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

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

I remember looking it up at the time the thread started and it wasn't far off.

Really? I had a look myself at the time and posted the actual number.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110651727&postcount=16

You think 7000 houses to rent were removed from Daft in 90 minutes and this just stayed around 1500 since?

:pac:

Deleted User wrote: »

BTW The thread title includes rooms. Not only houses

Yeah, haven't checked that out, I focused on the massive lie first.

& 8,500 houses to rent

boards.ie the only place on the planet where people will argue rudimentary maths.

Graces7

daft... probably many here have not spent hours thereon searching and have no idea how it works?

You can adapt your search to " all residential"

See

https://www.daft.ie/ireland/residential-property-for-rent/?s%5Bignored_agents%5D%5B0%5D=1551

and adjust as to price... eg say E700 a month?

https://www.daft.ie/ireland/residential-property-for-rent/?s%5Bmxp%5D=700&s%5Bignored_agents%5D%5B0%5D=1551

Under 400 for the whole of Ireland at that cost.

Some lovely places!
859 listed between 2 and 5 thousand euros.. mostly per month and add to E10ooo

There was one last week at e3,000 a week but it seems to have gone..

The Specialist

Boggles wrote: »

Jesus Titty Christ I provided the link for Houses to Rent as per the thread title and opening post several times now.



Here is it again.

https://www.daft.ie/ireland/houses-for-rent/

This is not the most difficult task you'll face today.

Click on it, what number do you get? Is that in and around 8,500?

I'll give you a clue, it isn't.

The thread title and opening post is complete and utter horse shít.

Why is the OP insisting on journalists reporting lies?

Ah I see your problem now - you are being pedantic about the thread title and limiting your filter to houses only. Why are you excluding apartments and all other residential properties? So you can manipulate the figure....

Boggles

The Specialist wrote: »

Ah I see your problem now - you are being pedantic about the thread title and limiting your filter to houses only.

Thread Title

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

Opening Post

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.

ELM327

The Specialist wrote: »

Ah I see your problem now - you are being pedantic about the thread title and limiting your filter to houses only. Why are you excluding apartments and all other residential properties? So you can manipulate the figure....

I said that to him earlier and he didnt seem to comprehend it.
It's very difficult to debate with a shrill screecher.

Boggles

ELM327 wrote: »

I said that to him earlier and he didnt seem to comprehend it.
It's very difficult to debate with a shrill screecher.

Eric Cartman

The Specialist wrote: »

I’d argue that if the figure of life time dolers is that low (bar a disability or acceptable reason), it would be acceptable to the majority of people to simply cut them off. Why should we continue to fund parasites when there is no reason for them not to be in some sort of employment apart from laziness or apathy? I’ve said it before but we are too soft on wasters in this country and while the usual bleeding hearts would stomp their feet at such a move, they might be surprised at how much appetite and support there is from the hard working taxpayers to see it done.

Youre not allowed say that because of the usual doublespeak , the number is so small that its not worth doing anything about but at the same time cutting them off would leave thousands of families out on the streets, and then the subtext of ‘if you cut them off theyll all do crime’ but theyre not bad people or something....

ELM327

Boggles wrote: »

.

Sorry I don't converse with pictographs thanks.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Youre not allowed say that because of the usual doublespeak , the number is so small that its not worth doing anything about but at the same time cutting them off would leave thousands of families out on the streets, and then the subtext of ‘if you cut them off theyll all do crime’ but theyre not bad people or something....

Ah but he is a good dad, member of the local GAA team and an upstanding member of the community (and we'll brush the 27 prior convictions under the table). Suspended sentence :mad::mad:
And these are the people that get free forever homes.



This banana republic wastebasket for socialist nincompoops really irritates me, sometimes more than others.

Boggles

Irish people ranting and raving and blaming all woes on Socialism is a different level of hilarious ignorance, it's like the past 10-20 years didn't actually happen.

Ireland has the third-highest rate of national debt per head in the world - behind Japan and the US.

Our national debt is €201bn or €42,000 per person.

the national debt is very real and is costing us close to €6bn each year to service.

Put another way, before the crash, Ireland was paying about €2.5bn a year in interest on €43bn of national debt. Since 2009, the state has paid out a total €53.9bn in interest on our national debt.

almost one-third of the income tax paid by workers in Ireland goes on the interest bill.

What 'ism' caused all that?

Fúck it, who cares. Let's just blame homeless people.

