If there was an election tomorrow, how would you vote?

landofthetree

FG increased public spending by 13 billion per year since 2016.

An insane amount.

The other parties want to spend more. Even Europe was egging FG to spend more.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/business/irish/start-acting-like-a-rich-country-ibec-and-eu-call-for-infrastructure-38993983.html

The whole system is one big joke.

We need to reduce taxes,spend less and reform public services.

James Brown

landofthetree wrote: »

FG increased public spending by 13 billion per year since 2016.

An insane amount.

The other parties want to spend more. Even Europe was egging FG to spend more.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/business/irish/start-acting-like-a-rich-country-ibec-and-eu-call-for-infrastructure-38993983.html

The whole system is one big joke.

We need to reduce taxes,spend less and reform public services.

Spending on 25 year leases for social housing rather than building social housing might be a start.
Not using the same off shore contractor for mobile, water metering, broadband, hospital beds, might be another.

Spending our money on good deals rather than sweet, Holding incompetent ministers to account would be nice too.

Any system is only as good as those running it.
I once voted for a party ran on 'change the way we do business', but that was a con.

landofthetree

Bowie wrote: »

Spending on 25 year leases for social housing rather than building social housing might be a start.
Not using the same off shore contractor for mobile, water metering, broadband, hospital beds, might be another.

Spending our money on good deals rather than sweet, Holding incompetent ministers to account would be nice too.

Any system is only as good as those running it.
I once voted for a party ran on 'change the way we do business', but that was a con.

Social housing is too expensive. It costs a fortune to be maintained.

Even the Nordic countries have stop building them.

padd b1975

Lyan wrote: »

lol Sinn-tards once in a lifetime election victory killed by Corona. I'll be voting for the blue shirts next. Heil O'Duffy and may covid reign long.

You have to be eighteen to vote.

James Brown

landofthetree wrote: »

Social housing is too expensive. It costs a fortune to be maintained.

Even the Nordic countries have stop building them.

All I can tell you is matters were/are made worse with the current model.
Everything is open to adjustment. Putting private concerns above the tax payer isn't trickling down anything but blame and bills.

We need a government that treats everyone equally not looking after vested interests and treating the majority like an inconvenience to be fobbed off or ignored.

LeinsterDub

landofthetree wrote: »

Social housing is too expensive. It costs a fortune to be maintained.

Even the Nordic countries have stop building them.

Not building social housing is even more expensive as we've seen

RandomViewer

If we have another election my only suggestion is that none of the current TD s should be allowed run. Clean sweep, New blood ,

landofthetree

landofthetree wrote: »

Social housing is too expensive. It costs a fortune to be maintained.

Even the Nordic countries have stop building them.

This is never, ever mentioned in the cost of social housing for some reason.

I think we do need social housing though.

I voted for one of the smaller parties, would probably stick with them.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

This is never, ever mentioned in the cost of social housing for some reason.

I think we do need social housing though.

I voted for one of the smaller parties, would probably stick with them.

Any maintenance can be discussed, who is obliged to do what etc. They have tenancy agreements. As with any arrears these can be addressed.
Also you still have housing stock after 25 years, unlike with leasing.
What we do know is leasing and renting from private concerns doesn't seem to be helping. Value for money should be the goal.

Bowie

Bowie wrote: »

Any maintenance can be discussed, who is obliged to do what etc. They have tenancy agreements. As with any arrears these can be addressed.
Also you still have housing stock after 25 years, unlike with leasing.
What we do know is leasing and renting from private concerns doesn't seem to be helping. Value for money should be the goal.

I dunno, DCC is owed 33 million in back rent alone, that's before they spend anything on maintenance. The current system clearly needs work, imo.

Mad_maxx

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Not building social housing is even more expensive as we've seen

paying rent in social housing is optional which makes it very expensive indeed

at least by outsourcing it to the private sector , the fool who owns the house gets to deal with the deadbeat tenant and fix the house whenever need be

add to that the tax take from the private rental sector is very high

the current model is the cheaper option , local authorities have no interest in being in the business of managing properties if they can avoid it

Mad_maxx

Deleted User wrote: »

I dunno, DCC is owed 33 million in back rent alone, that's before they spend anything on maintenance. The current system clearly needs work, imo.

