3,140 rooms to rent & 8,500 houses to rent -what 'homeless' crisis

BarryD2

GooglePlus wrote: »

I'm on 25k at the minute, luckily got an apartment 3 years ago and haven't been given the boot by the landlord yet, so it's only 1500 pm (Sharing so 750 each).

The same apartments in my complex if rented now all exceed 2000, which would be impossible for me.

When it comes to it, I'll most likely have to move out and commute (finding another job isn't an option for me).

Anywhere within a decent commute is now feeling the pressure of the move outs from Dublin, so the rent is increasing by the month in areas like Meath, Kildare, Wicklow.

Of course, if I was on the brink of becoming homeless, a 3 hour bus journey to Wexford would be the preference but it will severely affect my quality of life.

If I could move my job out of Dublin, i'd be gone with it in a heartbeat but as someone has nodded to already, Dublin is full to the brim with 24 - 32k jobs, which just about allow for renting in the place, as long as you don't plan on doing anything else.

Yep, that's tight. I think the OPs general angle might be to shift more people relying largely on social welfare & housing lists out of 'Dublin' and make more space for those who are working and need a place to live?

LoLth

The need to live outside Dublin and commute is not the end of the world. I did it myself for years (and still do but slightly closer). Its a pain, you lose a lot of time commuting and its ok for people without kids or that have a partner at home that can hold the fort until they get home to pitch in but it is not going to suit everyone. there will always be exceptions.

It is too simplistic to say that this is the solution because X or this wont work because of Y. The fact is that there is no single solution to fix the current issue of escalating rents that are outside the reach of average wage employees unless they are willing/capable of sharing with 4 strangers. Fine if you are a twenty-something starting out, not great if all 4 have dependants.

Also, while there are some, not every homeless person is homeless because they are holding out for a better offer from the council or the offer they got wasnt enough bedrooms beside their mother who is also in a social house with just herself and 4 bedrooms. There are some decent hardworking people who are homeless through no fault of their own and either do not have the luxury of waiting or have to make a choice between their job which they need to support their family or a roof over their head which they cannot maintain without the job. (What I cannot understand are those that willingly/deliberately go homeless as a strategy to move to the top of a list because their children are in danger....because they put them in that position).

Possible solutions that could help alleviate the issue in my opinion:
Home sharing with the elderly. Old lady has 3 bedrooms, she gets to rent out two and supplement her pension without having to sell the house. problem: could be open to abuse by either party and potential to put an elderly person at risk by housing the wrong person with them

Efficient use of social housing: 3 bedroom house, only a married couple in it, move to a smaller home, reallocate the multi bedroom house to a family that needs it and will utilise it. Give some form of relocation compensation or maybe have a slightly higher price range for these smaller houses to make them more attractive. Is it "uncaring" , no, they have had use of a house for ages. it is not theirs, it is the states to allocate as required.

Finish off the ghost estates by getting small building firms in to complete the work. sell them as affordable housing and provide public transport for X years to the nearest population centre with a decent commute time. Better yet, hire unemployed people looking for social housing to build the houses and then give them one at the end of their apprenticeship - then we get a shed load of qualified builders as well.

Convert NAMA held buildings into mid-term accommodation for families on the waiting lists. But the condition is that when a house comes up that is suitable there is no rejection allowed. - Houses offered would need to be checked for suitability (there have been some awful holes offered to people as family homes. maybe introduce a crime index into the criteria - ie: you cant house kids somewhere the breaking/mugging/car theft rate is greater than some national average).

problem is, nearly all of these will take time and will require money that has to come from some other service. (we could all just pay a water charge and have that funnelled - see what I did there? - directly to social housing provision)

Also, there needs to be a distinction between those that genuinely need a home and those that are homeless because they require rehabilitation before they can be trusted to maintain a home or not be a concern for themselves or their neighbours.

regardless of how you approach this topic, it is not a straightforward fix and it is not going to get discussed fairly or in any detail unless those discussing can a: park their indignation at perceived slights borne out of generalisations and b: have some degree of empathy and stop being cynical dicks when discussing people who genuinely need help.

