The €3,000 per month luxury welfare apartments

X111111111111

Nika Bolokov wrote: »

Nazi era thinking is hardly the solution.

Bang of the third reich off a lot of posts on here unfortunately

RacoonQueen

Children have the right to be properly cared for and not used to get free stuff.

Idbatterim

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Flat taxes have been tried, it generally ends in higher earners paying less tax than the majority, and an overall reduction in tax intake

whats the problem with that, the mid to high paid here are paying way more than their fair share. But its not about "fair" is it? its about there being far more low paid people and everyones vote counting the same. So who do you go to look after as a political party? answers on the back of a postcard...

Beechwoodspark

Boggles wrote: »

Councillors vote in favour of €22 million white-water rafting facility in Dublin's IFSC

I suppose it is a "sport".

Honestly thought it was a spoof but it’s been featured on prime time now.

Absolute utter complete madness

Jinglejangle69

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Honestly thought it was a spoof but it’s been featured on prime time now.

Absolute utter complete madness

Why?

SDs pushing for it on prime time.

PeasantHater

I’m hoping Saturday’s protest is somewhat of a success or at least starts a serious discussion about not letting this travesty occur.

My wife and I have decided to withdraw our current 600k offer for a nearby house, or at least negotiate a significantly lower offer if this sh1t goes ahead.

I don’t need to be going to bed at night wondering have the local untermensch burned out my wheelie bins on the local green space, although I worry that this will be a frequent occurrence.

GhostyMcGhost

PeasantHater wrote: »

I don’t need to be going to bed at night wondering have the local untermensch burned out my wheelie bins on the local green space, although I worry that this will be a frequent occurrence.

When you’ve an attitude like that I can see why they’d “pick” on you

Idbatterim

Ill join you on saturday peasanthater, fight the good fight. the family home is nearby! dont want it devalued when riff raff start burning fires on their balcony and letting out tents on said balconies on airbnb! at least that way they can start making their own contribution to the housing crisis and pay in some taxes!

" enjoy your very own outdoor space in this prime location, beside dundrum town centre, the luas, M50, excellent schools. The world is your oyster... PS, dont worry if you break anything in your compact but cosy home, the council will foot the bill! "

PeasantHater

GhostyMcGhost wrote: »

When you’ve an attitude like that I can see why they’d “pick” on you

They do it indiscriminately usually, they shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds them, after all, my extortionate tax payments are keeping the pondlife in luxury.

Millionaire only not

X111111111111 wrote: »

Life hands out different cards for everyone. Some make bad choices others don't.

Everyone has the right to have children.

By all means have all the children u like! don’t expect other people to fund it!
because it’s not the government’s money they get, only the tax taken from working people!

end of the road

Greyfox wrote: »

If it was just a dig out then that would be fine but were not just giving a dig out which is the whole point. Were giving non working people a better standard of living than a lot of working people. What part of this do you not understand? How is it fair to ever make non working person better off than working people?


The government should be finding the cheapest locations for building social housing and building lots and lots of them there. If you don't have a disability then it should be a case of accept the first decent house your offered or go to the bottom of the queue.

that is what they are doing, while taking all factors into account, and trying to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.
that is why we have social housing in cities, why we have mixed developments etc, otherwise we would have to spend big money on infrastructure, amenities, etc.
the problem those who suggest throwing social housing tenants down the country fail to grasp, is that it is not just the bare cost of land and house building that has to be taken into account these days, the days of throwing up housing and leaving people to their own devices as happened in the 60s in ballymon etc, are gone.

Millionaire only not wrote: »

Something not far of a ghetto is good enough if ur not prepared to help urself and contribute something to the state !

U have disincentive this breeding and let’s face it bad dna !

not to me as a tax payer it's not. we have already had to pay huge amounts to clean up after the last time we stuck people together in houses and left them with nothing, areas of limerick, dublin, etc, it was called regeneration. those days are quite rightly gone, and we are now trying integration and inclusion, which, while it won't work in all cases, will work in others.
ghettoes will ultimately not disincentivize people having multiple children without their own means to support them. such people have always existed and will always exist, and people are just going to have to get used to it. they can dislike it of course, and wish it was otherwise, but we have to be realistic.

zeebre12

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Honestly thought it was a spoof but it’s been featured on prime time now.

Absolute utter complete madness

This is so weird. It's in the middle of the business district of the city. It looks really out of place.

X111111111111

PeasantHater wrote: »

I’m hoping Saturday’s protest is somewhat of a success or at least starts a serious discussion about not letting this travesty occur.

My wife and I have decided to withdraw our current 600k offer for a nearby house, or at least negotiate a significantly lower offer if this sh1t goes ahead.

I don’t need to be going to bed at night wondering have the local untermensch burned out my wheelie bins on the local green space, although I worry that this will be a frequent occurrence.

Most people including my neighbours in social housing are lovely.

X111111111111

Millionaire only not wrote: »

By all means have all the children u like! don’t expect other people to fund it!
because it’s not the government’s money they get, only the tax taken from working people!

Social housing tenents pay taxes also

c montgomery

X111111111111 wrote: »

Social housing tenents pay taxes also

On fags and booze

Idbatterim

X111111111111 wrote: »

Most people including my neighbours in social housing are lovely.

link please?

X111111111111

c montgomery wrote: »

On fags and booze

Nope PAYE just like people in private housing.

oceanman

PeasantHater wrote: »

I’m hoping Saturday’s protest is somewhat of a success or at least starts a serious discussion about not letting this travesty occur.

My wife and I have decided to withdraw our current 600k offer for a nearby house, or at least negotiate a significantly lower offer if this sh1t goes ahead.

I don’t need to be going to bed at night wondering have the local untermensch burned out my wheelie bins on the local green space, although I worry that this will be a frequent occurrence.

your user name suits you well indeed...