ELM327

Boggles wrote: »

Irish people ranting and raving and blaming all woes on Socialism is a different level of hilarious ignorance, it's like the past 10-20 years didn't actually happen.







What 'ism' caused all that?

Fúck it, who cares. Let's just blame homeless people.

Well state interference in private industry certainly isnt capitalist in case that's what you're inkling.

markodaly

What -ism is that?

Populism FF style. They gave what the people wanted and drove the country to bankruptcy.

ELM327

markodaly wrote: »

What -ism is that?

Populism FF style. They gave what the people wanted and drove the country to bankruptcy.

Populism... or socialism/communism/braindead leftist crap

James Brown

JustAThought wrote: »

Intergenerational and third and fourth generation social welfare spongers more like. Work is a four letter word to most and sponging and 'entitlement' is a way of life from the cradle to the grave .

A good friend of mine was a full time carer for his daughter for many years. After she passed away they sent him on several courses and schemes and he's working in some community center at the moment having been out of the workforce for so long and his age, that's about his speed right now.
So how come he isn't scratching his belly watching Jeremy Kyle all day? They came for him while he was still in mourning. How are all these welfare ninja's doing it? How are these fouth generational spongers getting away with it, or is it just blue shirted shyte talk?

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Youre not allowed say that because of the usual doublespeak , the number is so small that its not worth doing anything about but at the same time cutting them off would leave thousands of families out on the streets, and then the subtext of ‘if you cut them off theyll all do crime’ but theyre not bad people or something....

Many tax payers rely on state aid to function. That's a fact.

Boggles

ELM327 wrote: »

Well state interference in private industry certainly isnt capitalist in case that's what you're inkling.

markodaly wrote: »

What -ism is that?

Populism FF style. They gave what the people wanted and drove the country to bankruptcy.

ELM327 wrote: »

Populism... or socialism/communism/braindead leftist crap

FF cheered on by FG took the shackles off and let them operate as close to Free Market conditions as possible.

I mean it's pretty recent history, we aren't going to try and rewrite it all ready are we?

Either way it had fúck all to with Socialism.

ELM327

Boggles wrote: »

FF cheered on by FG took the shackles off and let them operate as close to Free Market conditions as possible.

I mean it's pretty recent history, we aren't going to try and rewrite it all ready are we?

Either way it had fúck all to with Socialism.

With millions and millions of Euro of taxpayer money gifted to the banks. That's not free market capitalism.

James Brown

Boggles wrote: »

FF cheered on by FG took the shackles off and let them operate as close to Free Market conditions as possible.

I mean it's pretty recent history, we aren't going to try and rewrite it all ready are we?

Either way it had fúck all to with Socialism.

When FF/FG do something their supporters don't like it's because 'the left' made them do it or left led LA's. It must be great to be FF/FG were your supporters give you credit and blame external factors for your blatant cronyism and incompetence.

James Brown

ELM327 wrote: »

With millions and millions of Euro of taxpayer money gifted to the banks. That's not free market capitalism.

It's not, but it's far from the benefit of the lowly tax payer either. The game is rigged but not for the average punter. Vulture funds pay little to no tax buying up and renting out or selling property. What's the tax on a personal mortgage these days?

Boggles

ELM327 wrote: »

With millions and millions of Euro of taxpayer money gifted to the banks. That's not free market capitalism.

Exactly, that's the dire consequence of it.

Billions actually.

Again though, nothing to do with Socialism.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Again though, nothing to do with Socialism.

Nor homelessness

markodaly

Boggles wrote: »

FF cheered on by FG took the shackles off and let them operate as close to Free Market conditions as possible.

I mean it's pretty recent history, we aren't going to try and rewrite it all ready are we?

Either way it had fúck all to with Socialism.

You do not know your recent Irish electoral history.

You need to go back to 2002 first, when FF went into the election with the "Spend it all and spend it now" mentality.
FG under the leadership of Noonan went into the election with a much more guarded and conservative approach to the newfound wealth under the new boom.

FF won handily, FG got their worst result ever.
That was very telling.

During the local elections of 2004, FF suffered a 20% loss of seats, one of the worst results ever for them. The FF faithful fecked off down to Cork, to find their soul and invitied Fr. Sean Healy of Social Justice Ireland to speak. There was a photo which adorned the front page of every national newspaper of Bertie, Fr Sean Healy, Mary Hanifen and Mary Coughlan, taking a stroll barefoot on the Indydoney beach.

