People like SF candidates but won't vote for SF

markodaly

maccored wrote: »

China built a hospital in 10 days and we instead sink billions into a hospital thats taking years. Calling that progress is just bollox

And this is the logic of your average populist voter.

China is an authoritarian state. They can build stuff like that quickly because there are no civil rights in China. Planning permision, what is that?

You may as well state that the Nazi's churned out lots of stuff for their war effort cheaply enough, as they had millions of people working as slave labour.

You want to save money, then gut the Civil Service and reform it.

markodaly

maccored wrote: »

i think you've missed my point

Which was?

markodaly

square ball wrote: »

Sinn Fein are proposing to build 100,000 homes at a cost of €6.5 billion. Can anyone explain to me how this could be possible in Ireland starting in 2020?

It isnt. Even SF themselves admit its not possible.

James Brown

Why always on the attack? Do you want a hug?

Idbatterim

the attacks on China here , lol ! This place is the other extreme, they can get nothing done or built. Hence fg we going to pay a high price

maccored

markodaly wrote: »

Which was?

go read back and work it out.

FrancieBrady

Idbatterim wrote: »

what? have you left this country? you think dublin is a big city?

Not particularly no.

It is too big for the east coast of a small island though. And too big or it's infrastructure and facilities and housing.

Edgware

Idbatterim wrote: »

the attacks on China here , lol ! This place is the other extreme, they can get nothing done or built. Hence fg we going to pay a high price

Michael Martin really understands the Chinese mentality. I understand that he even speaks Chinese

Idbatterim

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not particularly no.

It is too big for the east coast of a small island though. And too big or it's infrastructure and facilities and housing.

Yeah that would the the base when your infrastructure is over a hundred year old rail system that has barely changed and the Mickey Mouse luas. Continental cities Dublin’s size have several metro lines

Edgware

Idbatterim wrote: »

Yeah that would the the base when your infrastructure is over a hundred year old rail system that has barely changed and the Mickey Mouse luas. Continental cities Dublin’s size have several metro lines

Ya but they were able to do it without disrupting Na Fianna G.A.A. club which is in the Finance Ministers constituency

efanton

square ball wrote: »

Regardless it was started and finished within 8 days. It still shows how inept everyone in the children's hospital has been. How long it has taken and how far over budget it has been. Everyone involved in the project should be sacked and blacklisted from any public projects from the minister down.

Sinn Fein are proposing to build 100,000 homes at a cost of €6.5 billion. Can anyone explain to me how this could be possible in Ireland starting in 2020?

SF costing are based on a number of things, but being that they have been costed and verified by the department of finance, they have to be basically sound.

1. they are not building high end homes, so will be cheaper home than many developers are currently building, when they actually get round to building something.

2. the cost of land is not a factor in the cost. Sites are one of the biggest single costs of a home. SF intended to use land already owned by the state.

3. Material used in the construction of a home and the VAT added to them add up to a pretty hefty cost. Most materials would be charged at the standard tax rate of 23% and any services used in the construction also at 23%. Being that the government technically pays that back to itself these costs can be subtracted

4. A similar situation come with labour charges. Any labour costs would include a VAT charge as well as an income tax. A sub contractor offering services would also be charging 23% VAT for the services they provide.
These too could be subtracted, but obviously PRSI , levies ,etc couldn't as these probably go to separate funds and are not directly administrated by the minister of finance.

5. Planning charges, service connection fees (ESB, water, etc) again the government would be paying towards itself so these technically can be removed from the cost.

6. Stamp Duty. again a cost that would go straight back to the governments coffers

7. Profit. Developer are not and never have been a charitable organisation.
They have never been shy either of making sure they get a substantial profit.
This also can be removed for the total cost

8. This is the costing that I could see as being slightly dodgy. SF are proposing a 6.5 billion spend IN ADDITION to the exist government budget for housing. In theory it should be ok, but we know that SF polices will not be FG policies so there is a possibility that some of that existing FG budget for house building will not be there. Having said that it seems that SF are not intending to reduce overall tax take so in theory where tax returns disappears from one place they will be offset by tax return appearing elsewhere.



Add up all the above and it becomes a very hefty cost of a home. I have tried to find a cost breakdown for a typical home to actually see if I could calculate what all the above would typically cost in building a home, and then see if when all are subtracted they get down to the €65,000 cost per home.
I would imagine that it probably would be close although its more likely to be slightly higher

square ball

efanton wrote: »

SF costing are based on a number of things, but being that they have been costed and verified by the department of finance, they have to be basically sound.

1. they are not building high end homes, so will be cheaper home than many developers are currently building, when they actually get round to building something.

2. the cost of land is not a factor in the cost. Sites are one of the biggest single costs of a home. SF intended to use land already owned by the state.

3. Material used in the construction of a home and the VAT added to them add up to a pretty hefty cost. Most materials would be charged at the standard tax rate of 23% and any services used in the construction also at 23%. Being that the government technically pays that back to itself these costs can be subtracted

4. A similar situation come with labour charges. Any labour costs would include a VAT charge as well as an income tax. A sub contractor offering services would also be charging 23% VAT for the services they provide.
These too could be subtracted, but obviously PRSI , levies ,etc couldn't as these probably go to separate funds and are not directly administrated by the minister of finance.

5. Planning charges, service connection fees (ESB, water, etc) again the government would be paying towards itself so these technically can be removed from the cost.

6. Stamp Duty. again a cost that would go straight back to the governments coffers

7. Profit. Developer are not and never have been a charitable organisation.
They have never been shy either of making sure they get a substantial profit.
This also can be removed for the total cost

8. This is the costing that I could see as being slightly dodgy. SF are proposing a 6.5 billion spend IN ADDITION to the exist government budget for housing. In theory it should be ok, but we know that SF polices will not be FG policies so there is a possibility that some of that existing FG budget for house building will not be there. Having said that it seems that SF are not intending to reduce overall tax take so in theory where tax returns disappears from one place they will be offset by tax return appearing elsewhere.