Lollipops23

I mentioned this elsewhere, but my mam and her 5 siblings all married people who'd been reared in social housing (all over Dublin).

Every single one of those newlywed couples bought houses in private estates. Nearly all of their children went on to buy houses in private estates.

My point is that, yes the social housing was there for those who needed it back in the 50s/60s in these cases. But the cycle was broken when the next generation were moving up and out; to the best of my knowledge they didn't even apply or look into it when they went to buy.

What's so different now? Why does generation after generation remain in social housing?

Naos

X111111111111 wrote: »

Embarrased for you. Maybe in the future research and read before posting.

Why would you be embarrassed for me? Simple mistake.

That being said, I believe it would be safe to infer that those on the waiting list would be a fair reflection of those currently in social housing.

Of course, it was you who made the claim that the majority of those in social housing work, do you have anything of substance to back up your claim?

Naos

Muir wrote: »

You misunderstood your source. Those are waiting list statistics, not statistics for those in social housing.

Fair point. Would you agree though that those on the waiting list would be a fair reflection of those currently in social housing?

If not, could you point to any sources that would state otherwise?

Boggles

Lollipops23 wrote: »

I mentioned this elsewhere, but my mam and her 5 siblings all married people who'd been reared in social housing (all over Dublin).

Every single one of those newlywed couples bought houses in private estates. Nearly all of their children went on to buy houses in private estates.

My point is that, yes the social housing was there for those who needed it back in the 50s/60s in these cases. But the cycle was broken when the next generation were moving up and out; to the best of my knowledge they didn't even apply or look into it when they went to buy.

What's so different now? Why does generation after generation remain in social housing?

They don't. Some do.

Your family would be an example of this.

Ye weren't unique then or now.

Padraig Mor

X111111111111 wrote: »

Nope PAYE just like people in private housing.

Did you not say in this or another thread that you pay "very little" (or words to that effect) income tax?

edit: and that you were earning an extra €11k as a takeaway driver - presumably without declaring it for tax?

Geuze

Lollipops23 wrote: »

I mentioned this elsewhere, but my mam and her 5 siblings all married people who'd been reared in social housing (all over Dublin).

Every single one of those newlywed couples bought houses in private estates. Nearly all of their children went on to buy houses in private estates.

My point is that, yes the social housing was there for those who needed it back in the 50s/60s in these cases. But the cycle was broken when the next generation were moving up and out; to the best of my knowledge they didn't even apply or look into it when they went to buy.

What's so different now? Why does generation after generation remain in social housing?

The houses provided by the market are too expensive, relative to incomes.

marieholmfan

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Did you not say in this or another thread that you pay "very little" (or words to that effect) income tax?

edit: and that you were earning an extra €11k as a takeaway driver - presumably without declaring it for tax?

It's called being entrepreneurial. Try it sometimes instead of standing on the sidelines moaning.

X111111111111

Naos wrote: »

Why would you be embarrassed for me? Simple mistake.

That being said, I believe it would be safe to infer that those on the waiting list would be a fair reflection of those currently in social housing.

Of course, it was you who made the claim that the majority of those in social housing work, do you have anything of substance to back up your claim?

Personal experience. In the evening time our estate which is half social half affordable is full of cars and in the day time there are none. Everyone is out working. It's the same in other social housing areas that i know of.

X111111111111

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Did you not say in this or another thread that you pay "very little" (or words to that effect) income tax?

edit: and that you were earning an extra €11k as a takeaway driver - presumably without declaring it for tax?

All declared. So what if it's little the rates the government set aren't my problem. If you don't like it vote in someone new

How do you feel about the american multis and the rate of tax they pay?

Lollipops23

Boggles wrote: »

They don't. Some do.

Your family would be an example of this.

Ye weren't unique then or now.

Oh our lot were far from unique. None of them had highfalutin fancy jobs, just 'normal'. If they were in modern times they'd probably all earn between 30-60k. Not terribly low, not extremely high. And several operated on a single wage.

Naos

X111111111111 wrote: »

Personal experience. In the evening time our estate which is half social half affordable is full of cars and in the day time there are none. Everyone is out working. It's the same in other social housing areas that i know of.

Okay but do you have any actual evidence other than "personal experience"?

I can just as easily say I have personal experience of the opposite of what you're saying which would nullify your point.

So your claim is that the majority of those in social housing are employed. I was able to provide evidence that the majority of applicants for social housing are unemployed, which would be a lot stronger indicator of current recipients than your personal experience.

Can you provide anything at all to back up your claim?

Padraig Mor

X111111111111 wrote: »

All declared. So what if it's little the rates the government set aren't my problem. If you don't like it vote in someone new

All declared me hoop. I'd hazard a guess there isn't a takeaway driver in the country paying tax. Just checked the other thread and what you said was "12k per year as a PAYE worker 16 hrs per week (very little tax on that), 6k social welfare per annum and about 11k per annum as a take away delivery driver 2 nights a week." Presumably given that you've separated out the 12k as a PAYE worker, and the 11k as a takeaway driver in that sentence it means that you are not, in fact, declaring the additional income.....which of course would additionally mean that you would have to pay bit more rent on your house (if you pay it - many don't).

How do you feel about the american multis and the rate of tax they pay?

Typical whataboutery from the ungrateful. So if the rates are "little" in your own personal case it's not your problem........but if it's little for MNCs then that's wrong?

MNCs pay the same 12.5% corporation tax rate as every company in the country so not sure what the problem is? Presumably you're referring to Ireland's active facilitation of tax evasion by MNCs in a complicated accounting practice which requires the connivance of other countries too? Hey, it's immoral and unethical, but if they're going to be siphoning that money through a compliant country anyway, may as well make it Ireland.