5,459 applicants turned down an offer of social housing since 2016.

InTheShadows

Augeo wrote: »

Oh right.
Well done.
Probably on the housing list yourself.

What's wrong with being on the housing list?

El_Bee

No sane political party is ever going to run on an anti-social welfare platform, even when safely incumbent FG quickly backpedaled on "people who get up early" comment, going into a general election with those sentiments is electoral suicide.

InTheShadows

InTheShadows wrote: »

What's wrong with being on the housing list?

Nothing, unless you are a waster

InTheShadows

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Eh no we have a crisis because 20/30 years of successive governments haven’t been building social housing and then allowed banks repossess homes post the crash. *when enda himself said he would not allow one home to be repossessed in one of his election promises.

Bingo. That is the bottom line. Its not the fault of anyone who is paying rent in a social house but FG'ers want to deflect the blame away from their frankly disgraceful policies.

James Brown

overkill602 wrote: »

They do try to meet several of the applicants requirements so wrong these many planned social career spongers can be choosers.
People with genuine special needs should be a priority.
a complete overhaul needed to cover under use, arrears and rent levels i know of one been let where the separated couple share another forever free gafe in D1 neither are working too.

What a dirty comment. The indo does a few stories on chancers and you get to dismiss everyone on the list but saying, 'some are legit' or other shyte? People in the worst situations do get priority. It's a points system. If a single lad walks in he won't be ahead of the special needs kid that comes in after him.
Forever homes my hole.

Boggles

sugarman wrote: »

Figure of speech :rolleyes: In other words I've worked extremely hard at 2 well paying jobs trying to scrape together enough for a mortgage over the last 10 years. What else do you want me to say?

I don't want you to say anything. I fail to see how you having to work "extremely hard at 2 well paying jobs" or failing to attain what you want has anything to do with someone residing in a Hub or Homeless accommodation.

How do you conflate the 2?

Like I said the notion of their life or lifestyle I find horrific, I don't see how anyone should get as upset as you over it.

It is bizarre. Especially when you are pontificating about personal responsibility, etc.

InTheShadows

Augeo wrote: »

Nothing, unless you are a waster

The vast majority aren't so let's target the ones who are instead of this mantra of all in social housing are on the scam.

Cryptopagan

Kivaro wrote: »

I wouldn't put my wife and two kids in that predicament in the first place. There is so much available work out there that this situation should never arise to able-bodied parents .......... who represent the vast majority abusing the housing system.

A recent survey of homeless families by Focus Ireland found that 3/4s of them "had been in lengthy, successful tenancies before landlords withdrew the property from the market"

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/editorial/the-irish-times-view-on-homelessness-a-crisis-that-shames-us-all-1.3925671

James Brown

Get Real wrote: »

This is a simple tactic by Murphy to be seen to be doing something. I agree with the policy.

But for jaysus sake, he's a Minister for housing, trying to divert blame for a national housing crisis on .001% of the entire population.

100th of a single percent!

Even all those waiting on social housing is a drop in the ocean. There are many, many more working people, who don't apply for/aren't eligible for social housing. They don't want a free house, they want to actually pay for their own house, but can't. Even when working full time, and fully contributing to the economic machine.

If he's trying to say that a 100th of a percent of the population are the reason why a post man, or teacher, or hotel manager can't buy a house, well that's bo!!ocks.

That's it and you've people who don't know what they are talking about chiming on about forever homes. As long as these gombeens continue to vote for wasters like FG we'll need another crash to start again. Hopefully when Martin gives his 'change the way we do business' he sticks to it unlike Enda the pork pie man.

s7ryf3925pivug

I live in a nice area, but it has bad public transport connections, and the roads to the city/suburbs are not safe to cycle on because they are narrow and winding.

There is a council estate in the village. I've walked through it and there aren't that many cars. There aren't a whole lot of jobs outside of schools in the village. So if you're living there with no car you're going to find it hard to find work.

So it would be reasonable to turn down a house there if you have no car, assuming you want to work.

I would suggest that it is not a suitable location for social housing at all for this reason. Note that the residents are absolutely fine. The estate is better kept than a mainly private estate opposite it, and I'm not aware of antisocial behavior. But they either have to maintain a car or commit to living in the bubble of the village.

Better to develop purpose-built high efficiency social accommodation. Police it proactively and boot out and punish troublemakers. Mixing them in with private housing solves nothing, just makes the problem less visible.

