"None of our children on the list are getting these houses"

str8talkingguy

Gatling wrote: »

Point A - exactly doesn't stop them though.

Point B- everything I said is true and yes I and many ,many others sweat our balls off to keep others in council housing ,hotels ,designer gear ,cars and holidays due to their lifestyle choices and their childhood goal of getting a 4eva home off the council like their mother's did and their mothers before them.

When will people like you realize you "sweat your balls off" to send your money upwards to the bankers and elites.But you obviously know that as do most posters its not hard to see the truth,but keep blinding yourself from the obvious and blame the people worse off than you.

Designer gear and fancy cars are for the guys selling you your white that you probably have no qualms about sticking up your nose at the weekends without asking whos pockets your lining.

Gatling

AulWan wrote: »

Blah, blah, blah.

Naive .

Keep your bs pity or whatever your nonsense you claim

Gatling

str8talkingguy wrote: »

When will people like you realize you "sweat your balls off" to send your money upwards to the bankers and elites.

Oh it's the banks fault now not the gubbemunt for not giving prosecco or Beyonce more free stuff .



Go back to bed

AulWan

Gatling wrote: »

Naive .

Keep your bs pity or whatever your nonsense you claim

So you keep saying.

But as has been pointed out more then once, just because you believe something, doesn't make it so.

Night now!

Idbatterim

J_1980 wrote: »

Can’t hear that term “vulnerable” anymore....
Poor life choices, fecklessness, and “everything for free attitude” more like.
I actually want another recession like 2008/12, purely to put a final nail into that welfare sponging coffin. Troika didn’t do their job last time around.

I'm sick of hearing the term too! There are very very few here actually vulnerable of adult age, the mentally disabled etc fair enough. Those working people struggling to keep a roof over their head or who have lost it, fair enough. But I am passed the point of caring about people who have made lifestyle choices, based admittedly on monkey see, monkey do and RTE banging on about the "vulneable". The fckuing gall of hearing about people in social housing being vulnerable etc, free roof over your head, you are a hell of a lot vulnerable here than most if thats your situation!

BanditLuke

Idbatterim wrote: »

I'm sick of hearing the term too! There are very very few here actually vulnerable of adult age, the mentally disabled etc fair enough. Those working people struggling to keep a roof over their head or who have lost it, fair enough. But I am passed the point of caring about people who have made lifestyle choices, based admittedly on monkey see, monkey do and RTE banging on about the "vulneable". The fckuing gall of hearing about people in social housing being vulnerable etc, free roof over your head, you are a hell of a lot vulnerable here than most if thats your situation!

Social housing isn't free.

suicide_circus

BanditLuke wrote: »

Social housing isn't free.

correct. the tax payers foot that bill.

Antares35

BanditLuke wrote: »

Social housing isn't free.

It might as well be given how much they pay for it.

Kivaro

Antares35 wrote: »

It might as well be given how much they pay for it.

Or not pay for it ..... according to the recent figures on those who default on their paltry payments.

blanch152

BanditLuke wrote: »

Social housing isn't free.

For most who get it, it practically is free.

end of the road

suicide_circus wrote: »

correct. the tax payers foot that bill.

that is why it is called subsidized housing.
it is not free as rent is required to be paid.
people not paying stil doesn't make it free as they are obligated to pay it.

str8talkingguy

suicide_circus wrote: »

correct. the tax payers foot that bill.

What about Corona Virus,how much you think this is gonna cost the taxpayer shutting down schools,contacting all these people,news conferences every few minutes,whos paying for all this?

Off course the governments are doing it because they care.But they dont seem to care about homeless or spending some money locking up gangsters who are terrorizing the country and make no mistake crime statistics is all about money,when they wanted the people for the Lunney kidnapping they got them.

But no,lets lockdown the country and throw all the taxpayer money at the WHO doctors for a virus that has killed 3000 people out of how many billion on the planet.

