Would you like to attend a housing protest?

Fordcspri23

No hopers demanding a free house to house their litter of children that they make an income out yea yer winners for sure.

Ash.J.Williams

i don't have a house because despite working hard and having a decent job i'm not the smartest when it comes to money....however on the news last night i saw the protest footage and they reckon we should all have houses...that seems like a realistic outcome

Ash.J.Williams

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

i don't have a house because despite working hard and having a decent job i'm not the smartest when it comes to money....however on the news last night i saw the protest footage and they reckon we should all have houses...that seems like a realistic outcome

Of course you can have a house. Where would you like it? How many rooms? How big a garden? Might have to hire a gardener for you. And maybe a housekeeper.

Ash.J.Williams

Deleted User wrote: »

Of course you can have a house. Where would you like it? How many rooms? How big a garden? Might have to hire a gardener for you. And maybe a housekeeper.

I know it's great, I'd like 4 beds for me little angles, definitely a house keeper and most importantly it must be near me mams or ill throw a strop.

Ash.J.Williams

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I know it's great, I'd like 4 beds for me little angles, definitely a house keeper and most importantly it must be near me mams or ill throw a strop.

I’m sure that the Robbin gubberment will do all dey can to care for your little angles GBT. How about a few acres for da hoss?

stateofflux

Any housing related protest is a good thing.

Despite the section of protest looking for free houses..there is a bigger picture which would benefit all

Current govt housing strategy is not working.. they need a good kick up the hole from somewhere...anywhere.. it feels the only class being catered for is very high earners

Also stop going on with the dole scrouger arguments with 5% unemployment..its a drop in the ocean just like the govt spin 'fraud' saving annoucements..they are spending more of our money on private UK activation firms at the moment.

Social housing is required for lower classes

should it be palatial and smack bang in the city centre? Of course not

Is it needed? ...yes

Will there be useless leeches getting a free gaff? Yes but they need to live somewhere...

once its not beside my gaff i worked my ass off for.

Mad_maxx

Mongfinder General wrote: »

I think the mood of the nation has turned in the past year from acknowledging that there is a housing shortage in some areas to "there are too many freeloaders jumping on the band wagon, so fcuk this".

Just look at the vote that Casey got. That was borne

from the complete frustration of the coping class who pay for everything but get comparatively little in return. Attitudes have hardened, that's for sure

No the Peter casey vote was specifically about travellers, long before the broader issue of the squeezed middle became a thing, travellers were running amok and all we got from media was romantic eulogising.

Old diesel

doolox wrote: »

It doesn't take a genius to figure out why housing is so dear.

