Fianna fail/Fianna Geal Confidence and supply deal

Wanderer78

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes - try reading boards from 2008. People thought we would default, be ejected from the Euro, be under the IMF for a decade etc. etc.


But now we are back as the fastest growing economy in Europe.

have you ever noticed that the economy isnt doing too bad, but society isnt exactly doing great? how disconnected have we become of the economic metrics and metric systems that measure our well being? neither fg or ff are good for our country, the only problem is, theres no one there to take over their reign. fastest growing economy, what nonsense!

Zubeneschamali

Wanderer78 wrote: »

have you ever noticed that the economy isnt doing too bad, but society isnt exactly doing great? how disconnected have we become of the economic metrics and metric systems that measure our well being?

Have you ever noticed that when the economy is in the toilet, no-one is talking like this because they have no money and don't know when they might be able to get a job and are 6 months in arrears and getting letters threatening to cut off everything and the kids are going to get no Santy presents again this year?



Now that economic armageddon has been averted, we are back to worrying about commute times and the property ladder and 191 offers and oh the disconnect between wellbeing and economic metrics.

Wanderer78

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Have you ever noticed that when the economy is in the toilet, no-one is talking like this because they have no money and don't know when they might be able to get a job and are 6 months in arrears and getting letters threatening to cut off everything and the kids are going to get no Santy presents again this year?



Now that economic armageddon has been averted, we are back to worrying about commute times and the property ladder and 191 offers and oh the disconnect between wellbeing and economic metrics.

some are worrying about these things, while others are hoping they dont end up homeless, some wondering will they ever gain access to secure accommodation again, some hoping they dont end up sick and dependent on our public health system, how disconnected some are from these issues, and these issues arent going away, but in fact are exasperating!

blanch152

Wanderer78 wrote: »

have you ever noticed that the economy isnt doing too bad, but society isnt exactly doing great? how disconnected have we become of the economic metrics and metric systems that measure our well being? neither fg or ff are good for our country, the only problem is, theres no one there to take over their reign. fastest growing economy, what nonsense!

You are right, we still have chancers in society not paying their bills to the State (see Strokestown) and ensuring there isn't enough money for health and housing and also chancers not paying their mortgage payments (see Strokestown) ensuring that because of the risk of non-payers, we have the highest mortgage rates in Europe for young buyers, making affordability a major issue.

Unfortunately, it seems there are too many out there - looking at you Matt Carthy MEP and Pearse Doherty, "accountant" - who support these type of chancers.

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

im not talking about people who work and you know that.

So with almost full employment you're talking about the sick, elderly and homeless. The hands out class is a harsh moniker for those worse off than ourselves. May you never be old, sick, in debt or let go.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

.....


Now that economic armageddon has been averted, we are back to worrying about commute times and the property ladder and 191 offers and oh the disconnect between wellbeing and economic metrics.

With worsening record breaking crises, (plural), grand job? They're doing a great job if you've your own house and a relatively steady job, with little to no regard for your fellow countrymen/women. Most people aren't prospering in tandem with the 'economy', many are going in the opposite direction. Try as some might to dismiss them as 'wanting something for nothing' the vast majority of people availing of state aid out of necessity are tax paying workers, despite the mythology that in a time of near full employment it's all chancers and 'dem who don't want to work'.

abcabc123123

Matt Barrett wrote: »

They're doing a great job if you've your own house and a relatively steady job

... and also if you like falling crime rates, falling poverty and deprivation rates, falling suicide rates, rising incomes and rising life expectancy rates.

"with little to no regard for your fellow countrymen/women"

Jesus, sanctimonious much?

James Brown

abcabc123123 wrote: »

... and also if you like falling crime rates, falling poverty and deprivation rates, falling suicide rates, rising incomes and rising life expectancy rates.

"with little to no regard for your fellow countrymen/women"

Jesus, sanctimonious much?

My take on worsening crises while applauding the job government is doing, is having little knowledge or regard for others once you yourself are doing well. It's not all bad for sure, I believe the economy is doing great.

No, I'm not Jesus, he's far more socialist than I. FYI, he's a birthday coming up.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

With worsening record breaking crises, (plural), grand job? They're doing a great job if you've your own house and a relatively steady job, with little to no regard for your fellow countrymen/women. Most people aren't prospering in tandem with the 'economy', many are going in the opposite direction. Try as some might to dismiss them as 'wanting something for nothing' the vast majority of people availing of state aid out of necessity are tax paying workers, despite the mythology that in a time of near full employment it's all chancers and 'dem who don't want to work'.

