the state needs borrow to subsidise the tax payer, who then in-turn subsidies policies that do not maintain themselves.
It's about value for money for the tax payer and quality of life.

seamus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

For SF to deliver on all their promises, they would have to tax you to the hilt. No-one earning a wage could possibly come out ahead.

This. If half of all of your pay rises get taken by the taxman, then you're not part of Sinn Fein's target audience. You're part of their target cash cow; the "wealthy elite" who should pay more tax.

JCX BXC

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Working people can't rent or buy without state hand outs. People are averaging a six week wait to see their GP. It's all well to say these things are frustrating, but doing is a different matter.
Being brave enough to cut social welfare, (one of the things you seem to be commending FG for having 'excellent'), won't cut it. Aren't we nearly at full employement by the way? It's a nice distraction, but people on welfare aren't maintaining the housing market prices, government are. When working people on 'very high minimum wage' can't make rent, somethings gone wrong. Supporting or standing by while this worsens because of fear of unproven alternative parties makes little sense. Might they crash the economy? Might they see the number of homeless children double, might they see in the reliance on tax funded emergency accommodation continuously break records? We are already there. The economy is a ponzi scheme waiting to either collapse or bleed the tax payer until the state needs borrow to subsidise the tax payer, who then in-turn subsidies policies that do not maintain themselves.
It's about value for money for the tax payer and quality of life.

I said FG aren't brave enough to cut social welfare.

No party in Ireland seems to want to stand up for earners just above the industrial wage, it's always the two extremes.

James Brown

JCX BXC wrote: »

I said FG aren't brave enough to cut social welfare.

No party in Ireland seems to want to stand up for earners just above the industrial wage, it's always the two extremes.

I know, but you said it was excellent. Welfare is there to fill a need. By your own admission, we've a decent minimum wage, so why do working people need welfare hand outs for rent? The welfare bill isn't only going to the anecdotal lads drinking cans. It's going to people working who cannot afford a roof.
If welfare was cut, people would be even less likely to be able to afford rent. Then we'd see more tax spend on hotels for 'emergency' purposes. All this, in my view, is to keep the 'economy' going under the pretense of 'recovery'. If the way we do business cannot support itself, and it can't, we need change tack.
FG are probably best equipped but are not willing. therefore it's more a case of 'well, I'm not sure about [insert party] but more of the same is a waste of my vote' rather than, 'better the devil you know/we can gauge how bad it will be' by sticking with FF/FG.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Working people can't rent or buy without state hand outs. People are averaging a six week wait to see their GP. It's all well to say these things are frustrating, but doing is a different matter.
Being brave enough to cut social welfare, (one of the things you seem to be commending FG for having 'excellent'), won't cut it. Aren't we nearly at full employment by the way? It's a nice distraction, but people on welfare aren't maintaining the housing market prices, government are. This 'economy' would tank if welfare/rent aid were cut.
When working people on 'very high minimum wage' can't make rent, somethings gone wrong. Supporting or standing by while this worsens because of fear of unproven alternative parties makes little sense. Might they crash the economy? Might they see the number of homeless children double, might they see in the reliance on tax funded emergency accommodation continuously break records? We are already there. The economy is a ponzi scheme waiting to either collapse or bleed the tax payer until the state needs borrow to subsidise the tax payer, who then in-turn subsidies policies that do not maintain themselves.
It's about value for money for the tax payer and quality of life.

I have seen the reports in newspapers coming from the GP lobby group, but I am not aware of anyone who has had to wait six weeks to see their GP, especially in emergency cases. As the GP lobby group is looking for more money for GPs, I have to question their motivation.

We do see this problem across the water and up North in relation to GPs under the NHS, where there are regularly huge problems with waiting lists for GPs. The nutty opposition parties down here regularly point to the NHS as the solution, but it seems it would cost a lot more money from the ordinary taxpayer and not bring any improvement.

Reform of the health service is the only way forward.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I know, but you said it was excellent. Welfare is there to fill a need. By your own admission, we've a decent minimum wage, so why do working people need welfare hand outs for rent? The welfare bill isn't only going to the anecdotal lads drinking cans. It's going to people working who cannot afford a roof.
If welfare was cut, people would be even less likely to be able to afford rent. Then we'd see more tax spend on hotels for 'emergency' purposes. All this, in my view, is to keep the 'economy' going under the pretense of 'recovery'. If the way we do business cannot support itself, and it can't, we need change tack.
FG are probably best equipped but are not willing. therefore it's more a case of 'well, I'm not sure about [insert party] but more of the same is a waste of my vote' rather than, 'better the devil you know/we can gauge how bad it will be' by sticking with FF/FG.

There is a problem with expectations in Ireland.

The ordinary person expects to be able to go on holidays, own a car and live in a four-bedroomed semi, all while on welfare. That sense of entitlement doesn't exist elsewhere.