1. Lack of skilled labour. Ireland dumped several 10's of thousands of building workers out of a job in the sudden shock downturn of 2008. They left not only for other countries but also for other sectors. Many plumbers, fitters, electricians etc moved into more stable and better paying roles in services and industry, leaving the insecurity and cyclical uncertainties of the building sector behind them, they won't be coming back in a hurry.
2 Planning slowdowns and delays and NIMBYism. People in existing houses and developments do not want new houses built beside them, many for good reasons such as historical inabilities of local government to increase the size and capacity of roads, schools, clinics, parks, libraries etc to match the new increased size of a particular location. Planning in general is a lot slower in Ireland than in many other countries.
3. Increased longevity. People are living longer than ever before. This means that young families are facing a reduced Available housing stock as older people are in the houses on their own or in nursing homes for longer periods in 3-4 bedroom houses because they cannot downsize to more suitable dwellings because of the huge costs, risks and taxes involved.
4. Land being held up or not made available. This also is attributable to slow planning processes and NIMBYISM.
5. Rising population in Ireland. Especially on the East Coast which is the result of full employment and the reluctance of non working populations to move away from the high rent, high cost East coast to cheaper locations although I know of some older retirees who have moved to cheaper locations in the country others haven't citing health and transport issues as the reason why not.Other countries have a custom of people retiring to less expensive locations on retirement. We need to incentivise this to increase housing stock for working couples etc.
6. Neglect of apprenticeship roles in the building industry. Ireland is now a nation of almost unemployable degree holders as the preference for people is heavily skewed towards degree holding academically top heavy careers at the cost of having far too few craftsmen and manual workers to do the necessary building work. Unlike cars and consumer devices, robotics and automated building practices have not been developed or adopted in the building industry. There was no magic solution to housing as applied to cars the the 1910's ( Henry Ford) or to shipping in the 1st and second world war, Liberty ships etc.
Most other industries applied mechanical and electronic automation to increase output in the face of lower labour availability. This has not happened to the same revolutionary extent in the building industry. In fact the opposite has happened as individual houses have become more elaborate and higher specced at the expense of raw numerical output. We need more basic houses to solve a basic need for private space. This is not happening. Only high spec and expensive housing is being built, out of reach of most average people to buy.
7. Increased job insecurity and the "gig" economy. It is becoming increasingly common for many young people not to secure their first permanent job until they are in their late 20's or early 30's. Many do not get steady employment at a high enough salary to get a mortgage on a house near their work. Employers are now finding out that lack of affordable housing is putting a damper on industrial development as they cannot hire enough workers to fill vacancies because those workers cannot secure housing in their new work location.
8. Reluctance of central government to build social housing. The government have given up on large scale social housing as a strategy to stabilise and control the spiralling costs of rents and house prices. In the past we had huge social housing projects to meet a need for housing. This no longer happens but is badly needed now. The government seek to embed social housing "invisably" in existing private housing stock. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that a lottery will take place in the future price of houses when the nature of your future neighbours becomes known. People living beside social housing units will suffer a reduced gain in the housing price and may even suffer a reduction as the knowledge of who is living next door becomes clear in time. I have experienced this myself in former local housing developments where there is good and bad roads on each estate, the good roads attracting higher prices than the bad roads. As housing estates develop and people maintain their houses ( or not) it soon becomes evident from the state of the houses where the social housing units are.
9. Dear fossil fuels. Most building work involves heavy use of machinery and concrete to accomplish. This requires copious amounts of diesel and this is not cheap. While on site machinery can use untaxed diesel all road transport must use fully taxed diesel and this is not cheap. Concrete making facilities face ever increasing regulation and opposition from environmentalists. Timber is also becoming scarce but timber housing faces widespread opposition in this country.
10. Insurance costs. The high cost of motoring insurance is also faced by building workers who face high loadings because of their jobs. Also it now impossible to insure often expensive tools and machinery which are constant targets for thieves and robbers. Also vandalism on building sites is a constant problem. All of this adds to costs of housing.Getting insurance for crane operations and scaffolding is a very expensive business.
11. Increased regulation and oversight costs by architects and engineers. While this may improve the standards and quality of new housing in the future it acts as an increaser of costs and a delayer of development when urgency would dictate a more expedient approach. While basic structural and fire safety must never be compromised it must be borne in mind that increased housing quality and consistency of higher standards means that people have to stay longer on the streets or in hostels and emergency accommodation.

On point 11.....

Housing will have start meeting NZEB in the near future which is actually EU law based. This is to do with reducing energy demand for homes

There are actually sound climate change/emissions based reasons why we would seek to do this.

Reducing our fossil fuel use for example.

Indeed Its actually considered that existing homes will need to be retrofitted as part of climate change measures. Yes really

We might be better to tackle the legacy issues of people paying far too much for land and people paying too much for BTLs back in the day.

The Hugh Brennan model is interesting even if you don't like it.

He shows that very very low cost land from DCC, no development levies, a considerably reduced developers model and other measures can deliver A2 BER 3 beds for 170 k in Ballymun.

Because an NZEB home saves energy use - there is actually scope to subsidize the energy saving aspect to support our transition to low carbon efforts.

Housing is a long term investment - the house we build today is the house thay will make up part of the housing stock in 2068.

The reduce the housing cost and build basic thing gets thrown out a bit.