This is absolute nonsense.

Social welfare rates are up.
Those in employment are up.
Wages are up.
Numbers housed are up.
Life expectancy is up.

Most are doing a lot better.

Yes, there are very few doing worse. There are chickens coming home to roost for some - the McGanns in Strokestown for example, but there were not enough of them as repossessions are too low in Ireland.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/defaulters-cost-other-mortgage-holders-250-a-month-1.3736146

Young people are losing out on the opportunity for cheaper mortgages because of the greed of those who refuse to pay. Similarly, the naked greed of the likes of Margaret Cash and others who want a forever house is doing damage to the genuinely homeless.

abcabc123123

Matt Barrett wrote: »

My take on worsening crises while applauding the job government is doing, is having little knowledge or regard for others once you yourself are doing well.

oh, I see. People who don't cherry pick government performance metrics in the exact same way that you do aren't necessarily uncaring; they might just be ignorant instead. That's much less insulting.

James Brown

abcabc123123 wrote: »

oh, I see. People who don't cherry pick government performance metrics in the exact same way that you do aren't necessarily uncaring; they might just be ignorant instead. That's much less insulting.

Calm yourself.
Somebody posted on 'the handout class'. I was looking for clarification on who they were. Then I was responding to the notion that the worries today are about commute times and the property ladder. I disagreed and gave examples.
What is your issue here? If you're only going to attack because for some reason you personally feel slighted, I suggest you stick to reading the conversation for answers, ongoing.

FreudianSlippers

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Calm yourself.
Somebody posted on 'the handout class'. I was looking for clarification on who they were. Then I was responding to the notion that the worries today are about commute times and the property ladder. I disagreed and gave examples.
What is your issue here? If you're only going to attack because for some reason you personally feel slighted, I suggest you stick to reading the conversation for answers, ongoing.

Deflection alert!

johnnyskeleton

abcabc123123 wrote: »

Jesus, sanctimonious much?

abcabc123123 wrote: »

oh, I see. People who don't cherry pick government performance metrics in the exact same way that you do aren't necessarily uncaring; they might just be ignorant instead. That's much less insulting.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

No, I'm not Jesus, he's far more socialist than I. FYI, he's a birthday coming up.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Deflection alert!

Mod note:

Let's get back to serious debate please!

abcabc123123

Apologies.

My view on taking an ultra negative view on the government's performance during a time of remarkable economic recovery, when poverty and deprivation indicators are being significantly reduced year on year, when crime is dropping, life expectancy is rising, when the suicide rate is falling, when incomes are rising and spending on luxuries is increasing, is having poor understanding or an ideologically warped view of society as a whole.

James Brown

abcabc123123 wrote: »

Apologies.

My view on taking an ultra negative view on the government's performance during a time of remarkable economic recovery, when poverty and deprivation indicators are being significantly reduced year on year, when crime is dropping, life expectancy is rising, when the suicide rate is falling, when incomes are rising and spending on luxuries is increasing, is having poor understanding or an ideologically warped view of society as a whole.

Not quite. Responding to comments, with specifics is just that. It's called discussion, rather than closing down.
The economy is doing great and we've record numbers of children homeless. There's a disconnect there. We've also near full employment, but a 'hand out' or 'privilege culture' based on the state spend, there's a disconnect there.
To say everything is great or bad would not be an accurate assessment IMO.
It's up for discussion not closing down IMO.

abcabc123123

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Not quite. Responding to comments, with specifics is just that. It's called discussion, rather than closing down.
The economy is doing great and we've record numbers of children homeless. There's a disconnect there. We've also near full employment, but a 'hand out' or 'privilege culture' based on the state spend, there's a disconnect there.
To say everything is great or bad would not be an accurate assessment IMO.
It's up for discussion not closing down IMO.

Thanks for deleting the personal attack, I appreciate it.

I've never said everything is great and I'm not shutting anything down. The government has made loads of missteps. It has also made loads of good decisions too. The homeless issue sucks but I like the steps bring taken to rectify it in the long term, which is the only realistic timeframe it could ever be fixed in, despite what detractors might say.

James Brown

abcabc123123 wrote: »

Thanks for deleting the personal attack, I appreciate it.

I've never said everything is great and I'm not shutting anything down. The government has made loads of missteps. It has also made loads of good decisions too. The homeless issue sucks but I like the steps bring taken to rectify it in the long term, which is the only realistic timeframe it could ever be fixed in, despite what detractors might say.