SF, PBP , plus the likes of Fr Peter Mc Verry from the poverty industry , oppose all evictions so moral hazard is rife

ILoveYourVibes

No idea.

Mad_maxx

Mad_maxx wrote: »

SF, PBP , plus the likes of Fr Peter Mc Verry from the poverty industry , oppose all evictions so moral hazard is rife

It's definitely an issue. I've asked a few hard left people how they would deal with people who refuse to pay their rent on social housing and most don't really have a plan for it.

ILoveYourVibes

Savecoronabeer wrote: »

I'd vote for Sein Fein. I've never had an interest in voting for them but someone always brings them up in a facebook, reddit or boards post constantly so there must be some good to them.

I've been considering it.

The only thing is the lack of intellectual freedom.

You can't criticize them or their followers shut you down. Its putting me off.

There is no room for debate. There is no room for criticism and personal opinion.

LeinsterDub

Mad_maxx wrote: »

paying rent in social housing is optional which makes it very expensive indeed

at least by outsourcing it to the private sector , the fool who owns the house gets to deal with the deadbeat tenant and fix the house whenever need be

add to that the tax take from the private rental sector is very high

the current model is the cheaper option , local authorities have no interest in being in the business of managing properties if they can avoid it

Simple solution take rent at source. Also not having a functional social housing system costs us all by hyper inflating the price of property

LeinsterDub

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I dunno, DCC is owed 33 million in back rent alone, that's before they spend anything on maintenance. The current system clearly needs work, imo.

They are owed more in back rates. Back rent is such a simple solution you'd have to wonder why it hasn't been implemented. Take rents at source

LeinsterDub

Mad_maxx wrote: »

SF, PBP , plus the likes of Fr Peter Mc Verry from the poverty industry , oppose all evictions so moral hazard is rife

'The poverty industry'!

That's one of the most discussing posts I've ever read on here about. He's a man who dedicated his life to help the poor

Prob sf/indos (no soc dems,where i am)

,though might spoil vote.....was on brink of spoiling last time!!

LeinsterDub

LeinsterDub wrote: »

They are owed more in back rates. Back rent is such a simple solution you'd have to wonder why it hasn't been implemented. Take rents at source

Will be a cold, cold day in hell before politicians take rent money directly from the dole or from lower income earners, rightly so imo.

LeinsterDub

Why rightly so?

LeinsterDub

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Why rightly so?

Just don't think the money is there in the dole to take a % of it away.

Mad_maxx

Deleted User wrote: »

It's definitely an issue. I've asked a few hard left people how they would deal with people who refuse to pay their rent on social housing and most don't really have a plan for it.

doubt those were hard left

the hard left ( ruth coppinger left ) want all property state owned so rent would not exist at all

BanditLuke

SF

SouthWesterly

RandomViewer wrote: »

If we have another election my only suggestion is that none of the current TD s should be allowed run. Clean sweep, New blood ,

That would work.. not.
A government with absolutely no experience of governing.

Idbatterim

doylefe wrote: »

FG obviously. The only sensible party we have, and on the correct side of the political spectrum.

Only slightly to the left?

Idbatterim

Is vote joe exotic? He'd love Leo!

Blueshoe

Mattie McGrath is your man. If he can't do it nobody can.
Go Mattie

OttoPilot

Professional in mid 20s. Voted SD last two elections but will switch to SF next time. Not happy with housing or healthcare

Yurt2

OttoPilot wrote: »

Professional in mid 20s. Voted SD last two elections but will switch to SF next time. Not happy with housing or healthcare

^^^^^
People should probably start listening up to what this demographic is saying: mid-20s often stretching to late-30s. Bust their ass before, during and after the financial crisis only to be equated to Margret Cash for questioning why in a booming economy they are dealing with runaway rents and house-prices, can't afford to start a family and are actively mocked by the 'I'm alright Jack' and 'that's just the way it is' cohort. They grow in number by the year but some people can only talk about Venezuela.

The next phase of their career / lives will be marked by the covid-19 downturn. A good lot of these people will have dealt with two of the worst economic crises since the Great Depression in what should be the prime of their working lives and at a time when social mobility should be at its greatest.

Political parties should p*ss down the leg of this demographic at their peril (as FG did and found out to their cost).

But yeah, Margret Cash is where this is all at.