But no one has actually bit the bullet and put forward actual concrete proposals as to how this works.

Mad_maxx

Ireland is not geographically big, Switzerland has a regionally balanced economy, as does Germany, we need to invest in high speed trains and broadband, population is small but too concentrated in Dublin, with proper transport, no reason people could not happily live in Longford if they had a train connection to Galway or Dublin, I realise this would take decades to fully implement but its not like we can sit on our hands, the American corporations have little interest in the other cities so developing Galway and Limerick offers limited rewards.

More space efficient housing needed, especially in Dublin. The semi-d with the front and back garden should be banned inside the M50. Should be made harder to object to new developments (the right type) too. These nimbyist “residents associations” need to have their cough softened a bit with regards to this.

Idbatterim

[Deleted User] wrote: »

More space efficient housing needed, especially in Dublin. The semi-d with the front and back garden should be banned inside the M50. Should be made harder to object to new developments (the right type) too. These nimbyist “residents associations” need to have their cough softened a bit with regards to this.

As much as nimbys are a pain in the ass. It’s the morons in planning that are the problem. You’d expect the planning authorities to find a balance ! At least with schemes of one hundred units or more , the planning now is pretty quick ... all of those old business parks, particularly beside the luas should be rezoned residential! Possibly even some golf courses in my opinion , relocate Dublin port!

Idbatterim

Idbatterim wrote: »

As much as nimbys are a pain in the ass. It’s the morons in planning that are the problem. You’d expect the planning authorities to find a balance ! At least with schemes of one hundred units or more , the planning now is pretty quick ... all of those old business parks, particularly beside the luas should be refined residential! Possibly even some golf courses in my opinion , relocate Dublin port!

The members of Clontarf GC won’t be happy. They’ll be ringing up Joe Duffy......

Squatter

stateofflux wrote: »

Any housing related protest is a good thing.

Despite the section of protest looking for free houses..there is a bigger picture which would benefit all

Social housing is required for lower classes

Not really. The lower classes are long past their sell by date, completely obsolete in fact. Other than being brainless voting fodder for parties of the left, they are of absolutely no use whatsoever to the Ireland of the 21st century. Plus they breed far too frequently.

If Leo was a genuine right-winger (as the loopers of the left persist in claiming that he is) then he'd be sending them all over to Montserrat, just like Cromwell (God bless him) did. But I'm not holding my breath.

Idbatterim

It’s the ultimate banana republic. We can’t even discuss issues, look at Peter Casey and the travelers. You think if issues can’t even be discussed , that they will solve issues that upset their voters and then their crony mates losing out? Lol! How long have you lived in this country !

Idbatterim

Squatter wrote: »

Not really. The lower classes are long past their sell by date, completely obsolete in fact. Other than being brainless voting fodder for parties of the left, they are of absolutely no use whatsoever to the Ireland of the 21st century. Plus they breed far too frequently.

If Leo was a genuine right-winger (as the loopers of the left persist in claiming that he is) then he'd be sending them all over to Montserrat, just like Cromwell (God bless him) did. But I'm not holding my breath.

Leo varadkar is now centre left! Creeping further left by the minute!

suicide_circus

Idbatterim wrote: »

Leo varadkar is now centre left!

Leo is now centre of his own hole

P_1

Idbatterim wrote: »

Leo varadkar is now centre left! Creeping further left by the minute!

He is in his Shiite Muslim.

Hes a neoliberal shill

Galwayguy35

stateofflux wrote: »

Any housing related protest is a good thing.

Despite the section of protest looking for free houses..there is a bigger picture which would benefit all

Current govt housing strategy is not working.. they need a good kick up the hole from somewhere...anywhere.. it feels the only class being catered for is very high earners

Also stop going on with the dole scrouger arguments with 5% unemployment..its a drop in the ocean just like the govt spin 'fraud' saving annoucements..they are spending more of our money on private UK activation firms at the moment.