Tokyo

Giovanna High Income wrote: »

Mod: Can we please stop with the píssing contest? If you are going to debate the issue, do so. Otherwise, don't post.

ELM327

SusieBlue wrote: »

As an educated working single woman on a relatively low income with no children, I receive absolutely no government assistance whatsoever, despite paying tax. No medical card, FIS, or council house for me.
So I have no idea where your getting that BS about paying my way. I already do and always have.
I don't expect or want anything for free.

My commute to work is presently 1hr and 20 minutes, and I don't live/work in Dublin. How much further away should I move?

The capital (and indeed other big cities such as Cork) needs low income staff to function. Its not reasonable to expect these people to travel 3hrs each way every day to go to work. The cities would collapse without them.

Those who do not work, by choice or otherwise, get many forms of government assistance as it is.
I don't think its unreasonable to suggest that those who actually do work should be able to enjoy a decent standard of living.
Paying €800 a month for a box room in a house with 5 strangers 90 minutes from your job is not something that is sustainable or acceptable long term.

How does one save for a mortgage when paying that kind of money on rent? And so the cycle continues.

Not denying there is probably some decently priced rentals in Longford and Laois, but those are typically areas of poor employment opportunities. Hence people move to Dublin to have a better shot at a well paying job. Or indeed any job at all, if they aren't that skilled or experienced.
Do you not see the flaw in your logic?

I think you may have mistaken my hypothetical rewriting of your question as being a dig at you. Far from it, and I wasn't accusing you of being on any benefits either.


I'm saying it's not realistic that everyone with a job can live in Dublin.
It's like expecting everyone to be rich. It's a nice idea but the law of supply and demand renders it impossible.


Our combined income as a couple is in the 6 figures and if we can't afford to live in Dublin (not willing to live in not nice areas , btw), then there's probably not that many that can.

ELM327

BarryD2 wrote: »

Yep, that's tight. I think the OPs general angle might be to shift more people relying largely on social welfare & housing lists out of 'Dublin' and make more space for those who are working and need a place to live?

This makes sense, why should the state (and for the state read you and i and everyone else who is working) pay for a free house for those who don't work, in an area where the working population cannot afford to live.

LoLth wrote: »

The need to live outside Dublin and commute is not the end of the world. I did it myself for years (and still do but slightly closer). Its a pain, you lose a lot of time commuting and its ok for people without kids or that have a partner at home that can hold the fort until they get home to pitch in but it is not going to suit everyone. there will always be exceptions.

Agreed but you have to live within your means and evaluate other options apart from wanting to live in Dublin and screeching until you get it, you know?

LoLth wrote: »

It is too simplistic to say that this is the solution because X or this wont work because of Y. The fact is that there is no single solution to fix the current issue of escalating rents that are outside the reach of average wage employees unless they are willing/capable of sharing with 4 strangers. Fine if you are a twenty-something starting out, not great if all 4 have dependants.

This is true for sure.

LoLth wrote: »

Also, while there are some, not every homeless person is homeless because they are holding out for a better offer from the council or the offer they got wasnt enough bedrooms beside their mother who is also in a social house with just herself and 4 bedrooms. There are some decent hardworking people who are homeless through no fault of their own and either do not have the luxury of waiting or have to make a choice between their job which they need to support their family or a roof over their head which they cannot maintain without the job. (What I cannot understand are those that willingly/deliberately go homeless as a strategy to move to the top of a list because their children are in danger....because they put them in that position).

Unfortunately it is the cases like ms cash and her ilk that get the news cover, not the cases where people are in genuine need through no fault of their own after contributing to society.


The question (to which I genuinely don't know the answer and would like to see some quantification) is which is the corner case, the leech or the "hard luck" prior contributor?

LoLth wrote: »

Possible solutions that could help alleviate the issue in my opinion:
Home sharing with the elderly. Old lady has 3 bedrooms, she gets to rent out two and supplement her pension without having to sell the house. problem: could be open to abuse by either party and potential to put an elderly person at risk by housing the wrong person with them

Efficient use of social housing: 3 bedroom house, only a married couple in it, move to a smaller home, reallocate the multi bedroom house to a family that needs it and will utilise it. Give some form of relocation compensation or maybe have a slightly higher price range for these smaller houses to make them more attractive. Is it "uncaring" , no, they have had use of a house for ages. it is not theirs, it is the states to allocate as required.

