Is it just me or have SF vanished?

Redgirl82

markodaly wrote: »

In fairness, a lot of what you mentioned is fluff.

Going on about flags and parades as 'achievements' is kinda odd for a Western European political party.
Policing was agreed as part of the GFA and SF refused to endorse it for years, until they relented.
A hard border? SF did nothing on that front, you can thank FG for that, I know you won't be there you go.

It is notable though on the things you have not mentioned.

The big-ticket items, jobs, economy, housing, health, and education..... what are SF's achievements there? Feck all to be honest.

So, if all SF can do is point to success about flags and fluff about parades yet ignore, say the state of the health service, then you know they are in trouble.
This is why their vote share is falling, they think it's still the 90's.

Exactly, imagine it took two pages of posts to get to this fluff. So either he hasn't a clue or Sinn Fein record in the North is actually this poor.

Time to move on anyway, couldn't spend another day going around in circles

Bishop of hope

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This has what to do with a housing crisis.....facts stand,when we were on our knees as a country we could build social housing and clear tenaments

Now we are told we are rich,econmy a success,yet by last xmas,we had more homeless than at anytime since the famine.....we have lost our way,badly in terms of what is important

Societaly as well, long gone are the days the state or councils could hire on workers for f'all, build a shanty with a shed at the bottom of the garden for a toilet.
Our own expectations what is acceptable housing is a major factor.
Housing hasn't just increased in line with inflation, standards and expectations have gone through the roof (pun intended).
Slums were everywhere, in every town the length an breadth of Ireland, this was housing, a roof over your head, you weren't homeless but you lived in a hovel.

Redgirl82

Runaways wrote: »

On a moral and constitutional level we have completely lost our way

But the current position with exponential homelessness and repossessions is FG policy and somehow we keep letting them away with that

I would support higher rates of repossessions in Ireland, this would drive down mortgage rates for everyone else. Why should everyone suffer for the few.

Bishop of hope

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Societaly as well, long gone are the days the state or councils could hire on workers for f'all, build a shanty with a shed at the bottom of the garden for a toilet.
Our own expectations what is acceptable housing is a major factor.
Housing hasn't just increased in line with inflation, standards and expectations have gone through the roof (pun intended).
Slums were everywhere, in every town the length an breadth of Ireland, this was housing, a roof over your head, you weren't homeless but you lived in a hovel.

We need more housing built,including 1 and 2 bedroom units

I know of places,where families have been reared and moved out,parents left in 3/4 bedroom houses.....all the while we have others raising kids out of hotel rooms

Theres no sense to this,

nor is there any sense to building top-of-line A2 rated houses for corporation houses either.....if someone wants to live in luxery,let them buy their own,simple,modest houses is whats needed


(Love the username btw )

Redgirl82

jm08 wrote: »

Well what about actually doing something about collecting rent like evicting people if they don't.


Found some info on Dublin City Council about this:
https://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-city-council-5-4956180-Jan2020/


Looks like they need some proper legislation to deal with this such as taking rent money directly from social welfare payments and Eviction Legislation. From what I read, some tenants are trying it on because they think they can get away with it.


Still, there are plenty of families who are now living in hotel bedrooms who would be only too happy to rent a corporation house at a reasonable rate.

All those rent supplements cost money as well!

Put in law to collect rent at source. The money that is saved can then be reinvested in more affordable housing. Buying huge amounts of social housing should be restricted.

Redgirl82

Deleted User wrote: »

We need more housing built,including 1 and 2 bedroom units

I know of places,where families have been reared and moved out,parents left in 3/4 bedroom houses.....all the while we have others raising kids out of hotel rooms

Theres no sense to this,

nor is there any sense to building top-of-line A2 rated houses for corporation houses either.....if someone wants to live in luxery,let them buy their own,simple,modest houses is whats needed

This whole post makes no sense.

So someone spends 30 years paying for a house to be told they have to move out? so why would someone buy a house in first place if at the end of paying for it they have no control over it? you just killed the housing market

High rated houses cost less to heat, reduce our CO2 and make the house at a standard that it doesn't need to be upgraded in years to come. Why would you build lower quality houses? this is a baffling statement?

Redgirl82

Redgirl82 wrote: »

I would support higher rates of repossessions in Ireland, this would drive down mortgage rates for everyone else. Why should everyone suffer for the few.

Whats point in reposessing houses,if you have nowhere to rehouse the people??


Like,your going from person costing state zero to house to likely 12K approx a year?

Redgirl82

Redgirl82 wrote: »

This whole post makes no sense.

So someone spends 30 years paying for a house to be told they have to move out? so why would someone buy a house in first place if at the end of paying for it they have no control over it? you just killed the housing market

High rated houses cost less to heat, reduce our CO2 and make the house at a standard that it doesn't need to be upgraded in years to come. Why would you build lower quality houses? this is a baffling statement?

30 years paying for a corporation house??the state still owns it?

(You understand that the phrase "free house" is a misnomer,right?)