El_Bee

InTheShadows wrote: »

The vast majority aren't

Where are you getting that from?

Wheeliebin30

El_Bee wrote: »

Where are you getting that from?

Well we know 20% in “homeless” accommodation have a job.

So take what you will from that.

Cryptopagan

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Well we know 20% in “homeless” accommodation have a job.

So take what you will from that.

How do you work that out?

And why do you call it "homeless accommodation" and put "homeless" in quotes, when it's typically referred to as emergency accommodation? Who are you quoting?

Wheeliebin30

Cryptopagan wrote: »

How do you work that out?

And why do you call it "homeless accommodation" and put "homeless" in quotes, when it's typically referred to as emergency accommodation? Who are you quoting?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thejournal.ie/census-homeless-adults-3538939-Aug2017/%3famp=1
Census 2016: Nearly one in five homeless adults have a job

Alun

We have a local TD here in Bray who lives in a council house, who at the same time is quite vociferous about the lack of social housing. A bit hypocritical to say the least.

Stop moaning ffs

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Well we know 20% in “homeless” accommodation have a job.

So take what you will from that.

Need you to back that up

You’re saying there isn’t a hosing crisis then saying 20% of homeless people have jobs?

Under Leos watch?
I thought he was all for the early risers?

suicide_circus

Alun wrote: »

We have a local TD here in Bray who lives in a council house, who at the same time is quite vociferous about the lack of social housing. A bit hypocritical to say the least.

whats a TDs salary? 90k? how much rent would he be paying on a council house given the salary does anyone know?

Wheeliebin30

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Need you to back that up

You’re saying there isn’t a hosing crisis then saying 20% of homeless people have jobs?

Under Leos watch?
I thought he was all for the early risers?

Yeah I think it’s pretty self explanatory that 4 out of 5 adults are unemployed in emergency accommodation.

Th 20% will get something eventually.

What’s the issue?

Stop moaning ffs

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Well we know 20% in “homeless” accommodation have a job.

So take what you will from that.

I’m laughing and despairing at you undoing your own position ‘there is no housing crisis.’
20% of the homeless are part of the workforce.
Are you hearing the stupidity of your many rants about the scroungers and loafers and wasters?

People in full time employment can’t find or afford housing.

Say it again and again until it settles into your brain

Wheeliebin30

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

I’m laughing and despairing at you undoing your own position ‘there is no housing crisis.’
20% of the homeless are part of the workforce.
Are you hearing the stupidity of your many rants about the scroungers and loafers and wasters?

People in full time employment can’t find or afford housing.

Say it again and again until it settles into your brain

Have you stats to show they are in full time employment?

The reply was to someone suggesting the majority aren’t spongers.

20% really isn’t a high number and they will get somewhere eventually.

There is no huge issue.

The state is supporting them until they can get a place, which is what is happening.

I don’t see any major problem here.

Sleepy

suicide_circus wrote: »

whats a TDs salary? 90k? how much rent would he be paying on a council house given the salary does anyone know?

Wicklow County Council's differential rent maxes out at €200 per week so that TD is having their lifestyle significantly subsidised by their electorate given that a market rent for a three bed house in bray would be around €1800 a month!

5) CALCULATION OF RENT

a) Rent will consist of:
i) The RENT as calculated will be €24.00
PLUS
ii) 20% of the tenants(s) (see ‘b’ below) assessable income in excess €188.00
PLUS
iii) 20% of each subsidiary earner’s (see ‘c’ below) assessable income in excess of €30 per week, subject to a maximum of an amount equal to the MINIMUM RENT for each subsidiary earner;

LESS
iv) A deduction of €5 per child will be allowed in respect of each dependant child of the household. A ‘dependent child’ for the purposes of rent assessment means a person aged 18 years or under or persons over 18 years of age and in full time education and not in receipt of income

(v) Multiplied by 3%

(vi) THE MINIMUM RENT SHALL BE €27

b) Where spouses and/or partners are in receipt of separate payments their incomes are combined for the purpose of determining the principal earner.

c) A Subsidiary Earner is a member of the household, other than the tenant who has an income.

Mad_maxx

Sleepy wrote: »

Having actually done some professional analysis of this data from a couple of local authority sites, it's extremely obvious that a majority of the refusals are due to the area the house being offered is in.