Finish off the ghost estates by getting small building firms in to complete the work. sell them as affordable housing and provide public transport for X years to the nearest population centre with a decent commute time. Better yet, hire unemployed people looking for social housing to build the houses and then give them one at the end of their apprenticeship - then we get a shed load of qualified builders as well.

Convert NAMA held buildings into mid-term accommodation for families on the waiting lists. But the condition is that when a house comes up that is suitable there is no rejection allowed. - Houses offered would need to be checked for suitability (there have been some awful holes offered to people as family homes. maybe introduce a crime index into the criteria - ie: you cant house kids somewhere the breaking/mugging/car theft rate is greater than some national average).

problem is, nearly all of these will take time and will require money that has to come from some other service. (we could all just pay a water charge and have that funnelled - see what I did there? - directly to social housing provision)

Some good ideas but most are not workable, you can't expect the elderly to house share!
You cannot convert NAMA properties to private rentals, I'm sure that breaches EU state aid rules if nothing else.

LoLth wrote: »

Also, there needs to be a distinction between those that genuinely need a home and those that are homeless because they require rehabilitation before they can be trusted to maintain a home or not be a concern for themselves or their neighbours.

regardless of how you approach this topic, it is not a straightforward fix and it is not going to get discussed fairly or in any detail unless those discussing can a: park their indignation at perceived slights borne out of generalisations and b: have some degree of empathy and stop being cynical dicks when discussing people who genuinely need help.

Agreed.

rireland

dudara wrote: »

There is an element of this, yes, but there’s also no denying that rents are exorbitantly high in Dublin, this putting homes out of reach of many people. This rental crisis is impacting lower paid employees, but is also reaching upwards and impacting salaried people who wouldn’t previously have experienced this.

When you see Daft ads showing rooms crammed full of bunk beds, you have to despair. This is a far more complex problem than “forever homes”

https://www.daft.ie/sligo/houses-for-rent/ballinode/no-1-brookfield-ballinode-sligo-1944589/

Nice 3 bed in Sligo for 280 a month.

You could afford this on the dole.

I know if I was facing homelessness I wouldn't care if I had to move across the country. I'd rather move 2 hours away than be homeless.

gibgodsman

ELM327 wrote: »

in dublin.


They can however move elsewhere.
There is no crisis, just an excess in demand for dublin properties which does not exist elsewhere. Plenty of houses in Longford. Cheap too.

Sorry but thats absolutely nonsense. I move to Meath when I hit 19 because the rents in Dublin were already outrageous. Apartment was 500 a month which was actually quite high at the time. Same apartments are now on daft for 12-1500 a month. That is a 1 bed apartment, in Navan.... there is absolutely a housing crisis, not a homelessness one. I work full time, my missus does to, but if you want to afford to rent anywhere now you both need to be on good salarys and willing to put 30% minimum of it towards rent.

GooglePlus

rireland wrote: »

https://www.daft.ie/sligo/houses-for-rent/ballinode/no-1-brookfield-ballinode-sligo-1944589/

Nice 3 bed in Sligo for 280 a month.

You could afford this on the dole.

I know if I was facing homelessness I wouldn't care if I had to move across the country. I'd rather move 2 hours away than be homeless.

I've a feeling that is 280pp sharing.

The landlord mentions that it fits 5 students and is near sligo IT.

280e for the entire house including bins?

ELM327

gibgodsman wrote: »

Sorry but thats absolutely nonsense. I move to Meath when I hit 19 because the rents in Dublin were already outrageous. Apartment was 500 a month which was actually quite high at the time. Same apartments are now on daft for 12-1500 a month. That is a 1 bed apartment, in Navan.... there is absolutely a housing crisis, not a homelessness one. I work full time, my missus does to, but if you want to afford to rent anywhere now you both need to be on good salarys and willing to put 30% minimum of it towards rent.