Its just another case of taxer payer money going upwards as it always does,while us fools fall again for more rubbish and keep infighting.

Gatling

BanditLuke wrote: »

Social housing isn't free.

For thousands it is .

Where else can you rent a house for €12 pw and complain you can't afford it

GreeBo

BanditLuke wrote: »

There are no free houses. Everybody in council housing pays rent to the council based on their earnings including me. You know this yet you continue to bring up "free housing".

If you are receiving more from the government than you are paying out, then you are getting a free house.

If they only reason you are paying €200/month rent is because the government is handing you the €200 a month so you can send it back, thats hardly paying your way.

Deebles McBeebles

end of the road wrote: »

that is why it is called subsidized housing.
it is not free as rent is required to be paid.
people not paying stil doesn't make it free as they are obligated to pay it.

Obligated and required do not pay the rent. The latest idea seems to be to pay private companies to collect unpaid rent, which again, will cost the taxpayer. So we are subsidizing on the double. I'm not saying its the biggest problem we face in Ireland but it certainly is irritating when people who work all week are less well off than people who have chosen not to. And they are better off, short term at least.

J_1980

Hopefully the Coronavirus will accelerate the demise of the Western welfare state. Personally I don’t think we are ripe for a recession yet, but maybe this way the central banks (interest rates, QE) and government (stimulus) waste all their firepower so in 2022 or whenever the demand recession strikes there’s nothing left but budget cuts.
The Asian economies are just too competitive for the West, the “cheap money” tapering over will eventually run out of steam.

GreeBo

str8talkingguy wrote: »

When will people like you realize you "sweat your balls off" to send your money upwards to the bankers and elites.But you obviously know that as do most posters its not hard to see the truth,but keep blinding yourself from the obvious and blame the people worse off than you.

Designer gear and fancy cars are for the guys selling you your white that you probably have no qualms about sticking up your nose at the weekends without asking whos pockets your lining.

Seriously?
Fat cat bankers are to blame again?

BanditLuke

suicide_circus wrote: »

correct. the tax payers foot that bill.

Yes and social housing residents are tax payers as well as paying rent on the property.

Regards, Luke

BanditLuke

Antares35 wrote: »

It might as well be given how much they pay for it.

We pay a percentage of rent based on both our earnings. A fair price and not the fault of the social tenent if the private housing sector is a disaster.

Regards, Luke

str8talkingguy

GreeBo wrote: »

Seriously?
Fat cat bankers are to blame again?

So you really genuinely think they are not?we had less homeless in the 70s when we supposedly hadn't a pot to piss in and were backward uneducated morons,now we are first world educated morons with even less than we had before,but no definitely nothing got to do with the debt we service.

Gatling

BanditLuke wrote: »

We pay a percentage of rent based on both our earnings. A fair price

Probably less than 4k pa .

So at current market value you pay 2 months rent and live the other 10 months of the year free

end of the road

GreeBo wrote: »

If you are receiving more from the government than you are paying out, then you are getting a free house.

If they only reason you are paying €200/month rent is because the government is handing you the €200 a month so you can send it back, thats hardly paying your way.

it's a subsidized house not a free house.
for it to be a free house, no payment by anyone in any form would be required.
payment is required by the tenant, and the rest is subsidized by the tax payer.
we all get our money from someone else at the end of the day.

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Obligated and required do not pay the rent. The latest idea seems to be to pay private companies to collect unpaid rent, which again, will cost the taxpayer. So we are subsidizing on the double. I'm not saying its the biggest problem we face in Ireland but it certainly is irritating when people who work all week are less well off than people who have chosen not to. And they are better off, short term at least.

agreed.
instead of wasting money on some private company, the councils need to be able to take the money at source themselves from non-payers. that really seems to me to be the most cost effective way to do it and will guarantee full collection.

