The €3,000 per month luxury welfare apartments

Kermit.de.frog

Boggles wrote: »

Great. You'll have no problem providing evidence of your claim.

Link?

It's 15% of the principle earner's income according to the Dept of Social Protection.

Ergo it's going to be between €20 and €30 depending on the payment they receive.

Even if most paid €30 it does not change the reality that that is nothing for what they have.

FutureGuy

Doesn't matter, because all people will do is b!tch and moan about it for a few days and then it'll fall to the wayside.

As usual.

Good ol' Ireland. It's easy to be a politician.

Boggles

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's 15% of the principle earner's income according to the Dept of Social Protection.

Ergo it's going to between €20 and €30 depending on the payment.

Even if most paid €30 it does not change the reality that that is nothing for what have.

That's great.

But anyway a link or some evidence to backup your claim?

Idbatterim

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

But thats not on the inhabitants, its policy set out by the government - these are the ones that should get the blame (as you rightfully have).

Give a man a fishing rod and hell heat forever

Give them the prospect of a free baby and hell disappear, while the wife has another baby.

Social housing ranking should be based on contribution to society with carers etc above Micko who has never worked. But again its not Mickos fault its not, its the govenments

How the hell do fg support the outrageous welfare state and benefits , when they are despised by the people that receive it. They will lose no votes by actually rewarding workers. Then they lie and f I’m us over. At least the tories in the uk do what they say on the tin

The_Brood

Boggles wrote: »

Great. You'll have no problem providing evidence of your claim.

Link?

Link to what? I have 10 years work experience, have worked every day of my life through college, and my rent for ****ty broken conditions + bills is the vast majority of my monthly paycheck. What exactly do you want to ask me?

FutureGuy

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

There should be actual protests by workers at this stage.

There won't be. Of course. Too much on Netflix.

Idbatterim

Boggles wrote: »

Easy there Edgelord.

Someone made a claim, I asked them to back it up.

It's how things work.

Save your rage typing for someone else.

“An edgelord is someone on an internet forum who deliberately talks about controversial, offensive, taboo, or nihilistic subjects in order to shock other users in an effort to appear cool, or edgy.”

Right. The vast majority would consider that I am talking sense. The madness is giving skangers free apartments. I’ve no agenda !

My taxes would be better kept in my pocket and me enjoying an extra trip to Vegas a year , instead of being wasted on take away number five of the week for rhianna and shakira!

Idbatterim

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's 15% of the principle earner's income according to the Dept of Social Protection.

Ergo it's going to be between €20 and €30 depending on the payment they receive.

Even if most paid €30 it does not change the reality that that is nothing for what they have.

It’s grand Kermit it’s only 15%. Sure why shouldn’t the rich on 40-50k etc pay 50%+ for the same thing..,

Kermit.de.frog

Boggles wrote: »

That's great.

But anyway a link or some evidence to backup your claim?

It differs slightly with each county. This is Dublin City Council calculation.

https://www.dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/Housing/Rent_Scheme_2011/Documents/Rent%20Scheme%202019.pdf

It says it there in black and white - minimum rent in DCC area is just €25.65 on €203 welfare payment.

Boggles

The_Brood wrote: »

Link to what? I have 10 years work experience, have worked every day of my life through college, and my rent for ****ty broken conditions + bills is the vast majority of my monthly paycheck. What exactly do you want to ask me?

I was quoting your "other" account.

Boggles

Idbatterim wrote: »

The vast majority would consider that I am talking sense.!

No, no they wouldn't.

Idbatterim

Boggles wrote: »

No, no they wouldn't.

lol. Wait for this to come up on the journal and see what comments get supported. Do you think what Is happening is perfectly reasonable? They should give them a cage courtesy of the tax payer hang a sign off it too. “ courtesy of the tax payer “

These untermensch as another poster referred to them as , their biggest concern is day time tv and if it will be a new episode of Jeremy Kyle or a re-run!

Boggles

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It differs slightly with each county. This is Dublin City Council calculation.

https://www.dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/Housing/Rent_Scheme_2011/Documents/Rent%20Scheme%202019.pdf

It says it there in black and white - minimum rent in DCC area is just €25.65 on €203 welfare payment.

Yip, I never asked you to back up what the minimum rent was.

You claimed the majority of people in social housing pay €20 odd euro.

Most claimants get €200 per week. They pay around €20.

That's your claim that needs to be backed up.

Obviously you wouldn't make a claim like that without having seen relevant data to support the claim.

So for the 3rd time when you are ready.

Link?

Boggles

Idbatterim wrote: »

lol. Wait for this to come up on the journal and see what comments get supported. Do you think what Is happening is perfectly reasonable? They should give them a cage courtesy of the tax payer hang a sign off it too. “ courtesy of the tax payer “

Everything Okay?

Kermit.de.frog

Boggles wrote: »

Yip, I never asked you to back up what the minimum rent was.

You claimed the majority of people in social housing pay €20 odd euro.



That's your claim that needs to be backed up.