That's interesting because I moved from a 6 bed house in Navan (1k per month) to a 3 bed in Athboy , last year, and am now paying 400 per month).


The houses are out there, in Meath, sub 500 per month mortgage and sub 1k rent for sure.

James Brown

JustAThought wrote: »

July 2019 & today there are 3,140 house share rooms and over 8,500 houses to rent on daft.ie
Isn't it about time journalists started quoting these figures when reporting 'homeless' figures.

Money. Imagine you needed a car and only 2019 BMW's were available?

ELM327 wrote: »

It's not a homeless crisis or a housing crisis, it's an "I want a free/heavily taxpayer subsidized house next to mummy" crisis.

Yep, you keep believing that. You must be fierce annoyed at all the time, money and energy goes into this nothing.

blackbox

gibgodsman wrote: »

Sorry but thats absolutely nonsense. I move to Meath when I hit 19 because the rents in Dublin were already outrageous. Apartment was 500 a month which was actually quite high at the time. Same apartments are now on daft for 12-1500 a month. That is a 1 bed apartment, in Navan.... there is absolutely a housing crisis, not a homelessness one. I work full time, my missus does to, but if you want to afford to rent anywhere now you both need to be on good salarys and willing to put 30% minimum of it towards rent.

Is spending 30% of your income on accommodation unreasonable?

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Thats it , loads of people living in their ma’s or in a hotel prepared to turn on the waterworks and say its a disgrace and hold out till FG magically authorises the building of 3 bed semi’s with a back garden inside the m50

How many? I could say only two people are as you describe, a lad called Simon and a girl called Patricia.

ELM327

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Yep, you keep believing that. You must be fierce annoyed at all the time, money and energy goes into this nothing.

Care to elaborate on that?
Why would I be annoyed? It's an unfortunate reality of living in an socialist banana republic like ours. Radical acceptance trumps permanent annoyance.

markodaly

blackbox wrote: »

Is spending 30% of your income on accommodation unreasonable?

I thought the general consensus was that spending 25% to 35% of your income on accommodation was the benchmark.

On the topic itself, we need to build more of course, but we need to get out of the habit of building 3-bed semi's.

We need to build high-density apartments around the city, but the last DCC dominated by the left and SF has for years rejected this premise.

In fact, they are adamant that Dublin is a low-profile city and should remain as is. Great, so where is everyone going to live??

ELM327

blackbox wrote: »

Is spending 30% of your income on accommodation unreasonable?

Yes, when the state will give it to you for much less if you can have a few children without a plan to support them.

ELM327

markodaly wrote: »

I thought the general consensus was that spending 25% to 35% of your income on accommodation was the benchmark.

On the topic itself, we need to build more of course, but we need to get out of the habit of building 3-bed semi's.

We need to build high-density apartments around the city, but the last DCC dominated by the left and SF has for years rejected this premise.

In fact, they are adamant that Dublin is a low-profile city and should remain as is. Great, so where is everyone going to live??

Nail on head.



We need to build up, that supplies the needed demand and brings prices down for everyone. Unfortunately you need a right wing pro development government with balls to bring in that policy, and our current government and the lead opposition party are neither of those

xckjoo

ELM327 wrote: »

And if the free market cannot sustain these wants?
Do you expect a socialist government to fund your want to live in dublin, from the pockets of others (who may not be able to afford to live there either, like me) or should you move and pay your own way in society?


You dress it up very well and make some reasonable points. I don't expect nor want a free house, I would like to live within a reasonable commute and I am not living alone. I moved to somewhere that met this threshold and did not expect the taxpayer to fund my want to live in Dublin, as opposed to my need to live somewhere.

You didn't pay for the roads you use to commute. Why is the socialist government funding your want to commute long distances from other tax payers money? :pac:

weldoninhio

rireland wrote: »

https://www.daft.ie/sligo/houses-for-rent/ballinode/no-1-brookfield-ballinode-sligo-1944589/

Nice 3 bed in Sligo for 280 a month.

You could afford this on the dole.

I know if I was facing homelessness I wouldn't care if I had to move across the country. I'd rather move 2 hours away than be homeless.