J_1980 wrote: »

Hopefully the Coronavirus will accelerate the demise of the Western welfare state. Personally I don’t think we are ripe for a recession yet, but maybe this way the central banks (interest rates, QE) and government (stimulus) waste all their firepower so in 2022 or whenever the demand recession strikes there’s nothing left but budget cuts.
The Asian economies are just too competitive for the West, the “cheap money” tapering over will eventually run out of steam.

the western non-wellfare state but state that provides supports to those deemed to be in need, is unlikely to go anywhere fast.
not at least until something is found to give the same supports and not cause issues, at less cost.
so far to my knowledge that hasn't been found.

Antares35

BanditLuke wrote: »

We pay a percentage of rent based on both our earnings. A fair price and not the fault of the social tenent if the private housing sector is a disaster.

Regards, Luke

And what percentage of the market monthly rent would that be? Other tenants don't have that cushy clause about only being able to "pay what they can afford based on their income". It isn't their fault either.

Deebles McBeebles

BanditLuke wrote: »

We pay a percentage of rent based on both our earnings. A fair price and not the fault of the social tenent if the private housing sector is a disaster.

Regards, Luke

Can't speak for anyone else but personally if you are able to do so and are working and paying your rent, I have no problem with that. I doubt many do.

Deebles McBeebles

end of the road wrote: »

agreed.
instead of wasting money on some private company, the councils need to be able to take the money at source themselves from non-payers. that really seems to me to be the most cost effective way to do it and will guarantee full collection.

In a perfect world, absolutely but councils all over the country have shown an inability to do this. As it stands, it's cheaper to just let people continue not to pay than to enforce it in any decent way. It should irritate working and rent-compliant people in social housing too, they pay their way, while the scrounging class do not.

gibgodsman

I grew up in Mulhurddart, right beside the site basically, literally everyone that lives in that area, that sticks around anyway, are free loaders who will never contribute anything to anyone. Some of my family still live there, none below the age of 50 anyway, and they would agree with that statement.

The entire place sticks of anti working attitude, riddled with drugs, criminal activity and basic scumbaggery. A few immigrants might actually brighten the place up for once, because its just gone more and more downhill with the additional social housing that was build over the years

GreeBo

end of the road wrote: »

it's a subsidized house not a free house.
for it to be a free house, no payment by anyone in any form would be required.
payment is required by the tenant, and the rest is subsidized by the tax payer.
we all get our money from someone else at the end of the day.

Susbsidized means that they full value is not paid to the owner.
However, if the portion that is paid to the owner is also sourced from the owner then yes, the house is free.

Yes we all get money from someone else, most of us just do something to earn that. We typically call it work.

Idbatterim

look, big business is not shouldering its "fair share", but its outrageous that hundreds of thousands in social housing, are paying near nothing and benefitting from a ridiculous system, when the lack of rent they are paying, massively hampers providing more social and affordable housing. Its morally corrupt. I dont care what way its spun!

J_1980

str8talkingguy wrote: »

So you really genuinely think they are not?we had less homeless in the 70s when we supposedly hadn't a pot to piss in and were backward uneducated morons,now we are first world educated morons with even less than we had before,but no definitely nothing got to do with the debt we service.

The banker caused a 40bn bailout.
Where did the other 120bn of debt come from? Excessive welfare, PS pensions etc.

And these 120bn will happen again come next recession. €340bn debr sounds about right for paddy and his children and grandchildren. Luckily I have a UK passport

Idbatterim

J_1980 wrote: »

The banker caused a 40bn bailout.
Where did the other 120bn of debt come from? Excessive welfare, PS pensions etc

you also have to have a banking system. Look I dont agree with the bailout of anglo etc, what happened is morally corrput. But its over, its done. This excessive welfare and poverty trap it creates, is unacceptable!

if money needs to be raised to pay for this new housing, it should start with existing social housing rents and lack of payments. In fact, I would create a new body, that is run by a new authority, the local councils are pathetic. Outsource a lot of its operation to the private sector, who are actually good at what they do... Like revenue collection and actually building more stock. It would be a very safe bet for developers, with the state as the buyer...