In fairness to Bertie, he was a master politician. This was the 'new' FF. More caring, more nurturing, more feminine.

They blamed the reason of the poor local election results on the lack of spending and 'helping' the poor.

After the 2002 election was one, budget increases were actually modest and there was a much more conservative, fiscal approach taken Charlie McCreevy was Minister of Finance, who wasn't as loose with the pursestring as often as you would think. Well, he had to go...

He was shipped off to Europe, Brian Cowen took his place and opened the door of the Dept. of Finance to everyone and the new look FF began to get going.


..
.

The seeds of the crash were sown during these years (2002-2004).

You may not want to call it socialism (a far-reaching term) but what it was was populism, loose fiscal control, a total lack of regard for the future. The chickens came home to roost when the arse came out of the property sector.


In 2007, they were all at the auction politics, because the Irish electorate are short terms thinkers.

Boggles

markodaly wrote: »

Charlie McCreevy was Minister of Finance, who wasn't as loose with the pursestring as often as you would think. Well, he had to go...

He was shipped off to Europe

Charlie, ah yeah he was the right thrift merchant all right. What was it he once said.

When I have it, I spend it and when I don’t, I don’t

:rolleyes:

markodaly wrote: »

You may not want to call it socialism (a far-reaching term) but what it was was populism, loose fiscal control, a total lack of regard for the future. The chickens came home to roost when the arse came out of the property sector.

It's not that I am struggling to call it anything.

It is what it was.

Free Market Capitalism.

Or as close as you could actually get.

Anyone trying to label it Socialism or any other ideology is either completely ignorant, trolling or Charlie McCreevy.

ELM327

Boggles wrote: »

Charlie, ah yeah he was the right thrift merchant all right. What was it he once said.



:rolleyes:




It's not that I am struggling to call it anything.

It is what it was.

Free Market Capitalism.

Or as close as you could actually get.

Anyone trying to label it Socialism or any other ideology is either completely ignorant, trolling or Charlie McCreevy.

Free Market Capitalism.
Let's explore that nomenclature shall we?


Free market. A market operating on the laws of supply and demand without interference or regulation. nope


Capitalism. an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. nope

So it is neither free market, nor capitalism.

markodaly

Boggles wrote: »

Charlie, ah yeah he was the right thrift merchant all right. What was it he once said.

That is a quote for what he was known for but look behind the headlines. The data confirms this. After the 2002 election, the budget for 2003/2004 were much more conservative. They went back to 'normal' after he took his job at the EU commision.

He was shipped off because FF thought he was too tight. The rest, as they say, is history.

Free Market Capitalism.

Or as close as you could actually get.

But it wasn't, as the banks were bailed out and it was the government inflating public spending, that was a key fault for the crash.

Anyone trying to label it Socialism or any other ideology is either completely ignorant, trolling or Charlie McCreevy.

Why are you so aggressive in your tone?
This is an honest question. You can have a debate, but your tone belies the fact you just want to shout at people and call them all idiots.

I never called it Socialism, I call it populism.
All one has to do is look at any metric for public spending for that decade.
Dept. budgets increased spectacularly. One year, the health budget was so big, they couldn't find the time to spend it.
OAP's more than doubled, JSA around the same.
Dare I say it, benchmarking!?

Are you honestly calling the level of spending the Irish government engaged in from 2001-2008 is free-market capitalism?

Boggles

ELM327 wrote: »

Free Market Capitalism.
Let's explore that nomenclature shall we?


Free market. A market operating on the laws of supply and demand without interference or regulation. nope


Capitalism. an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. nope

So it is neither free market, nor capitalism.

You just know when someone is pulling out the dictionary they are so winning. :pac:

Anyway what I actually said.

Free Market Capitalism.

Or as close as you could actually get.

So if it wasn't loose or lack of regulation that caused the crash.

Tell me in your opinion what was?

Let me get a pencil.

If you think it was Socialism, please please just ignore my question.

Boggles

markodaly wrote: »

Are you honestly calling the level of spending the Irish government engaged in from 2001-2008 is free-market capitalism?

What caused the financial crash?

markodaly

Boggles wrote: »

What caused the financial crash?

There was a multitude of causes.

Lax lending practices.
Entry to the Euro
Low-interest rates
Government inflating the economy
Just to name a few

Boggles

markodaly wrote: »

There was a multitude of causes.
Lax lending practices.

You nailed it there. The rest are just bit part players.

"Lax" is pretty understated.

The banks collectively had 440 billion on their loan books, that was roughly 3 times the size of the Irish Economy.