Mate,we have thousands if kids in homelessness now,kinda personally think thats a wee bit more important than wheter corporartion houses have under-floor heating

Let the top of line houses to the private sector (and more power to anyone,who wishes to buy them)

Redgirl82

Deleted User wrote: »

Whats point in reposessing houses,if you have nowhere to rehouse the people??


Like,your going from person costing state zero to house to likely 12K approx a year?

The rate of repossession is tiny. The amount of people with mortgages is high

Why should everyone pay for a few. We already have social housing available for these people. If you reduce the mortgage rate, increase affordable housing then you have a proper market.

Do you disagree?

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

Whats point in reposessing houses,if you have nowhere to rehouse the people??


Like,your going from person costing state zero to house to likely 12K approx a year?

As somebody said about a priest one time - he is all gate and no garden.

On rent arrears all redgirl's solution would achieve is a reduced take on 33 million owed and more people homeless. Same on mortgages.

Redgirl82

Deleted User wrote: »

30 years paying for a corporation house??the state still owns it?

(You understand that the phrase "free house" is a misnomer,right?)


Mate,we have thousands if kids in homelessness now,kinda personally think thats a wee bit more important than wheter corporartion houses have under-floor heating

Let the top of line houses to the private sector (and more power to anyone,who wishes to buy them)

As I said baffling....you build low quality social housing and then spend a fortune paying to heat them because the tenant can't heat then. Genius plan.

Runaways

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Whats point in reposessing houses,if you have nowhere to rehouse the people??


Like,your going from person costing state zero to house to likely 12K approx a year?

This one is taking the Mickey at this point searching furiously for the ignore button right now

Redgirl82

Redgirl82 wrote: »

The rate of repossession is tiny. The amount of people with mortgages is high

Why should everyone pay for a few. We already have social housing available for these people. If you reduce the mortgage rate, increase affordable housing then you have a proper market.

Do you disagree?

We dont have social housing,theres more homeless than anytime since the famine??


Affordable housing,simply isnt there at the min,theres also larger questions to be had/answered about why issues,such as housing need to be in a market....its a falsehood that has bankrupted the state already once in my lifetime,

Bishop of hope

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We need more housing built,including 1 and 2 bedroom units

I know of places,where families have been reared and moved out,parents left in 3/4 bedroom houses.....all the while we have others raising kids out of hotel rooms

Theres no sense to this,

nor is there any sense to building top-of-line A2 rated houses for corporation houses either.....if someone wants to live in luxery,let them buy their own,simple,modest houses is whats needed


(Love the username btw )

Tnx.
But they won't except simple modest houses.
There's a three bed council house up the road from me, detached on its own site, rural, idle for two years. They've been unable to find a Tennant who will accept it since the previous owners have now passed away. It was built in the eighties. Grand little modest cottage.

Redgirl82

Redgirl82 wrote: »

As I said baffling....you build low quality social housing and then spend a fortune paying to heat them because the tenant can't heat then. Genius plan.

The house at home is roughly B3 rated,last winter it cost my folks a total of 450 euro to heat it

Like your berating people for suggesting under-floor heating isnt needed in council houses,

while demanding others be evicted,(into what will likely be higher standrd accomandation,if you get your way?)

Bishop of hope

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Tnx.
But they won't except simple modest houses.
There's a three bed council house up the road from me, detached on its own site, rural, idle for two years. They've been unable to find a Tennant who will accept it since the previous owners have now passed away. It was built in the eighties. Grand little modest cottage.

Tbh this also needs to stop and people grab a hold of emselves

Their getting houses at well below usual rate,id be ashamed to bring up a kid in a hotel room,and pass up a modest house (if i was on housing list)

Redgirl82

Runaways wrote: »

This one is taking the Mickey at this point searching furiously for the ignore button right now

If you can't find the ignore button then no help for you at all

But I am sure we are all grateful that you told us that.

Redgirl82

Deleted User wrote: »

The house at home is roughly B3 rated,last winter it cost my folks a total of 450 euro to heat it

Like your berating people for suggesting under-floor heating isnt needed in council houses,

while demanding others be evicted,(into what will likely be higher standrd accomandation,if you get your way?)

When did I mention under-floor heating?

Berate? ahh poor baby. Not my fault you post stupid ideas.

Redgirl82

FrancieBrady wrote: »

As somebody said about a priest one time - he is all gate and no garden.

On rent arrears all redgirl's solution would achieve is a reduced take on 33 million owed and more people homeless. Same on mortgages.

Ahh your back, another busy day?

Maybe read my posts. Come back to me then.

atticu

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Mate,we have thousands if kids in homelessness now,kinda personally think thats a wee bit more important than wheter corporartion houses have under-floor heating

Let the top of line houses to the private sector (and more power to anyone,who wishes to buy them)

Why are homeless people having children if they are homeless?

Don’t you think it would be better for them to get themselves into steady employment and into suitable accommodation before having children?