Obviously you wouldn't make a claim like that without having seen relevant data to support the claim.

So for the 3rd time when you are ready.

Link?

No. You are confused. The majority of claimants (i.e unemployed getting €203 per week at the post office) are paying the minimum rent.

This thread is not about those who are working and in social housing - it's about those who are not working and have no intention of working. Hence the word "claimants" in what I said.

The_Brood

Boggles wrote: »

I was quoting your "other" account.

You seem to have an issue that people are angry at this. Tell me why I should not be?

dodzy

X111111111111 wrote: »

Social housing isnt free.

A 700k apartment in a prime location in Dublin for what will amount to less than 50€ per week for many tenants is as damn close to free as you can get.

Boggles

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

No. You are confused. The majority of claimants (i.e unemployed getting €203 per week at the post office) are paying the minimum rent.

Fair enough.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

This thread is not about those who are working and in social housing - it's about those who are not working and have no intention of working.

No it isn't, it's about the council leasing a block of apartments, how do you know the employment status of the people going into them?

Boggles

The_Brood wrote: »

You seem to have an issue that people are angry at this. Tell me why I should not be?

You can express whatever emotion you want lad, not up to me to tell you otherwise.

Kermit.de.frog

Boggles wrote: »

Fair enough.



No it isn't, it's about the council leasing a block of apartments, how do you know the employment status of the people going into them?

I don't.

All the lucky few might be working.

That might happen. I don't know.

My suspicion, and it is just a suspicion, that you will get more than one Margaret Cash in this complex and I think that is morally wrong.

I think it's wrong on workers, renters, mortgage payers and anyone who contributes to this society.

If that doesn't happen fair enough.

Boggles

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I don't.

All the lucky few might be working.

That might happen. I don't know.

My suspicion, and it is just a suspicion, that you will get more than one Margaret Cash in this complex and I think that is morally wrong.

I think it's wrong on workers, renters, mortgage payers and anyone who contributes to this society.

If that doesn't happen fair enough.

But sure who ever goes in there didn't sanction the lease nor do they make policy?

Correct?

Also, I'll still have to pay my mortgage either way, wrong morally or not it won't make one bit of difference to my life.

Captcha

Bit of a joke this, why work in this country and commute from places like Wexford?

This whole social system cannot be sustainable in the long run.

Kermit.de.frog

Boggles wrote: »

But sure who ever goes in there didn't sanction the lease nor do they make policy?

I'm not blaming the person going in for that at all.

I blame the policy makers like everyone else.

If someone wants to offer me a high end apartment in a sought after location for next to nothing i'm in.

Captcha

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm not blaming the person going in for that at all.

I blame the policy makers like everyone else.

If someone wants to offer me a high end apartment in a sought after location for next to nothing i'm in.

WOuld these apartments be better given to people earning up to 30k or similar per year? Especially in a nice area and near public transport. Have unemployed people take the longer journey, they have the time after all.

Boggles

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm not blaming the person going in for that at all.

You said a certain type of person going in there is "morally wrong".

Like I said I don't care who goes in there, the only wrong bit I see is the money could be used far better.

Kermit.de.frog

Captcha wrote: »

WOuld these apartments be better given to people earning up to 30k or similar per year? Especially in a nice area and near public transport.

That's how the system should work. I have no issue at all with anyone getting social housing anywhere so long as they are at least making an effort to improve things.

Those who don't make any effort and never will work should be pointed toward Darndale or where ever and told "that's your standard, that's your future"...

Seems fair to me.

Kermit.de.frog

Boggles wrote: »

You said a certain type of person going in there is "morally wrong".

It is. Does not make it their fault.

Their lifestyle is their fault not policy makers bending over backwards for them.

So the likes of Margaret Cash have decided she is going to pump out one kid after another and we are going to pay for it. The policy makers are the enablers of that lifestyle choice.

cruizer101

Boggles wrote: »

Also, I'll still have to pay my mortgage either way, wrong morally or not it won't make one bit of difference to my life.

Not strictly true, while the impact of this individual case may not really have a direct effect on you the overall policy of paying large sums of money to house social tenants when it could be done cheaper does have an effect it, is your tax money being used to pay for it when it could be used for other public services.

BarryD2

Captcha wrote: »

WOuld these apartments be better given to people earning up to 30k or similar per year? Especially in a nice area and near public transport. Have unemployed people take the longer journey, they have the time after all.

Absolutely, they should be reserved for working people below a certain threshold. Lose your job, get a substantial payrise - out. And give it someone else who fits the criteria.

Apart from that, just the craziest thing I've read in a while. How far out of touch can a government get with ordinary citizens who are trying to pay their way and keep the state afloat??

zerosugarbuzz

Though its true that the tenants are benefiting this is being done primarily for the benefits of the German Investors who own the apartments. They are guaranteed rent for whatever period they hold on to the properties. What is there not to love for the investment fund, expect to see much much more of this. At the end of the day its the Irish Tax payers that are paying for the German "investment".