It wasn't lax it was insane.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

You nailed it there. The rest are just bit part players.

"Lax" is pretty understated.

The banks collectively had 440 billion on their loan books, that was roughly 3 times the size of the Irish Economy.

It wasn't lax it was insane.

It was mind boggling

markodaly

Boggles wrote: »

You nailed it there. The rest are just bit part players.

"Lax" is pretty understated.

The banks collectively had 440 billion on their loan books, that was roughly 3 times the size of the Irish Economy.

It wasn't lax it was insane.

Bit part?

Entry to the Euro was the game changer as it allowed Irish banks access to credit they could have only dreamed off before

Low-interest rates because of slow growth in the German economy, yet boom times here in Ireland exasperated the issue further.

Government spending was also as you say, insane. Just look at the budget figures.
Benchmarking played a role bankruptcy of the nation and fueled spending and property prices.

Lax lending was, of course, a factor, but again, we the Irish people lapped it up. New cars and apartments in Bulgaria were the things.

All of this was populism. The government gave people what they wanted. The example of shipping McCreevy off to the EU. The shackles came off and the government did nothing to stop the party.

It was populism, pure and simple.

Pawwed Rig

People are people though. The most prudent person in Ireland who never borrowed or overspent still had to bail out those who did. So the lesson here is spend when you have it as there will be minimal consequences. Govt and the central bank need to be protecting people from themselves. They won't though because politics and elections.

markodaly

Well the Central Bank rules are still there and seem to be working on keeping a lid on the house prices, even though we have people complaining about them, and of course, the unintended consequence of that is that it's much much more difficult to get a loan for a property and to raise the amount needed.

No more 110% mortgages for people on min wage.

Boggles

markodaly wrote: »

It was populism, pure and simple.

Politicians in trying to be popular shocker.

Who exactly were they trying to popular with though? Who was the focus?

Something about a tent in Galway comes to mind.

Either way populism is not exclusive to one ideology.

But we have hashed the financial crisis out, we've had the committees and post-mortem. Conclusion have been made.

It was ultimately Free Market conditions that caused the financial crash.

Patrick Neary has admitted and apologized. (Big of him) Unless you think he needs to retract it?

But again, it definitely wasn't Socialism.

markodaly

Boggles wrote: »

Politicians in trying to be popular shocker.

Therein you admit it.

It's easy for a politician to spend money we do not have to try and win the next election.
Do you even acknowledge that such a thing as populism even exists in Ireland?

Who exactly were they trying to popular with though?

The electorate

Either way populism is not exclusive to one ideology.

Of course, you can have right-wing, ban the immigrant's type populism but you also the left-wing, tax the rich and spend all the money now, variant.

But we have hashed the financial crisis out, we've had the committees and post-mortem. Conclusion have been made.

Not at all. The primary issue with the financial crisis was low interests set by central banks. Cheap credit and too much of it.

It was ultimately Free Market conditions that caused the financial crash.

What 'Market' sets the interest rates for the ECB?

But again, it definitely wasn't Socialism.

I never said it was.
It was populism.

Donald Trump

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

People are people though. The most prudent person in Ireland who never borrowed or overspent still had to bail out those who did. So the lesson here is spend when you have it as there will be minimal consequences. Govt and the central bank need to be protecting people from themselves. They won't though because politics and elections.

There is a middle ground between excessively conservative and not using potential opportunities and being profligate. Neither is particularly optimal, even if the former is far better than the latter.

B_ecke_r

lots of Tories in here.

I live 91km away from my job.

Reason - the jobs are in Dublin.

I agree with the sentiments about people who don't work etc but something (no idea what) needs to be done for the young couples who work 40+ hours a week breaking their backs trying to save and get nothing in return.

no one is looking for a handout but if you're born and reared in Dublin you will tend to want to stay there.

look at the motorways every morning and see the amount of people travelling to Dublin for work.

as said earlier the people who work in the city on lowish paying jobs - coffee shops for example - are they expected to commute from Longford?

Boggles

markodaly wrote: »

Not at all. The primary issue with the financial crisis was low interests set by central banks. Cheap credit and too much of it

No it wasn't. It was lack of regulation.

IF the lending portfolios had been managed properly there would have been no crash. All the cheap money in world doesn't change that fact.

But sure we will have to agree to disagree.

markodaly

Cheap credit always pushes up asset prices. This has been the case for hundreds of years. There is always a crash after the fact as well.