So you have a job in Dublin, but it doesn't afford you the comfort to afford a place in Dublin, you are about to be kicked out of your house share and you are advocating moving to Sligo to pay E280 a month??

ELM327

xckjoo wrote: »

You didn't pay for the roads you use to commute. Why is the socialist government funding your want to commute long distances from other tax payers money? :pac:

That's interesting.
Care to tell me then what my "motor" tax of €1494 for my last car, and €570 for the current one, paid for?

ELM327

weldoninhio wrote: »

So you have a job in Dublin, but it doesn't afford you the comfort to afford a place in Dublin, you are about to be kicked out of your house share and you are advocating moving to Sligo to pay E280 a month??

And getting a job there.

Plumbthedepths

ELM327 wrote:

That's interesting. Care to tell me then what my "motor" tax of €1494 for my last car, and €570 for the current one, paid for?

Water .

James Brown

ELM327 wrote: »

Care to elaborate on that?
Why would I be annoyed? It's an unfortunate reality of living in an socialist banana republic like ours. Radical acceptance trumps permanent annoyance.

What don't you understand? You seem outraged about a problem you don't believe exists. So I was asking did it annoy you that so much time effort and money was spent on this fantasy?

This might help your flat earth mentality; They measure homelessness and housing issues. You can completely disagree with the methodology, that's fine.
However, even if it's exaggerated, the figures break records year on year. Even after Eoghan massaged the books, it's still growing for both housing and homelessness. So even if you think half of them are pretending or any other made up theory, by the measurements, even if exaggerated, it gets worse every year.
Do you think the hospital trolley crisis is people just like dying in corridors?

xckjoo

ELM327 wrote: »

That's interesting.
Care to tell me then what my "motor" tax of €1494 for my last car, and €570 for the current one, paid for?

Sweet FA if you look at the cost breakdowns of roads, etc. Private car usage is heavily subsidised from general taxation and the likes. Anyway, I don't want to go off on a tangent. I was more making a point about how we all rely on general taxation subsidising out lives. Your choice to live in a lower rent area does not have a zero cost to the rest of us.

Boggles

ELM327 wrote: »

That's interesting.
Care to tell me then what my "motor" tax of €1494 for my last car, and €570 for the current one, paid for?

Half dozen "water conservation grants".

SusieBlue

ELM327 wrote: »

I think you may have mistaken my hypothetical rewriting of your question as being a dig at you. Far from it, and I wasn't accusing you of being on any benefits either.


I'm saying it's not realistic that everyone with a job can live in Dublin.
It's like expecting everyone to be rich. It's a nice idea but the law of supply and demand renders it impossible.


Our combined income as a couple is in the 6 figures and if we can't afford to live in Dublin (not willing to live in not nice areas , btw), then there's probably not that many that can.

The supply and demand of well paying jobs in sparsely populated midland towns just isn't there. Its even worse for unskilled/inexperienced people.
That's why people move away from them.

With the absence of affordable housing for working professionals within commutable distance of the big cities, coupled with our piss poor standard of public transport, what you'd actually end up having is educated, valuable members of the workforce ending up burning out and on social welfare because the burden of the commute would take its toll eventually.
It simply isn't sustainable for most people to do a long distance commute indefinitely.

If building/letting affordable housing proportionate to the actual average salary isn't possible, at the very least we need to make serious improvements to our public transport so that those on low incomes can commute more efficiently and not spend hours sat in traffic jams on buses, as is currently the case across the country.

Affordable (not free, affordable) housing in our big cities for our workforce benefits everyone, so I can't understand why you are so against it.

Boggles

xckjoo wrote: »

Sweet FA if you look at the cost breakdowns of roads, etc. Private car usage is heavily subsidised from general taxation and the likes. Anyway, I don't want to go off on a tangent. I was more making a point about how we all rely on general taxation subsidising out lives. Your choice to live in a lower rent area does not have a zero cost to the rest of us.

Really?

Car tax is a little over a billion which is actually the same budget or a little more than our road maintenance and improvement budget.

Have you a figure of what an actual private car contributes to the economy?

VRT
Servicing
Parts
Fuel
Labour
Testing
Etc.