Unless you think that the situation they have got themselves into is somehow someone else’s fault.

Redgirl82

Redgirl82 wrote: »

When did I mention under-floor heating?

Berate? ahh poor baby. Not my fault you post stupid ideas.

You do know,what A2 energy rating amounts too??.....ive mates who have built houses to this spec in last year or 2



Its nice and all,but imo,there no need to build corporation houses to that spec,

Basic,modest houses is all anyone wants/asks for

FrancieBrady

Redgirl82 wrote: »

Ahh your back, another busy day?

Maybe read my posts. Come back to me then.

I did. All your 'solutions' will achieve is a reduced take in rent and more people without homes.

atticu

atticu wrote: »

Why are homeless people having children if they are homeless?

Don’t you think it would be better for them to get themselves into steady employment and into suitable accommodation before having children?

Unless you think that the situation they have got themselves into is somehow someone else’s fault.

I know people,who.have had kids and lost their homes (including one,who is in a violent relationship,but cant registar for homelessness help)

Peoples circumstances change,??

Never said it was anyones fault,but jesus standing about giving out to people,while expecting them to raise kids out of hotel rooms,seems a waste of time to me anyway

Redgirl82

Deleted User wrote: »

You do know,what A2 energy rating amounts too??.....ive mates who have built houses to this spec in last year or 2



Its nice and all,but imo,there no need to build corporation houses to that spec,

Basic,modest houses is all anyone wants/asks for

Yes, sure you have mates who built houses. I have a son who is 16. He posts exactly the same as you.

You don't seem to understand the maths. Building lower cost houses cost more over the life of the house. Plus at the moment we have a CO2 problem, lower quality housing will just increase CO2. Also the government are pushing everyone to build high rated houses, would look stupid if they go and build low quality.

THe investment now in higher quality house will mean reduced costs in the future, makes perfect sense.

Redgirl82

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I did. All your 'solutions' will achieve is a reduced take in rent and more people without homes.

Off we go again. Another day of pages of post from Francie with no information. Maybe let the adults have a discussion and read, you might learn something. Then add something to the conversation, not push up your post count?

Are you been paid to post or something? I heard of online Sinn Fein team, are you one? is that allowed here?

Redgirl82

Redgirl82 wrote: »

Yes, sure you have mates who built houses. I have a son who is 16. He posts exactly the same as you.

You don't seem to understand the maths. Building lower cost houses cost more over the life of the house. Plus at the moment we have a CO2 problem, lower quality housing will just increase CO2. Also the government are pushing everyone to build high rated houses, would look stupid if they go and build low quality.

THe investment now in higher quality house will mean reduced costs in the future, makes perfect sense.

Im well past 16,kid....looking at building myself in 2-3 years,(well past hearing about heat recoveries etc )

Im not at fault for you not being aware of what A2 spec amounts to and demanding council houses be built to it


They arent building any of these higher spec housing though??,

the world likely has never been better in last 200 years for CO2 with this lockdown......lads thinking putting underfloor heating into council housrs is gonna save the planet are pure and utter deluded

FrancieBrady

Redgirl82 wrote: »

Off we go again. Another day of pages of post from Francie with no information. Maybe let the adults have a discussion and read, you might learn something. Then add something to the conversation, not push up your post count?

Are you been paid to post or something? I heard of online Sinn Fein team, are you one? is that allowed here?

I responded to all your questions. I posted an answer to your solution to 'rent arrears', you ignored it, like you ignored my listing of SF's achievements...you pretended that because you couldn't find them on google that they never happened.
Then you dare to pretend you have an 'adult' approach to debate. You have set yourself up as some kind of mod for the thread and are beginning to annoy other posters as well.
If you could stop the invective and amateur modding and address points by refuting their content, that would be good.

overkill602

for SOME the homeless thing is a game, it not really there fault the system allows, a hotel for 3 year throw in a sprog or 2 maybe a good photo op, bingo...
location and spec sorted as good as some clown who works and pays a mortgage could even be neighbours.
Its socialism got to love it..

FrancieBrady

overkill602 wrote: »

for SOME the homeless thing is a game, it not really there fault the system allows, a hotel for 3 year throw in a sprog or 2 maybe a good photo op, bingo...
location and spec sorted as good as some clown who works and pays a mortgage could even be neighbours.
Its socialism got to love it..

I agree there are some who abuse the system, all systems are abused.
Solving those abuses will go some way to solving the overall issues but won't come near doing that on their own.
It's far too easy to start targeting sections and coming the dictator.

mattser

Redgirl82 wrote: »

Off we go again. Another day of pages of post from Francie with no information. Maybe let the adults have a discussion and read, you might learn something. Then add something to the conversation, not push up your post count?

Are you been paid to post or something? I heard of online Sinn Fein team, are you one? is that allowed here?

Nice to see someone looking past their veneer. Fact is they have achieved nothing , as you rightly say. And they're spooked by the thoughts of responsibility.
Wasting your time.