While part of me falls back to the "beggars can't be choosers", I know full well that were I on the housing list and in receipt of HAP in a reasonable area I'd be doing everything I could to refuse an offer of a "forever home" in some hell-hole estate where half the neighbours are known trouble-makers or members of the travelling community.

There's very little the councils can actually do with anti-social tenants. Evict them and they're straight back onto the housing list and no-doubt getting priority as they're now "homeless". The sad reality is that some people just behave like absolute scumbags and it only takes one or two families of them to ruin an estate. I just can't see any Irish government ever having the stomach to deal with them properly. Rounding them all up to live in a purpose built estate in the middle of nowhere where they couldn't disturb law-abiding citizens would draw too many comparisons to concentration camps.

Nothing will happen for decent responsible people until some sort of vaguely Conservative media outlet emerges

RTE are the enemy of the law abiding tax payer

Stop moaning ffs

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Have you stats to show they are in full time employment?

The reply was to someone suggesting the majority aren’t spongers.

20% really isn’t a high number and they will get somewhere eventually.

There is no huge issue.

The state is supporting them until they can get a place, which is what is happening.

I don’t see any major problem here.

And that’s exactly why you have no idea what you’re talking about and reading from prepared scripts and stats.

You have no understanding of any of it.

I’ll ask again.

You have previously and regularly ranted at length that homeless people are all scroungers. Everyone lookihg for social housing is a scrounger. FG are working wonders for housing and people refusing the housing are scrounging.

Then you say 20% of the homeless are actually working

I’d love to know what point you were actually trying to make with that stat because it did nothing but make you look like a hypocrite and a liar. I’m not calling you these things. Your own post did that itself.

Mad_maxx

Cryptopagan wrote: »

A recent survey of homeless families by Focus Ireland found that 3/4s of them "had been in lengthy, successful tenancies before landlords withdrew the property from the market"

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/editorial/the-irish-times-view-on-homelessness-a-crisis-that-shames-us-all-1.3925671

Focus are a left wing activist outfit posing as a housing body

Wheeliebin30

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

And that’s exactly why you have no idea what you’re talking about and reading from prepared scripts and stats.

You have no understanding of any of it.

I’ll ask again.

You have previously and regularly ranted at length that homeless people are all scroungers. Everyone lookihg for social housing is a scrounger. FG are working wonders for housing and people refusing the housing are scrounging.

Then you say 20% of the homeless are actually working

I’d love to know what point you were actually trying to make with that stat because it did nothing but make you look like a hypocrite and a liar. I’m not calling you these things. Your own post did that itself.

When did I say all people in emergency accommodation are scroungers?

The majority are as I have said and as the stats proves.

You can deny it all you want but as this thread shows most people know it and it seems you’re in complete denials

You say there are no scroungers or people gaming the system when it’s well known by the ordinary posters here.

Plumbthedepths

Stop moaning ffs wrote:

I’ll ask again.

I wouldn't bother tbh.

Stop moaning ffs

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

When did I say all people in emergency accommodation are scroungers?

The majority are as I have said and as the stats proves.

You can deny it all you want but as this thread shows most people know it and it seems you’re in complete denials

You say there are no scroungers or people gaming the system when it’s well known by the ordinary posters here.

Just your own words.

Cryptopagan

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Focus are a left wing activist outfit posing as a housing body

Feel free to debunk the research:

https://www.focusireland.ie/press/focus-ireland-report-finds-that-nearly-70-of-families-becoming-homeless-in-dublin-had-their-last-home-in-the-rental-sector/

Stop moaning ffs

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

When did I say all people in emergency accommodation are scroungers?

The majority are as I have said and as the stats proves.

You can deny it all you want but as this thread shows most people know it and it seems you’re in complete denials

You say there are no scroungers or people gaming the system when it’s well known by the ordinary posters here.

One more time.

You said 20% of the homeless are in employment.

So are they scroungers?
Surely they are anything but and being shut out by this FG government failing them?

Why can’t they get housing? They’re working?


So you’re saying even homeless people who are working, are scroungers?

Apiarist

shesty wrote: »

Serious overhaul of the screening process needed.Surely it can't be too difficult to start out identifying those with a disability need, and putting them in a separate category for a particular form of housing???At the very least?

It is a government department you are talking about. 5,459 applicants turned down offers from 2016? It's 3 years, on average 5 refused applications per day. A single effective administrator could deal with all of those over the years. Ok, let's put two people on this!