I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just wondering where and who costed it?

ELM327

Matt Barrett wrote: »

What don't you understand? You seem outraged about a problem you don't believe exists. So I was asking did it annoy you that so much time effort and money was spent on this fantasy?

This might help your flat earth mentality; They measure homelessness and housing issues. You can completely disagree with the methodology, that's fine.
However, even if it's exaggerated, the figures break records year on year. Even after Eoghan massaged the books, it's still growing for both housing and homelessness. So even if you think half of them are pretending or any other made up theory, by the measurements, even if exaggerated, it gets worse every year.
Do you think the hospital trolley crisis is people just like dying in corridors?

buh bye
(PS: Examples of how to debate without insulting come from many posters on this thread, including susieblue's post below, might be worth reading)

SusieBlue wrote: »

The supply and demand of well paying jobs in sparsely populated midland towns just isn't there. Its even worse for unskilled/inexperienced people.
That's why people move away from them.

With the absence of affordable housing for working professionals within commutable distance of the big cities, coupled with our piss poor standard of public transport, what you'd actually end up having is educated, valuable members of the workforce ending up burning out and on social welfare because the burden of the commute would take its toll eventually.
It simply isn't sustainable for most people to do a long distance commute indefinitely.

If building/letting affordable housing proportionate to the actual average salary isn't possible, at the very least we need to make serious improvements to our public transport so that those on low incomes can commute more efficiently and not spend hours sat in traffic jams on buses, as is currently the case across the country.

Affordable (not free, affordable) housing in our big cities for our workforce benefits everyone, so I can't understand why you are so against it.

Affordable housing must be paid for by everyone, if you enforce a max selling price then the developer pays for it. If you subsidise it from general taxation, we all pay for it. There can't just be now "affordable" housing, without a) market interference from a country that has a track record of an inability to self govern and b) a cost from general taxation.




I don't see why there is this groundswell of support for pseudo socialist groups like sinn fein and PBP et al.

I'd expect it was just me being too capitalist (compared to the Irish population at large, I generally am) but there are plenty of others who seem to agree with me..... an unusual occurrence considering boards is rather more left wing than society at large for most instances.

For what it's worth, I do agree that there are less high skilled jobs outside Dublin. I work in the credit risk field and if I could find a job in Meath in that field at all I'd love to take it but the salary would probably be half what I am on now.

ELM327

Boggles wrote: »

Really?

Car tax is a little over a billion which is actually the same budget or a little more than our road maintenance and improvement budget.

Have you a figure of what an actual private car contributes to the economy?

VRT
Servicing
Parts
Fuel
Labour
Testing
Etc.

I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just wondering where and who costed it?

Not to mention the near €1 per litre we pay in fuel tax. Doing 50k per annum the fuel tax adds up.

ThunbergsAreGo

LoLth wrote: »

Efficient use of social housing: 3 bedroom house, only a married couple in it, move to a smaller home, reallocate the multi bedroom house to a family that needs it and will utilise it. Give some form of relocation compensation or maybe have a slightly higher price range for these smaller houses to make them more attractive. Is it "uncaring" , no, they have had use of a house for ages. it is not theirs, it is the states to allocate as required.

This 100%, was brought up on the Dunphy Podcast recently.
Our social housing is being horribly under utlised - better a family of 5 in a 3 bedroom house than a married or single person. It is not a house for life

SortingYouOut

ELM327 wrote: »

Not to mention the near €1 per litre we pay in fuel tax. Doing 50k per annum the fuel tax adds up.

And our roads are still a joke.

I'd actually recommend anyone looking for accomodation to reside in one of the potholes out my direction, you'd be set for life.

weldoninhio

ELM327 wrote: »

And getting a job there.

Had a quick look on Jobs.ie there, Sligo is not exactly a hotbed of economic activity. So unless you walk into a job straight away, say it takes 2/3 weeks what would you propose the aforementioned person pays a deposit with? their first few weeks wages? food?

markodaly

If we want to build social housing then we need to raise money for this, the most obvious one would be a property tax of some sort.
Yet the same groups and people speaking blue murder about the homeless are also in favour of abolishing property tax, one of the best ways to tax wealth.