I've deleted nothing. I suggest you report any personal attack to the Mods.

So you disagree. Grand. The 'steps' are making it worse.

markodaly

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I've deleted nothing. I suggest you report any personal attack to the Mods.

So you disagree. Grand. The 'steps' are making it worse.

Matt in your view everything is making it worse. That's your modus operandi.

The CSO released statistics there that shows average household income on the way up, and poverty rates trending down.

Things are never all bad or all good. It's a nuanced argument. Beating the same drum all the time is just tiring imo.

If you think things are absolutely terrible now, then god help you if you lived through the 1980's, like I did or went through the life of poverty my own mother had, where there was actual food scarcity growing up. She is made of hardy stuff, by no means an FG supporter (has never voted for them) but would state quite clearly that we are spoiled today with a huge entitlement culture.

In other words, people, in general, do not know how good we have it in reality. Ireland is not without its issues, but please tell me would you swap it for the 1980's or the 1950's or any other time in Irish history? I think not.

Zubeneschamali

markodaly wrote: »

In other words, people, in general, do not know how good we have it in reality. Ireland is not without its issues, but please tell me would you swap it for the 1980's or the 1950's or any other time in Irish history? I think not.

You don't have to go back to the 1980s - would anyone swap today for just 10 years ago, 2008?


Budget cuts, Taoiseach Brian Cowen, Anglo, job losses...

Wanderer78

Zubeneschamali wrote:

You don't have to go back to the 1980s - would anyone swap today for just 10 years ago, 2008?

Of course now is better than even 10 years ago, but we have some major issues to address, we have left many in extremely precarious situations, particularly younger generations, their future looks deeply uncertain, as we can no longer guarantee their most critical of needs, this is very evident in things such as health care and housing etc. We have to ask ourselves, has bailing out banks and imposing things such as austerity truly worked, or have we just helped to increase this uncertain future for many?

Seth Brundle

Wanderer78 wrote: »

we can no longer guarantee their most critical of needs, this is very evident in things such as health care and housing etc. We have to ask ourselves, has bailing out banks and imposing things such as austerity truly worked, or have we just helped to increase this uncertain future for many?

What exactly about health care or housing can we not guarrantee?
We have accommodation. Just not where many want it!
Healthcare although inefficient in many ways, it is not bad. What about healthcare cannot be guaranteed?

Eric Cartman

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Of course now is better than even 10 years ago, but we have some major issues to address, we have left many in extremely precarious situations, particularly younger generations, their future looks deeply uncertain, as we can no longer guarantee their most critical of needs, this is very evident in things such as health care and housing etc. We have to ask ourselves, has bailing out banks and imposing things such as austerity truly worked, or have we just helped to increase this uncertain future for many?

The number of people in Ireland living rurally was approx 55% in 1960 , it was 34% in 2016 , our population in 1960 was 2.8 million , in 2016 it was 4.7 million , thats a lot of increase in urban housing demand. In 2016 the average number of children for a household was 1.6 , I cant find stats for 1960 but it would easily be double that.

In 1960 the vast majority of mortgages were taken out by men who were financially supporting themselves, their wife and an average of 3 children , the buying power to drive up house prices wasnt there.

In modern Ireland most households are twin income , with less than half the number of dependants and predominantly urban , so demand is high.

People often say that in our parents day you could afford a house on any old job and it was so easy, the reality is we did this to ourselves, unless we kick out all the foreigners , go back to farming ,, put all our women out of work , ban contraception again and live 20 years less , were not going back to the affordability of housing of the old days.

James Brown

We could go back to the 1930's. Less homeless children than today. That's some feat.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Of course now is better than even 10 years ago, but we have some major issues to address, we have left many in extremely precarious situations, particularly younger generations, their future looks deeply uncertain, as we can no longer guarantee their most critical of needs, this is very evident in things such as health care and housing etc. We have to ask ourselves, has bailing out banks and imposing things such as austerity truly worked, or have we just helped to increase this uncertain future for many?

It secured a return the the way we did business that led us there and that FG at the time claimed we needed to change, before they got back up on the same horse.

James Brown

Seth Brundle wrote: »

What exactly about health care or housing can we not guarrantee?
We have accommodation. Just not where many want it!
Healthcare although inefficient in many ways, it is not bad. What about healthcare cannot be guaranteed?

The tax payer needing to give aid to workers so they can put a roof over their head is a ponzi scheme. There'll be nice profits made by some until the bottom falls out but then they can blame Brexit so it's all good.