Social housing is required for lower classes

should it be palatial and smack bang in the city centre? Of course not

Is it needed? ...yes

Will there be useless leeches getting a free gaff? Yes but they need to live somewhere...

once its not beside my gaff i worked my ass off for.

It's always popular to beat down on the high earners but they do pay most of the tax to fund the leeches you mentioned elsewhere in your post.

What's the point in people getting a well paid job if they are going to get hammered on tax for the rest of their lives which is what's happening to anyone earning over 35 k a year.

And then they see M Cash getting 50 k and a free house for lying on her back.

BlackandGreen

Alright lads.
I'll give my take on the protest.

So I arrived yesterday about half 1. At the top of o'connell street and around the ambassador there was the usual, various people handing out leaflets. Nothing extravagant. Mostly from each group that attended.

A couple of people selling socialist newspapers for €2

There was a good buzz around. The march kicked off, and you had all the main political parties heading the front. SF, Greens, Labour, Then you had SIPTU and a couple unions joining in.

At the front of the SF march was mary lou. Not going to lie lads, she's fairly intimidating looking in person.
SF and some groups were giving speeches. Standard stuff, just talking about how leo is a coward and FG are failing the people of Ireland yada yada.

As much as I dislike SIPTU, I believe unions are important because they represent actual working people, so it was nice to see some representation from unions, and FORSA was there too.

So far the crowd around seemed fairly, middle class, people ranging from late 20's - 50's.

Then you had the various groups like, PBP, Communist part of Ireland and others I forget.
PBP were a bit...ehh...OTT to say the least, young enough looking bunch.

Lots of student representation from this point on. Sorry I don't remember the group names. Mostly student unions and different colleges.

Then towards the rear of the protest you the Social Democrats and a couple other groups I forget. Mostly represented by average middle class looking people.

Then you had ROSA the social feminist movement. They looked like a groovy bunch. They were playing pretty awesome music, like, old 70's psychedelic rock.
Last you had the Dublin Tenants Association. Small bunch.


I stayed at the back and watched as it went down from parnell square onto o'connel street. I have to say it was impressive seeing the whole street filled with people all the way down past the spire and onto o'connell bridge.

Myself and probably a couple hundred people not affiliated with any group trailed behind.

Gardai presence was minimal, saw maybe 10 guards in total and a couple of dublin bus inspectors. There was no trouble what so ever.

Down at City Hall, I missed the first few speeches but there was just a truck trailer with a couple of speakers. Each group kinda made generic speeches, shouting nonsense. One girl in particular, a student from waterford gave a good speech about student rent.
Then some clown got on stage with a guitar and made a fool of himself.

After people kind of just stopped paying attention and the crowd dissipated within 30 minutes.

Oh, I should also mention some ****in eejit from DCC drove a street sweeper through the middle of the crowd. It was ridiculous.

I was surprised at the type of crowd throughout the entire protest. Most of the people there seemed fairly average joe/jane soap. student, or very hippy like, for lack of better word.
The amount of rough Margaret Cash types was minimal. There was a few but honestly everyone there seemed fairly normal.

From the way the media were reporting all this TBTC stuff I thought it was going to be a much more agitated crowd. I thought there's be loads of scroungers. But it didn't seem that way.

I would have estimated maybe 5000 but they're saying 10'000. I'm not good at judging so i haven't a clue either way.

tl:dr - went to protest, mingled, was surprised at the kind of people attending, surprised by lack of scroungers and mgt cash types, no trouble, mostly ****e speeches though.

Some pictures for you.

https://i.imgur.com/IJU2FEw.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/2unCTnf.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/KmjOqXg.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/9x3d5pj.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/VS8v9yd.jpg

BlackandGreen

As for why I was there myself, I'll re-iterate.

I was there not affiliated with any group. Just there to represent myself a tax payer working in a skilled industry, who is being affected by this crisis.
I think it's important to make a stand no matter what group you fall into. I don't agree with all or most of the groups that attended but, I attended as a lot of others did.
Merely followers angry at FG for some reason or another.