However, having dealt with government employees personally, it seems that many of them just follow instructions, do the minimal effort and would not take any responsibility.

James Brown

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Well we know 20% in “homeless” accommodation have a job.

So take what you will from that.

That the crisis effects all walks and not just lifers on the dole looking for forever homes? That's been spoke about for years once you filter out the FG shills.

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Have you stats to show they are in full time employment?

The reply was to someone suggesting the majority aren’t spongers.

20% really isn’t a high number and they will get somewhere eventually.

There is no huge issue.

The state is supporting them until they can get a place, which is what is happening.

I don’t see any major problem here.

So you think workers might not be earning enough? Also common knowledge.

I guess you've unwittingly begun to argue against your spin.
There is a housing crisis, people effected are workers with a majority coming from the private rental sector.
Keep the discovery going!

Plumbthedepths

Matt Barrett wrote:

I guess you've unwittingly begun to argue against your spin. There is a housing crisis, people effected are workers with a majority coming from the private rental sector. Keep the discovery going!

In fairness Wheelie said he wouldn't be voting for FG again. ;-)

James Brown

shesty wrote: »

...
I'd be more concerned about the headline this morning saying that if house prices/supply continue the way they are, we risk becoming a "welfare state" when it comes to housing.

That's all on Fine Gael. But if we vote for 'the others' something something...

Stop moaning ffs

Wheelie has clocked off it seems.

10-4 is with a leisurely lengthy lunch is a handy work window though isn’t it?

Galwayguy35

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

The briefest glance on boards will show you countless threads from people asking advice about noisy disruptive neighbours from the small annoyances up to court cases.

Shared accommodation simply wouldn’t work here. Bizarre Murphy wasn’t asked would he be happy to live in such circumstances

College students and working people who are renting have to share accommodation maybe sometimes with people they might not always prefer to be living with.

These so called homeless crowd are living free of charge so they shouldn't be so choosy about something without trying it out first.

Stop moaning ffs

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

College students and working people who are renting have to share accommodation maybe sometimes with people they might not always prefer to be living with.

These so called homeless crowd are living free of charge so they shouldn't be so choosy about something without trying it out first.

Living free of charge in a tent on the canal or in front of the four courts or in the Phoenix Park.

Go way and shyte

James Brown

Murphy suggesting families go back to the tenement days of the 30's is almost as disgraceful as there being more children homeless today, than we had in the tenement/slum days of the 30's...or ever before.

It's disgusting the way some excuse away FG Tory shyte. Next it'll be bunk beds and renting out the space under the bottom one to students. No depth too low for these people until it lands on their doorstep.

El_Bee

People are still conflating the Homeless, Housing and Rental issues as the one problem, we're stuck where we are until they're un-entangled

Stop moaning ffs

El_Bee wrote: »

People are still conflating the Homeless, Housing and Rental issues as the one problem, we're stuck where we are until they're un-entangled

Aaaand
Eoghan Murphy is just the man to untngale this mess

He’s not. Not one of them are.

Next GE one of the parties should hire Father Peter and get him in to every meeting and wake everyone up if they’re serious.


They aren’t though.


Early risers n all that.

Stop moaning ffs

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Aaaand
Eoghan Murphy is just the man to untngale this mess

He’s not. Not one of them are.

Next GE one of the parties should hire Father Peter and get him in to every meeting and wake everyone up if they’re serious.


They aren’t though.


Early risers n all that.

Fr Peter and his ilk are part of the problem. Close down the multitude of homeless charities and bring them under one department, thereby cutting out the many duplicated services and saving millions of euro. Money that could be better used to actually house people.

Stop moaning ffs

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fr Peter and his ilk are part of the problem. Close down the multitude of homeless charities and bring them under one department, thereby cutting out the many duplicated services and saving millions of euro. Money that could be better used to actually house people.

I can only say I hope you never find yourself in need of their help.

marieholmfan

Build council houses.
There's a narrative that council estates are hell holes and disasters. Council estates have high levels of social problems because almost everyone who lives there is poor and because we have a huge problem with the police simply refusing to work.

A council house on a council estate is vastly better than no house and removes the issue of state intervention to drive up the cost of housing.

In central Dublin and in every town there are large areas of single story cottages which should be CPOd knocked and rebuilt as apartments. These aren't just in poor areas; there is a row of small expensive houses by Sydney Parade train station that should be knocked and rebuilt as a vertical forest.