Add up all the above and it becomes a very hefty cost of a home. I have tried to find a cost breakdown for a typical home to actually see if I could calculate what all the above would typically cost in building a home, and then see if when all are subtracted they get down to the €65,000 cost per home.
I would imagine that it probably would be close although its more likely to be slightly higher

1. Any state built houses have the same specs or even higher than most privately built houses. You hardly expect the people that are getting houses for free to be living in an inferior house than the guy that works and pays for it himself.

2. Sites are a big cost this is why developers buy bigger sites to build more houses as it reduces the cost per house.

3. So by that logic all publicly paid employee's eg: teachers, nurses, guards, etc can stop paying income tax to reduce the government wage bill.

4. See number three.

5. See number three.

6. And who would pay the difference to make up the shortfall caused by not charging this on most homes built?

7. Government ran projects are known for not wasting money or going over budget. Projects such as __________ and _____________ come the mind.

8. Sinn Fein are living in cloud cuckoo land if they think that they could even build half of that number of houses at double the cost even allowing to discount the costs you have mentioned above.

Granadino

Some of the SF candidates I could vote for, but I won't vote for SF as it stands. Too many shady characters still involved, questions still not answered etc, and once these are gone and the decks are cleared, then yes, I would consider it. All for a 32 county republic, though I wouldn't be a "nationalist". No I'm not FF or FG or Lab either.
Eoin O Broin and Pearse Doherty are admirable. But closer to home, I couldn't ever give Ferris or Quinlivan my vote.

If SF do well, good luck to them, and I'll get behind them. Let's see what they're made of.

mada999

Snow Garden wrote: »

Could Dobbo have been any less biased in that Mary Lou interview earlier?

he got stuck in for Mary Lou was well fit for him imo....

James Brown

I see the Independent has gone fully back to it's FF nest. The poor Journo's, FF for years, then FG now FF again.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I see the Independent has gone fully back to it's FF nest. The poor Journo's, FF for years, then FG now FF again.

You must be too young to remember the Irish Press, which for decades was the paper of the Soldiers of Destiny.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

You must be too young to remember the Irish Press, which for decades was the paper of the Soldiers of Destiny.

And so the Indo seems to be again, not when the majority shareholder, FG's pal was in though.
I on occasion mention De Valera and his using the Irish to make money through the fraudulent sale of 'shares' for the Press.

SantaCruz

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

To be fair to FF they did always spread work around the country, FG just lumbered everything into Cork and Dublin where the population was high and more constitutes , both cities especially Dublin is fit to bust now as a result

How did Fianna Failure 'spread work'??

If you're talking about 'decentralisation' of the civil service (the only jobs the government actually controls) it was a hugely expensive failure - another one for Fianna Fail's outstanding record.

https://www.independent.ie/life/moving-in-the-wrong-direction-the-decentralisation-debacle-35345392.html

As usual, Fianna Fail tried to use it as a pork-barrel exercise in buying votes (with voters' own money).

feargale

Anyone who aspires to a United Ireland would be crazy to vote SF. A referendum now, (which SF promises) will fail, and will push a UI back by 50 years. If the section of Protestant Ulster which is needed to push it over the line moves to a UI position they will come to that conclusion of their own accord. They will not be pestered into it. The less SF have to say about it the better. Those who point to polls showing a trend in NI would do well to ponder the Scottish referendum. Polls coming up to it suggested a yes vote. It didn't materialise on the day.

James Brown

FG would have us in the Commonwealth.

The Rape of Lucretia

Matt Barrett wrote: »

FG would have us in the Commonwealth.

A country should take every advantage available to it.

Bishop of hope

Matt Barrett wrote: »

FG would have us in the Commonwealth.

I doubt that now Matt. Your revisionism is a bit askew.

James Brown

Bishop of hope wrote: »

I doubt that now Matt. Your revisionism is a bit askew.

Having a joke Des.
I think they'll learn from the RIC/Tan debacle.

Bishop of hope

Yea, it's best to keep a bit of humor at times like this, there's enough sourpussed lads wondering on their political future out there.

rdwight

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I see the Independent has gone fully back to it's FF nest. The poor Journo's, FF for years, then FG now FF again.

The Indo was always the FG paper, possibly back to the 1920's. The first change from this that I remember was for the 1997 election when it ran a "It's Payback Time" headline and supported FF.

SEPT 23 1989

Vote Sinn Fein kids

This is the reality

maccored

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Vote Sinn Fein kids

This is the reality

thats disgraceful to be using things like that in a tit for tat internet debate. Nevermind it isnt relevant in any way to the Sinn Fein running for election.

How is a video showing how a republican funeral reacted to two undercover soldiers in the north 30 + years ago got anything at all to do with this election?

The barrel is well scraped at this stage.

SantaCruz

maccored wrote: »

How is a video showing how a republican funeral reacted to two undercover soldiers in the north 30 + years ago got anything at all to do with this election?

The barrel is well scraped at this stage.

Well do you think that Mary Lou would condemn the people who murdered those men?

Professor Moriarty

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Vote Sinn Fein kids

This is the reality

I won't be voting Sinn Féin but putting that video forward as a reason not to vote SF is ignorant at best. Read up on the context of that funeral.

James Brown

rdwight wrote: »

The Indo was always the FG paper, possibly back to the 1920's. The first change from this that I remember was for the 1997 election when it ran a "It's Payback Time" headline and supported FF.

O'Reilly was a FF man going by the paper for many years.