Protesting is an important democratic process and I was glad to be part of it. Ye should go see it yourselves lads sometime lads. It was an interesting day out all the same. Not like I had anything else to do.

And as business went on as usual on o'connell street I managed to get some lovely donuts and tea. Jesus they were to die for

Seth Brundle

BlackandGreen wrote: »

I think it's important to make a stand no matter what group you fall into. I don't agree with all or most of the groups that attended but, I attended as a lot of others did.
Merely followers angry at FG for some reason or another.

So what solutions were put out there by the speakers?
In some ways I'm surprised that SF had the gall to be there criticising inaction given how dominant they are on various county councils.

BlackandGreen

BlackandGreen wrote: »

As for why I was there myself, I'll re-iterate.

I was there not affiliated with any group. Just there to represent myself a tax payer working in a skilled industry, who is being affected by this crisis.
I think it's important to make a stand no matter what group you fall into. I don't agree with all or most of the groups that attended but, I attended as a lot of others did.
Merely followers angry at FG for some reason or another.

Protesting is an important democratic process and I was glad to be part of it. Ye should go see it yourselves lads sometime lads. It was an interesting day out all the same. Not like I had anything else to do.

And as business went on as usual on o'connell street I managed to get some lovely donuts and tea. Jesus they were to die for

Interesting posts. Would you say that the genuine homeless were present or represented?

Gimme A Pound

Lol, one crowd calling Leo a neo liberal, the other calling him a leftist.

You can be sure he is in the centre when he gets the above reactions.

A guy at the protest was interviewed on RTE saying he rings every day and there's nothing, so he has to go to hotels every evening and walk the streets with his four kids during the day (crap situation but someone else is still paying for him and his children to be housed in the hotels). Now he has likely had a sh1te upbringing - I know getting a job wouldn't be easy for him, but what he certainly shouldn't be doing is having unprotected sex, and acting as though he is owed and entitled, and that none of it is down to his own choices. The government is building social housing - it doesn't happen overnight, there will also be objections to certain proposed housing and purchasing which delays things further, and some people have the cheek to refuse accommodation that they are offered. Now I know nobody in Dublin wants to live in Longford but you have to do stuff like this if you are homeless. You have to make the best of things.

There's all this "We want something done now!" talk. But what?

What RTE covered then, which really made me see red, was the travellers protesting for housing. I thought they were "travellers"? And they were protesting about the poor condition of halting sites. A condition caused by whom? Not the government.

I wouldn't do it as I'm too close to my family and friends, but I fantasise about emigrating to a fairer society. I worry greatly about this country - as the fairness towards people in the middle who do the right thing seems to be fizzling out, and the rights of the absolute dregs seem to be increasing. And these well-to-do, ultra privileged folks in the upper classes who will never ever have to deal with said dregs, are ensuring it happens. It's depressing.

This post by johnnyskeleton on a recent closed thread absolutely nails it: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108751529&postcount=44

BlackandGreen

Deleted User wrote: »

Interesting posts. Would you say that the genuine homeless were present or represented?

I'm sure they were present. But no, none of the groups present seemed to be legit on the street homeless. But there was lots of people there struggling for sure.

I'll make a note however that there is quite a visible presence of homelessness in Dublin.
I don't mean the likes of the roma beggars, there was lots of Irish homeless too, men and women lying and sitting around in the rain and cold.

BlackandGreen

Seth Brundle wrote: »

So what solutions were put out there by the speakers?
In some ways I'm surprised that SF had the gall to be there criticising inaction given how dominant they are on various county councils.

I wasn't really paying much attention to be honest. Each group got up and shouted about whatever, and im sure at some stage they asked a bunch of questions and shouted out demands, or something.

Each group has different solutions put forward.

Regardless of those.
The government already has dozens of solutions, a whole list of them, they have specialist advisors and are paid a lot to implement these policies and take action.
The solutions are already out there.

Idbatterim

BlackandGreen wrote: »

I wasn't really paying much attention to be honest. Each group got up and shouted about whatever, and im sure at some stage they asked a bunch of questions and shouted out demands, or something.

Each group has different solutions put forward.

Regardless of those.
The government already has dozens of solutions, a whole list of them, they have specialist advisors and are paid a lot to implement these policies and take action.
The solutions are already out there.

You believe those morons are capable or want to solve this crisis for some ? Loll

The cost of building apartments is ridiculous, the “standards” they insist on , make it totally unaffordable for the masses. Dual aspect , ridiculous height limitations , the lift core ratio. People are living out of vans, on the streets, in kind, ridiculous commutes! It’s like telling someone on low to mid pay to go out and drive a Bentley. They are total morons. Total morons !

Idbatterim

“I wouldn't do it as I'm too close to my family and friends, but I fantasise about emigrating to a fairer society. I worry greatly about this country - as the fairness towards people in the middle who do the right thing seems to be fizzling out, and the rights of the absolute dregs seem to be increasing. And these well-to-do, ultra privileged folks in the upper classes who will never ever have to deal with said dregs, are ensuring it happens. It's depressing.

This post by johnnyskeleton on a recent closed thread absolutely nails it: https://www.boards.ie/...529&postcount=44“

Let me tell you where the dregs and workers have in common. Bring bled dry to put a roof over your head. The government have created the situation, let that scum solve it ! They want totally unaffordable property, as it benefits them and many of their constituents ( tend to be older and vote ) , the cost it comes to at the rest of us is morally disgusting !

Gimme A Pound

That's it - it's all the current government's fault, none lies with their predecessors, or people who acted the moron during the "boom", or irresponsible banking practices, or people causing themselves to be in a difficult situation now due to their own irresponsible behaviour such as not working, having lots of children, being evicted for anti social behaviour. It's not down to a global recession (nah it was just in Ireland, caused by Leo going back in a time machine) or landlord greed.

And no, that (what you said) is not what workers and dregs have in common.

Your posts are just unhinged rants.

BoJack Horseman

We thought about protesting but decided instead to work hard, save & buy a house instead of waiting for the state to wipe our holes for us.

No regrets.

Sir Oxman

Naos wrote: »

I don't think anyone is ever including those will genuine illnesses or disabilities when discussing long-term dole recipients in terms of them being scroungers.

Hm.
But that's the thing.
No one ever provides stats as to the amount of proper "scroungers", unless they have and I've missed it amongst the billion scrounger posts on here

Is it 0.1%
1%
2%
0.5%
0.25%

Forgive me for being confused but the multitude of threads and posts indicate to me a vast swathe of posters think it's 50%+ maybe
Mind you, don't forget to exclude who you think isn't a proper scrounger
Anecdotes not accepted

Wheeliebin30

Sir Oxman wrote: »

Hm.
But that's the thing.
No one ever provides stats as to the amount of proper "scroungers", unless they have and I've missed it amongst the billion scrounger posts on here

Is it 0.1%
1%
2%
0.5%
0.25%

Forgive me for being confused but the multitude of threads and posts indicate to me a vast swathe of posters think it's 50%+ maybe
Mind you, don't forget to exclude who you think isn't a proper scrounger
Anecdotes not accepted

Seriously how can anyone provide stats on something like that.

Yeah the cso keeps stats on proper scroungers!!

We all know the score with this except for the leafy suburbs of foxrock cabinteely etc.

We have the highest disability claimees in Europe.

Please explain to me how a country of our size is has 1st prize for this?????

NIMAN

Idbatterim wrote: »

You believe those morons are capable or want to solve this crisis for some ? Loll

The cost of building apartments is ridiculous, the “standards” they insist on , make it totally unaffordable for the masses. Dual aspect , ridiculous height limitations , the lift core ratio. People are living out of vans, on the streets, in kind, ridiculous commutes! It’s like telling someone on low to mid pay to go out and drive a Bentley. They are total morons. Total morons !

So who do you think, if put in charge of the country, would solve the homeless crisis, the health crisis etc?

Sinn Fein?
AAA/PBP?
Labour?

Interested to hear your thoughts.

Fordcspri23

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

We thought about protesting but decided instead to work hard, save & buy a house instead of waiting for the state to wipe our holes for us.

No regrets.

Did you not consider option C, bull your other half.

Geuze

Sir Oxman wrote: »

Hm.
But that's the thing.
No one ever provides stats as to the amount of proper "scroungers", unless they have and I've missed it amongst the billion scrounger posts on here

Is it 0.1%
1%
2%
0.5%
0.25%

If you are asking, how many people are on JSA / DA / OPF / CA by choice, and are choosing to avoid getting a job, I would estimate 100,000 people minimum.

By this I mean people on DA who are not genuinely disabled, people on long-term JSA and not looking for work, etc.

Obviously there are no stats on this.

This is my opinion based on working close to social policy.

Sweet.Science

I feel sorry for the people genuinely in need of help. Those in low paid/middle earning jobs with either crippling rent or who cant afford to buy

The reality is these people will never be looked after by the government and it will be the people who have never worked with kids that are seen as the most vulnerable in our society and will be no 1 priority

How do you break the entitlement cycle if you keep proving free 3 bed semis or luxurious apartments for these types. We have created a monster that is no longer sustainable

PlaneSpeeking

Story in the paper today - cue violins - "me and my kids will be on the streets by Christmas!"

Turns out, landlord is selling upm she was given 6 months notice in April and has overstayed since.

Yeah but "my boy asks why we can't put the tree up and i have to tell him we don't know where we will be living".

I didn't read to the end but I imagine "how will Santy know where to bring my presents ?" is following along somewhere.

No job, so no geographical limitations and 9 months to find a gaff anywhere in the State and can't ? Sure. Yeah. Right.

Wanderer78

I see the sociopaths are still active in the thread!

Sweet.Science

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Story in the paper today - cue violins - "me and my kids will be on the streets by Christmas!"

Turns out, landlord is selling upm she was given 6 months notice in April and has overstayed since.

Yeah but "my boy asks why we can't put the tree up and i have to tell him we don't know where we will be living".

I didn't read to the end but I imagine "how will Santy know where to bring my presents ?" is following along somewhere.

No job, so no geographical limitations and 9 months to find a gaff anywhere in the State and can't ? Sure. Yeah. Right.

Its sad in a way - but you cant just be handing people houses . And this is only going to get worse

Guy:Incognito

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The French take their protesting more seriously......

Yeah nothing gets the average person on board with you more than smashing up their livelihood and burning their car

PlaneSpeeking

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Its sad in a way - but you cant just be handing people houses . And this is only going to get worse

I agree. She is getting HAP, there are houses.

We don;t have a housing crisis, rather we have an "unrealistic expectations - beggars can't be choosers" crisis.

PlaneSpeeking

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Story in the paper today - cue violins - "me and my kids will be on the streets by Christmas!"

Turns out, landlord is selling upm she was given 6 months notice in April and has overstayed since.

Yeah but "my boy asks why we can't put the tree up and i have to tell him we don't know where we will be living".

I didn't read to the end but I imagine "how will Santy know where to bring my presents ?" is following along somewhere.

No job, so no geographical limitations and 9 months to find a gaff anywhere in the State and can't ? Sure. Yeah. Right.

I listened to the interview where did it say she had no job? I am open to correction if it said in the paper she has no job.

PlaneSpeeking

mariaalice wrote: »

I listened to the interview where did it say she had no job? I am open to correction if it said in the paper she has no job.

Sure she has a job, yeah. :rolleyes:

She's being repped by that Boyd-Barrett sort, he couldn't give two f***s for working folk so no chance she's employed.

PlaneSpeeking

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Sure she has a job, yeah. :rolleyes:

She's being repped by that Boyd-Barrett sort, he couldn't give two f***s for working folk so no chance she's employed.

You stated in your reply that she did not have have a job I quired it, thats all.

Old diesel

mariaalice wrote: »

I listened to the interview where did it say she had no job? I am open to correction if it said in the paper she has no job.

Saying that she's working helps her case if she was working. So it's logical that no mention of working = she isn't working.

She could be working on course but you'd imagine shed mention it.

Erica Fleming for example was quite vocal about the fact that even though she was working she STILL ended up homeless inspite of doing the right things.

If you are highlighting your housing case and actually work then saying your working can only ever help your case.

And if you have to give up your job due to the housing issues and some have - saying that also helps your case

Sir Oxman

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Seriously how can anyone provide stats on something like that.

Yeah the cso keeps stats on proper scroungers!!

We all know the score with this except for the leafy suburbs of foxrock cabinteely etc.

We have the highest disability claimees in Europe.

Please explain to me how a country of our size is has 1st prize for this?????

Geuze wrote: »

If you are asking, how many people are on JSA / DA / OPF / CA by choice, and are choosing to avoid getting a job, I would estimate 100,000 people minimum.

By this I mean people on DA who are not genuinely disabled, people on long-term JSA and not looking for work, etc.

Obviously there are no stats on this.

This is my opinion based on working close to social policy.

Yes, I am asking for stats from those that allude that there are tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of "scroungers"

This is what annoys the fck out of me on these threads - plenty of opinion/feelings not based on tangible facts

I would imagine the number of people on JSA over 15 months (ie longterm) at a minimum should be readily available?
Also, stats on people jumping from one scheme to the next

I know scroungers exist (in all walks of life) but I don't think anyone can intelligently use a "feeling" to put a figure on it

Idbatterim

none of the current options, all pathetic and spineless, incompetent! My main gripe with this crisis is, this laughable notion that it costs a fortune to fix, it doesnt and thats why I believe the current lot are totally complicit in wanting sky high prices. Mandate higher densities and the ridiculous build cost of apartments, the working masses cant afford them, so why not reduce built costs or perhaps even the insane amount of tax they cream off when you buy a new property?

If you are going to give tens of thousands free housing, why should they cream off tens of thousands in levies and taxes, just so a worker can have a roof over their head? THIS BULL**** does not fly in london, berlin etc, they get compact living, you want to live centrally, on your own, on a low to mid income, there has to be a trade off, you cant have it all, dual aspect , ridiculous lift core ratio, OTT parking requirements, the place is a joke!

The government need to start building universal public housing, people can forget ever owning it though and you pay a reasonable amount of your income 35% in my opinion, if that income is derived from welfare, then so be it!

P_1

Simple solution, tax the absolute bollox out of rents taken in by American vulture funds that have bought up the place. Ringfence that money towards building proper public housing of a reasonable density with proper amenities on public land. Rent this public housing out to people who actually work at a reasonable price

JupiterKid

The total lack of empathy and compassion on this thread is disgusting but sadly not at all surprising.

May you never face an uncertain future in which you aren't sure if you will have a roof over your head and a place to call your own...

Ray Palmer

Idbatterim wrote: »

If you are going to give tens of thousands free housing, why should they cream off tens of thousands in levies and taxes, just so a worker can have a roof over their head? THIS BULL**** does not fly in london, berlin etc, they get compact living, you want to live centrally, on your own, on a low to mid income, there has to be a trade off, you cant have it all, dual aspec

Two cities that were bombed to hell allowing and requiring massive social housing construction. Possible due to payments from the war restitution. London has sold and is selling the former social housing as quickly as they can.

Berlin has also got huge amounts of housing due to the communist state too. You need a time machine to create the situation they are in.

Taylor365

JupiterKid wrote: »

The total lack of empathy and compassion on this thread is disgusting but sadly not at all surprising.

May you never face an uncertain future in which you aren't sure if you will have a roof over your head and a place to call your own...

The poor children... having scrotes for parents.


It's not their fault!