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The number of people in Ireland living rurally was approx 55% in 1960 , it was 34% in 2016 , our population in 1960 was 2.8 million , in 2016 it was 4.7 million , thats a lot of increase in urban housing demand. In 2016 the average number of children for a household was 1.6 , I cant find stats for 1960 but it would easily be double that.

In 1960 the vast majority of mortgages were taken out by men who were financially supporting themselves, their wife and an average of 3 children , the buying power to drive up house prices wasnt there.

In modern Ireland most households are twin income , with less than half the number of dependants and predominantly urban , so demand is high.

People often say that in our parents day you could afford a house on any old job and it was so easy, the reality is we did this to ourselves, unless we kick out all the foreigners , go back to farming ,, put all our women out of work , ban contraception again and live 20 years less , were not going back to the affordability of housing of the old days.

Fine points, regarding turning back the clock, not the examples, (less income per household and more kids equals cheaper housing?) but the market is queered by the state and LA's. Corporate entities are buying up property because they know the state and LA's will supply customers/be the tenant. This has the effect of the cure feeding the cause. This drives up prices when corporate entities are buying up. House prices and rents aren't set by what people can or are willing to pay when the state picks up the overage, therefore the market becomes skewed and that's why we don't have a natural market where affordability sets the rates like any normal market place. Basically if nobody can afford your product you need lower pricing of close up.

Seth Brundle

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The tax payer needing to give aid to workers so they can put a roof over their head is a ponzi scheme. There'll be nice profits made by some until the bottom falls out but then they can blame Brexit so it's all good.

Thanks for answering a question that nobody asked!

James Brown

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Thanks for answering a question that nobody asked!

Seth Brundle wrote: »

What exactly about health care or housing can we not guarrantee?
We have accommodation. Just not where many want it!
Healthcare although inefficient in many ways, it is not bad. What about healthcare cannot be guaranteed?

Have you read the above?
Also, there's housing just not were many want it? So if I live and work in Dublin, can't find a place I can afford, but there's a cheap house going spare in Leitrim or Cavan, it's all good?

Seth Brundle

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Have you read the above?
Also, there's housing just not were many want it? So if I live and work in Dublin, can't find a place I can afford, but there's a cheap house going spare in Leitrim or Cavan, it's all good?

I'm well able to read, thanks.
Is accommodation for all guarranteed (is there anyone who has absolutely nowhere to go)?
What exactly is not guaranteed in terms of accommodation? Are you referring to availability or availability in a specific location?

Still unsure of how my questions and your response about ponzi schemes and profits are supposed to be related.

Zubeneschamali

Matt Barrett wrote: »

less income per household and more kids equals cheaper housing?

Yes, of course. Basic economics - houses can only cost what the market will bear. If every household has only a single income and needs four bedrooms, a four bedroom house is only worth what that household can pay.


If every household has 2 incomes and only 1 child, they can pay more than double for a house, so that is what a house costs.

James Brown

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, of course. Basic economics - houses can only cost what the market will bear. If every household has only a single income and needs four bedrooms, a four bedroom house is only worth what that household can pay.


If every household has 2 incomes and only 1 child, they can pay more than double for a house, so that is what a house costs.

That's how it should work, but it's not the reality. If people can't afford rents, they don't come down, the tax payer takes a hit. If there are more people than housing they can afford, the tax payer steps in. So prices remain the same pretty much, as with rents. This is the problem and then corporate entities step in buying up property to meet the need and making matters worse.
Reliance on the private market is not working. It does what it does, makes as much profit as it can by any means.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I'm well able to read, thanks.
Is accommodation for all guarranteed (is there anyone who has absolutely nowhere to go)?
What exactly is not guaranteed in terms of accommodation? Are you referring to availability or availability in a specific location?

Still unsure of how my questions and your response about ponzi schemes and profits are supposed to be related.

There is a homeless crisis, it's ongoing.
There is a health crisis, it's ongoing.

Finding accommodation you can afford is not guaranteed, which is fair enough, but when you're working full time, where do you go from there?

The ponzi scheme goes back to why we are in crisis, (the housing one). Poor policies of FG endorsed by FF, and that's why the 'stability' of this confidence and supply deal isn't good for the country. Yes, one could argue it could be worse, but that's pretty much the election slogan of FF/FG these days.

Zubeneschamali

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That's how it should work, but it's not the reality. If people can't afford rents, they don't come down, the tax payer takes a hit.

This turns out not to be the case: