Is it fair to mix social housing with privately owned homes?

Idbatterim

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

No I don't agree with it at all.

Sorry.

Not paying 1k a month or so mortgage to live beside someone who pays what, 50 quid a week for the same property. NOPE.

Get back to me and defend it.

a thousand a month mortgage? LOL! Try two thousand a month and you are in the ball park. Houses up beside nutgrove shopping centre now, market rent easily two k plus for the working poor, twenty euro a week if bothered paying on social housing, no lpt, no management fee :rolleyes:

CPTM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

stop incentivising having kids as a route to free housing
stop enabling people to choose to live off the welfare state their entire lives
stop people being incentivised to choose social housing because even workers cant afford to live near their families in cities.
punish parents for being lax and expecting the state to raise their kids for them.

Agreed - But the electorate contains a growing number of voters which believe in free handouts. This will always be the case for as long as uneducated people have more children than educated people.

Those who can implement what you're talking about will therefore never get into power despite how much it makes sense. It's a bug in the democratic system. The sad thing is it's exponential, all those feral kids you see running around, littering and aggressively screaming at each other or strangers on the street (and that's on good days) will all have many kids of their own, while the number of children born from the working population will dwindle. Statistically speaking, this is as good as it gets!

Idbatterim

pjohnson wrote: »

Your reverting back to your right wing/FG roots again :pac:

the housing situation is a disgrace! but "renting " out a housing stock worth billions, for a few cents. While many working people are fcuked, is a big part of the problem and it is a moral disgrace, that point isnt even up for debate! (and yes, I am aware some people in social housing work...

Dorakman

Padre_Pio wrote: »

If your neighbours never bothered you and you never saw them, would you care?

I think it’s the principle of the scenario that bothers a lot of people.

Padre_Pio

Dorakman wrote: »

I think it’s the principle of the scenario that bothers a lot of people.

The argument has been done to death. I'm surprised this thread is still open.

I don't know why people bother. If it's so good, then why isn't everyone at it? Maybe because there's more to life than a house.

Calhoun

My understanding is the reason we mix people in society is to make sure we don't ghettoize our poorer in society and we have better integration. We only have to look at the Ballymun flats ect in years gone by for how bad it can get.

In theory it makes allot of sense but the thing with Ireland is we don't manage our social housing stock or tenants very well. So we let problems fester and get out of hand when they don't need to be.

So its not a matter of being fair as it make sense as society to do this but we must ensure that the right supports and monitoring is put in place.

CPTM

It would be great to see a reducing dole payout figure (with means testing), but the policy makers will be voted out if they go for it. The last thing we want is for that side of society to start voting - Sinn Fein would definitely have a majority then! It's better from a policy maker's perspective to keep that side of society happy enough not to vote, while trying to implement as many policies as possible to help those who work. That balance is hard and we saw that in the last election.

Edit.. Sorry for going off topic.

Spanish Eyes

Idbatterim wrote: »

a thousand a month mortgage? LOL! Try two thousand a month and you are in the ball park. Houses up beside nutgrove shopping centre now, market rent easily two k plus for the working poor, twenty euro a week if bothered paying on social housing, no lpt, no management fee :rolleyes:

I know. It is driving most of us paying through the nose independently absolutely mad, but no one can say it. But I will.

I detest this 20% rule. It makes a mockery of those who save and pay their own way.

So have I been banned now?

Dorakman

Calhoun wrote: »

My understanding is the reason we mix people in society is to make sure we don't ghettoize our poorer in society and we have better integration. We only have to look at the Ballymun flats ect in years gone by for how bad it can get.

In theory it makes allot of sense but the thing with Ireland is we don't manage our social housing stock or tenants very well. So we let problems fester and get out of hand when they don't need to be.

So its not a matter of being fair as it make sense as society to do this but we must ensure that the right supports and monitoring is put in place.

So it’s the people who are the problem?

endacl

I’d be all in favour of it if the conception of the ‘foweva home’ had never become a thing.

Foweva homes are for rescue dogs. Not for healthy adults who should aspire to pay their way.

Padre_Pio

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I know. It is driving most of us paying through the nose independently absolutely mad, but no one can say it. But I will.

I detest this 20% rule. It makes a mockery of those who save and pay their own way.

So have I been banned now?

Write to your TD. Ranting on the internet isn't going to change a thing.

Spanish Eyes

What is the latest figure for arrears of rent in social housing?

What are Councils doing about it?

Not much. Let those of us with a mortgage try to get away with a month's arrears and see what will happen.

The incentive is not there for social housing tenants is it? Has to be said.

Spanish Eyes

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Write to your TD. Ranting on the internet isn't going to change a thing.

They fought for this. Nothing to see here. And nothing will change their view either.

Calhoun

Dorakman wrote: »

So it’s the people who are the problem?

Yes and no, there are bad people who have taken support provided from the government and blackened the name of anyone who needs support. Just look at allot of the early responses to this thread, that is a product of the current system.

However they aren't solely responsible the local government who wash their hands of tenants as soon as they are housed regardless of what happens are the problem.

If we want a system that works we need to make sure it is managed correctly.

Dorakman

Calhoun wrote: »

Yes and no, there are bad people who have taken support provided from the government and blackened the name of anyone who needs support. Just look at allot of the early responses to this thread, that is a product of the current system.

However they aren't solely responsible the local government who wash their hands of tenants as soon as they are housed regardless of what happens are the problem.

If we want a system that works we need to make sure it is managed correctly.

Why not move troubled tenants to dedicated estates?

Padre_Pio

Calhoun wrote: »

Yes and no, there are bad people who have taken support provided from the government and blackened the name of anyone who needs support. Just look at allot of the early responses to this thread, that is a product of the current system.

However they aren't solely responsible the local government who wash their hands of tenants as soon as they are housed regardless of what happens are the problem.

If we want a system that works we need to make sure it is managed correctly.

It's a case of people taking advantage of a system, and the people in control of the system not giving a damn. We're not unique in this, it happens in every country.

But taking money away from people who've never worked won't make them work. It'll either make them destitute or criminals.
The government is happy to accept a level of non-participation in society. Complain to your TDs if you want this to change.

Dorakman wrote: »

Why not move troubled tenants to dedicated estates?

"Darndale: The Edge of Town"

Calhoun

Dorakman wrote: »

Why not move troubled tenants to dedicated estates?

That just builds ghettos and no-go areas. The only model im aware of that does similar is in the Netherlands where they have the container cities but I don't know how successful they are.

https://nltimes.nl/2014/05/09/container-town-rotterdams-worst-families

Dorakman

Padre_Pio wrote: »

It's a case of people taking advantage of a system, and the people in control of the system not giving a damn. We're not unique in this, it happens in every country.

But taking money away from people who've never worked won't make them work. It'll either make them destitute or criminals.
The government is happy to accept a level of non-participation in society. Complain to your TDs if you want this to change.



"Darndale: The Edge of Town"

Fine, move them there. Society shouldn’t have to suffer them.

Idbatterim

CPTM wrote: »

It would be great to see a reducing dole payout figure (with means testing), but the policy makers will be voted out if they go for it. The last thing we want is for that side of society to start voting - Sinn Fein would definitely have a majority then! It's better from a policy maker's perspective to keep that side of society happy enough not to vote, while trying to implement as many policies as possible to help those who work. That balance is hard and we saw that in the last election.

Edit.. Sorry for going off topic.

who is going to vote them out? FFG voters would be dolers in general. they lost a lot of seats, because a lot of people who would have voted for them before, are non homeowner workers , who are fcuked by the housing situation. Cant wait to see this next budget. If cutting it politically is difficult, it should be frozen for years and use any resources to help the ones that are broke and paying for this whole farce!

Padre_Pio

Dorakman wrote: »

Fine, move them there. Society shouldn’t have to suffer them.

Society is all the worse for them because of places like Darndale. Gangs start in places like this as it becomes a massive poverty trap with no escape.

Dorakman

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Society is all the worse for them because of places like Darndale. Gangs start in places like this as it becomes a massive poverty trap with no escape.

No it isn’t. I’ve no problem with Darndale. It keeps the problem isolated

twowheelsonly

Eric Cartman wrote: »

incorrect.

43,000 people of working age and not disabled have never made a single PRSI contribution , 62% of social housing applicants are only in receipt of welfare, 10% work only and 7% mix work and claiming welfare. If you are living beside somebody in social housing there is only a 10% chance they put in a full work day

Obviously I have no idea where you got those figures from but of the 43,000 how many are travelers ? How many are foreigners living in direct provision ? We have approx 30,000 travelers with roughly 60% 'of working age' and I'd imagine that of the 4.5 thousand living in DP the percentage is probably close enough to the same. Overall say 17 to 18 thousand. The remainder is not a huge number in the overall context of things. Probably a few 'silver spoons' in there as well of people who never had to work due to affluent families etc.

The last line I just point blank refuse to believe, based on what I see with my own eyes. Only 10% chance that they've put in a days work ? Not a hope in hell is that even close to true. I live in a predominantly Social Housing area (Mahon, in Cork) and even my lowest ballpark guess of people working would be 65% +, and that's being conservative.

The key word in your middle statement is Social Housing Applicants . Not all of them actually want a house but AFAIR you have to apply to be eligible for RA or HAP payments, hence the swollen numbers. Many will also be living comfortably at home but unfortunately there's some instances where once the child turns 18 they put their name down as they know that the waiting list is so long.

Padre_Pio

Dorakman wrote: »

No it isn’t. I’ve no problem with Darndale. It keeps the problem isolated

Since when?
People in Darndale are well able to travel outside Darndale.

Techold

The amount of long term unemployed appears low statistically. This is masked by government action some years ago to 'migrate' many of these people to other DSP schemes such as disability benefit,domiciliary care allowance etc. This made the unemployment figures to appear respectable. Many families collect these allowances while in perfect health.No proper DSP review of cases. All kids in some households are in receipt of these payments because they might have two hairs on their head growing in opposite directions.

Spanish Eyes

I would never buy a new build ever now.

Safer to buy in an established area where everyone knows the score. And I do realise that the council can buy houses in certain areas. But not beyond a certain level financially.

So that's me sorted ha fkn ha. Millionaire that I am lol.

Just in a nice area where the Council will not buy. Ordinary enough. Happy Days.

Calhoun

Techold wrote: »

The amount of long term unemployed appears low statistically. This is masked by government action some years ago to 'migrate' many of these people to other DSP schemes such as disability benefit,domiciliary care allowance etc. This made the unemployment figures to appear respectable. Many families collect these allowances while in perfect health.No proper DSP review of cases. All kids in some households are in receipt of these payments because they might have two hairs on their head growing in opposite directions.

Have you applied for the DCA? If so then you wouldn't be coming out with such ignorant statements.

I am not sure about the disabillity benefit but i can tell you the DCA isn't a walk in the park to get and parents that do get it require it because our taxes don't pay for services that vulnerable children need.

Padre_Pio

Padre_Pio wrote: »

The actual amount of dole lifers in the country is tiny.
We're at near full employment now. Once you take away the stay at home parents, people in between jobs and people who are out of work not by choice, there's very few people left who are on the dole for fun.

Most people getting HAP and houses are working too.


But when the only friends Jacinta's kids have are all from wealthy backgrounds, they're not going to consider mammy's dole life as a viable way forward.

Jesus theres always one. Were you in the short distance driving thread saying it doesn't rain much in Dublin?

Eric Cartman

twowheelsonly wrote: »

Obviously I have no idea where you got those figures from but of the 43,000 how many are travelers ? How many are foreigners living in direct provision ? We have approx 30,000 travelers with roughly 60% 'of working age' and I'd imagine that of the 4.5 thousand living in DP the percentage is probably close enough to the same. Overall say 17 to 18 thousand. The remainder is not a huge number in the overall context of things. Probably a few 'silver spoons' in there as well of people who never had to work due to affluent families etc.

The last line I just point blank refuse to believe, based on what I see with my own eyes. Only 10% chance that they've put in a days work ? Not a hope in hell is that even close to true. I live in a predominantly Social Housing area (Mahon, in Cork) and even my lowest ballpark guess of people working would be 65% +, and that's being conservative.

The key word in your middle statement is Social Housing Applicants . Not all of them actually want a house but AFAIR you have to apply to be eligible for RA or HAP payments, hence the swollen numbers. Many will also be living comfortably at home but unfortunately there's some instances where once the child turns 18 they put their name down as they know that the waiting list is so long.

Firstly it doesnt i clude those unable to work (direct provision) secondly this is the first time ive seen anyone throw travellers under the bus to defend those who have no interest in working .

“Not all of them want a house” what kind of statement is that, ofcourse they do

BanditLuke

Fred Cryton wrote: »

When will they learn, we are never going to "integrate". We're never going to have Jacinta over for dinner.

It's just a farce and a con. Why is this being forced upon us? They say it only takes one bad apple to ruin a barrel. Well why spread the bad apples among many barrels?? Put them all in the same barrel.

100% social on the far distant outskirts of the city with poor transportation into the city is the way forward. Out of sight and out of mind.

Maybe we should put stars of david on them just to be sure.

BanditLuke

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Yep.

They all have 201 Mercedes also oh oh and gold plated trampolines in the back gardens.