Socialists and left-wingers against a wealth tax. Yeap, this is Ireland 2019.

People harp on about the large social housing projects of the 1930s and 1950s but forget the tax people had to pay on their homes that paid for this. There was not one but two types of rates people had to pay, one was a rate for your house and the other was a social rate, which went to the building of other homes. These were scrapped over the course of mostly FF governments.

I presume those wanting solutions will have no problems with the re-introduction of these rates?

James Brown

ELM327 wrote: »

buh bye
(PS: Examples of how to debate without insulting come from many posters on this thread, including susieblue's post below, might be worth reading)

You don't believe theres a problem. That's complete fantasy. I would put it on par with climate change denial and flat earthers. In short, it's measured and even if exaggerated, it's worse year on year.

ELM327 wrote: »

Affordable housing must be paid for by everyone, if you enforce a max selling price then the developer pays for it. If you subsidise it from general taxation, we all pay for it. There can't just be now "affordable" housing, without a) market interference from a country that has a track record of an inability to self govern and b) a cost from general taxation.

There are two main ways to achieve affordable housing:

A) The state/LA pays a private developer to build homes we own and sell above cost. We make our money back and people get affordable housing. Win win.

We give concessions and subsidies to private developers so we get a percentage of built stock to use as social or affordable housing.

I'd be inclined to go with option 'A'.

Currently we are spending tax monies on hotels, HAP, subsidising rents to private landlords and buying homes on the market at the going rate, to use as social housing. This is a massive waste of tax payer money.

xckjoo

Boggles wrote: »

Really?

Car tax is a little over a billion which is actually the same budget or a little more than our road maintenance and improvement budget.

Have you a figure of what an actual private car contributes to the economy?

VRT
Servicing
Parts
Fuel
Labour
Testing
Etc.

I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just wondering where and who costed it?

Nah not to hand. It's been a few years since I read up on it.

On the other hand, I do believe there's merit in a return to town/village set ups, where satellite towns/villages could be used to live and good transport infrastructure in place for commuting to cities for work and play.

Assetbacked

naughtb4 wrote: »

This 100%, was brought up on the Dunphy Podcast recently.
Our social housing is being horribly under utlised - better a family of 5 in a 3 bedroom house than a married or single person. It is not a house for life

Those who raised their families in social housing with those families now moved out, should be required to move to smaller units in order to enable the next generation to move in. The house-for-life mentality is ridiculous and entirely unfair.

rireland

weldoninhio wrote: »

So you have a job in Dublin, but it doesn't afford you the comfort to afford a place in Dublin, you are about to be kicked out of your house share and you are advocating moving to Sligo to pay E280 a month??

How many homeless people had jobs before they were made homeless?

cfuserkildare

xckjoo wrote: »

Nah not to hand. It's been a few years since I read up on it.

On the other hand, I do believe there's merit in a return to town/village set ups, where satellite towns/villages could be used to live and good transport infrastructure in place for commuting to cities for work and play.

Therein lies the issue.

The transport infrastructure in this country is one of the worst in Europe.
There is only one bus service where I live, and that's only 12 miles outside Dublin City Center.

gibgodsman

ELM327 wrote: »

That's interesting because I moved from a 6 bed house in Navan (1k per month) to a 3 bed in Athboy , last year, and am now paying 400 per month).


The houses are out there, in Meath, sub 500 per month mortgage and sub 1k rent for sure.

You live in Athboy, which is basically in the middle of nowhere, where do you work? If not in Athboy how much are you now paying to get to work? Also there is currently 0 properties to rent in Athboy..... so yeah....

SusieBlue

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Therein lies the issue.

The transport infrastructure in this country is one of the worst in Europe.
There is only one bus service where I live, and that's only 12 miles outside Dublin City Center.

Exactly. I work about a 15/20 minute drive from my job. If I want to make it in for 8am, I need to get the 6:40am bus. To get that bus I need to leave home at 6:15am.
And yet I'm still late for work a few times a month, due to the bus not showing up, being too full, or being stuck in traffic.