We need massive state intervention but we cannot get it from an FG government.

Yeah_Right

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

One more time.

You said 20% of the homeless are in employment.

So are they scroungers?
Surely they are anything but and being shut out by this FG government failing them?

Why can’t they get housing? They’re working?


So you’re saying even homeless people who are working, are scroungers?

I'm just wondering, do you know what the word majority means? I only ask because you seem to be holding up the fact that 20% are employed, as proof that the majority aren't scroungers/chancers/freeloaders (whatever term people want to use). You do realise that 20% is a minority and 80% is a majority?

Stop moaning ffs

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I'm just wondering, do you know what the word majority means? I only ask because you seem to be holding up the fact that 20% are employed, as proof that the majority aren't scroungers/chancers/freeloaders (whatever term people want to use). You do realise that 20% is a minority and 80% is a majority?

Now that’s some weird tangent
I was referencing the posters running history of the unemployed being scroungers and the homeless somehow don’t exist.
He’s implying that there is 20% of homeless people actually have a job. (Still haven’t seen a back up for that) but would be really interested to know if he’s still saying they’re scroungers by somehow working and yet homeless?


You seem to be suggesting they’re all scrounging but I’m open to correction

marieholmfan

marieholmfan wrote: »

Build council houses............. These aren't just in poor areas; there is a row of small expensive houses by Sydney Parade train station that should be knocked and rebuilt as a vertical forest..............

Why the fook should expensive houses be knocked to provide council houses ?
Like, sweet mother of devine fooooooooooook .........why?

Yeah_Right

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Now that’s some weird tangent
I was referencing the posters running history of the unemployed being scroungers and the homeless somehow don’t exist.
He’s implying that there is 20% of homeless people actually have a job. (Still haven’t seen a back up for that) but would be really interested to know if he’s still saying they’re scroungers by somehow working and yet homeless?


You seem to be suggesting they’re all scrounging but I’m open to correction

I'm definitely not suggesting they are all scroungers. I am asking if you know the difference between majority and all.

I do not know if that 20% figure is true. If it is, then I would be comfortable in saying that the majority of the "homeless" are scroungers.

Stop moaning ffs

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I'm definitely not suggesting they are all scroungers. I am asking if you know the difference between majority and all.

I do not know if that 20% figure is true. If it is, then I would be comfortable in saying that the majority of the "homeless" are scroungers.

I take it you’ve never been homeless or know how easy it is to find yourself homeless.
There are a great many homeless men who’ve come from broken marriages and had to leave the family home and are working and can’t get anywhere to rent or share.
Are they scroungers too?

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Build a load of social and affordable homes. Ireland has the space.

Building social and affordable housing will make homes cheaper for mortgages too. The whole of society benefits.

What's paid now to rent supplement should be put towards housing stock.

Most other OECD countries give their citizens the opportunity to live in affordable accommodation. Ireland must do the same.

El_Bee

marieholmfan wrote: »

Build council houses.
There's a narrative that council estates are hell holes and disasters.

Because they are.

Council estates have high levels of social problems because almost everyone who lives there is poor and because we have a huge problem with the police simply refusing to work.

So your solution is to make that problem larger?

A council house on a council estate is vastly better than no house and removes the issue of state intervention to drive up the cost of housing.

That's like saying a forest fire is better than no fire at all

In central Dublin and in every town there are large areas of single story cottages which should be CPOd knocked and rebuilt as apartments. These aren't just in poor areas; there is a row of small expensive houses by Sydney Parade train station that should be knocked and rebuilt as a vertical forest.

Those are people's homes, they've lived there their entire lives, but sure kick them out and knock them down for the "greater good".

We need massive state intervention but we cannot get it from an FG government.

We're in this mess because people think the guvvermint is mana from heaven, this sentiment typifies the culture of entitlement we need to break, not increase.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I'm definitely not suggesting they are all scroungers. I am asking if you know the difference between majority and all.

I do not know if that 20% figure is true. If it is, then I would be comfortable in saying that the majority of the "homeless" are scroungers.

Does it matter if they are scroungers or not? We have social protection. So any family on the street will be given a roof to sleep under. Disagreeing with that is for another thread.

Social and affordable housing should have been the government's number one priority for the past 3/4 years. Instead of putting a fiver increase to the dole, they should have taken a tenner off it, and put that money towards housing stock.