I'm lucky that I can walk it in roughly an hour or so if the weather is good but that isn't always possible in this climate, particularly in the winter.

James Brown

rireland wrote: »

How many homeless people had jobs before they were made homeless?

There are homeless working tax payers.

Plumbthedepths

Assetbacked wrote:

Those who raised their families in social housing with those families now moved out, should be required to move to smaller units in order to enable the next generation to move in. The house-for-life mentality is ridiculous and entirely unfair.

These smaller units exist where?

Pawwed Rig

SusieBlue wrote: »

Exactly. I work about a 15/20 minute drive from my job. If I want to make it in for 8am, I need to get the 6:40am bus. To get that bus I need to leave home at 6:15am.
And yet I'm still late for work a few times a month, due to the bus not showing up, being too full, or being stuck in traffic.

I'm lucky that I can walk it in roughly an hour or so if the weather is good but that isn't always possible in this climate, particularly in the winter.

Scooter would be the solution here to be fair. Or else take up cycling or running. Zero gym fees then

Ush1

SusieBlue wrote: »

If building/letting affordable housing proportionate to the actual average salary isn't possible, at the very least we need to make serious improvements to our public transport so that those on low incomes can commute more efficiently and not spend hours sat in traffic jams on buses, as is currently the case across the country.

Affordable (not free, affordable) housing in our big cities for our workforce benefits everyone, so I can't understand why you are so against it.

Best of luck with that with the usual NIMBYs, see the Metro and Bus Connects.

SusieBlue

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Scooter would be the solution here to be fair. Or else take up cycling or running. Zero gym fees then

I would 100% do this if my office had showering facilities but it doesn't.

Graces7

rireland wrote: »

https://www.daft.ie/sligo/houses-for-rent/ballinode/no-1-brookfield-ballinode-sligo-1944589/

Nice 3 bed in Sligo for 280 a month.

You could afford this on the dole.

I know if I was facing homelessness I wouldn't care if I had to move across the country. I'd rather move 2 hours away than be homeless.

OK...

"Very clean and in excellent condition 3 Bedroom House to rent in Brookfield and 3 Bedroom House to rent in Glencarrick from 1st September, 9 months lease. Sleeps 5 students. Less than 5 minute walk to Sligo I.T. and beside bus stop to St. Angela's College. "

it is per room not the house and on a nine month arrangement.

Pawwed Rig

SusieBlue wrote: »

I would 100% do this if my office had showering facilities but it doesn't.

Electric Scooter then? Moped? Electric bike?

My office installed a shower when I asked them about commuting options. Maybe yours would too?
My point is that there are always solutions available if people are willing to try them.

Fair play to you for walking it btw. I wouldn't do that bus trip.

weldoninhio

rireland wrote: »

How many homeless people had jobs before they were made homeless?

I've no idea what your point is. Probably lots.

Sonics2k

ELM327 wrote: »

in dublin.


They can however move elsewhere.
There is no crisis, just an excess in demand for dublin properties which does not exist elsewhere. Plenty of houses in Longford. Cheap too.

Eh, not quite true. My old apartment in Jacobs Island, Cork, used to cost me €700 a month. It's a small 2 bed, with a shared living room/kitchen and obviously no garden.

Quiet recently (a month ago) I saw the same place going for €1050 a month. It's only been 3-4 years at most since I moved out of there.

ILoveYourVibes

JustAThought wrote: »

July 2019 & today there are 3,140 house share rooms and over 8,500 houses to rent on daft.ie
Isn't it about time journalists started quoting these figures when reporting 'homeless' figures.

True. You are 100% correct.

But they are places people cannot afford. Or places people cannot find jobs in or commute.

People don't feel secure enough to leave a good career for a place to rent.

So its either build high speed trains ...or build other economic hubs outside of Dublin, Galway and Cork.

ILoveYourVibes

Sonics2k wrote: »

Eh, not quite true. My old apartment in Jacobs Island, Cork, used to cost me €700 a month. It's a small 2 bed, with a shared living room/kitchen and obviously no garden.

Quiet recently (a month ago) I saw the same place going for €1050 a month. It's only been 3-4 years at most since I moved out of there.

That's cheap.