Rathgar council tenants in luxury apartments claim discrimination over facilities

Normal One

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Its what true socialism is though. Everyone gets a luxury house.

This attitude is nothing more than begrudgery and jealousy.

Everyone, except those in the 30-100k bracket who are paying for everything. It's not jealousy, it's anger at breaking your bollix working every day while some people get everything handed to them for nothing.

malinheader

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

How?

Listen I think you know how but I will try and make this simple for you.
John and Mary buy a house for 450,000.ok.
Paddy and candice get the house for nothing next door.
Paddy and candice let the house run into disrepair, total mess outside.

now. John and Mary want to sell.
How much will John and Mary get now.

thomas 123

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

What is the monthly council rent for THESE particular luxury apartments then?

Shouldn't we KNOW this before we claim we can judge?

No - my point(judgment) is they shouldn’t be in there at all.

ILoveYourVibes

malinheader wrote: »

Listen I think you know how but I will try and make this simple for you.
John and Mary buy a house for 450,000.ok.
Paddy and candice get the house for nothing next door.
Paddy and candice let the house run into disrepair, total mess outside.

now. John and Mary want to sell.
How much will John and Mary get now.

John Mary need to wise up and stop making bad investments then.

Why buy into mixed housing ..no one forced you to.

Omackeral

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I work because i like what i am doing.

If you are not happy with your life. Change it.

What does this even mean? Absolutely manure. The issue isn’t whether or not someone likes their job. It’s that they’re putting in graft to get good things, things they’ve worked for. I’m not saying people don’t deserve a helping hand when it’s needed but at the same time there has to be incentive and payoff for a bit of hard work and determination. Why would anyone bother if everyone just gets the same. Sounds a bit communist!

ILoveYourVibes

thomas 123 wrote: »

No - my point(judgment) is they shouldn’t be in there at all.

No one is forcing people to BUY into these apartments.

However if you refuse social housing you get pushed down the lift ..i am told anyway.

thomas 123

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

John Mary need to wise up and stop making bad investments then.

Why buy into mixed housing ..no one forced you to.

Do you know it’s a requirement for new developments?

So yes people are being forced.

Feisar

cannotlogin wrote: »

I would absolutely love an apartment there but I work, earn well above the average industrial wage and cannot afford one.

If they don't let the fact they can't use the gym in their free luxury gaff, then maybe they should house themselves.

I'm all for supporting those who need it but somewhere along the way the government have lots the plot. Surely a basic property would suffice and would be much more cost effectively. Instead first time buyers are continually priced out of nice areas as the government/social housing sector buy up the stock and drive prices up.

Some many people commuting daily whereas others can sit on their backside, do feck all but still complain about it. It's time for this to turn. What is the point in working when it pays so well not to?

A general strike is in order.

ILoveYourVibes

Omackeral wrote: »

What does this even mean? Absolutely manure. The issue isn’t whether or not someone likes their job. It’s that they’re putting in graft to get good things, things they’ve worked for. I’m not saying people don’t deserve a helping hand when it’s needed but at the same time there has to be incentive and payoff for a bit of hard work and determination. Why would anyone bother if everyone just gets the same. Sounds a bit communist!

The issue is about bitter people unhappy with their lives.

They need to feel better about themselves by pushing others out of a space they keep for themselves.

Even tho ..this doesn't actually make them richer.

Its sad.

I've not gotten anything from anyone. I struggled to make a life i enjoy. No one helped me. Thankfully i am happy enough that i don't feel the only way i can make my life better is to push others down.

ILoveYourVibes

thomas 123 wrote: »

Do you know it’s a requirement for new developments?

So yes people are being forced.

No one is forcing people to build luxury complexes.

There is a housing crisis you know.

Omackeral

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Its what true socialism is though. Everyone gets a luxury house.

This attitude is nothing more than begrudgery and jealousy.

Begrudgery is painted as such a negative word these days and it’s a lazy response. You’re damn right I’d begrudge someone getting a luxury house if they’ve never lifted a finger in their life, while most of us are up and out before it gets bright and home when it’s dark.

ILoveYourVibes

Omackeral wrote: »

Begrudgery is painted as such a negative word these days and it’s a lazy response. You’re damn right I’d begrudge someone getting a luxury house if they’ve never lifted a finger in their life, while most of us are up and out before it gets bright and home when it’s dark.

In winter in Ireland that means you are out at 8.30 and home at 4.30. :rolleyes:

I leave the house at 6.45 ...i get home when **** is done.

I avoid negative people so ...i think i will exit thread.

enricoh

malinheader wrote: »

Listen I think you know how but I will try and make this simple for you.
John and Mary buy a house for 450,000.ok.
Paddy and candice get the house for nothing next door.
Paddy and candice let the house run into disrepair, total mess outside.

now. John and Mary want to sell.
How much will John and Mary get now.

They will get whatever the council/ some charity are prepared to pay for it.
No doubt yer man from kurdistan in the article has his mates back home looking on enviously.

2 years in mosney n they too can get one, pity about the lack of concierge services, boyd barrett, pbp etc will organise a protest outside the entrance!!

thomas 123

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

No one is forcing people to build luxury complexes.

There is a housing crisis you know.

Not for the people in those luxury apartments.

The housing crisis is for those working who have put having kids on hold, getting married etc while they try scrape together a mortgage deposit while paying a landlords very high boom time mortgage.

By hey, live and let live ...

malinheader

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

John Mary need to wise up and stop making bad investments then.

Why buy into mixed housing ..no one forced you to.

Alot of the Time the council purchase these houses after alot of buying customers have bought.

But hey John and Mary need to wise up is your answer.
Tells me alot about you. So end of I think.

ILoveYourVibes

thomas 123 wrote: »

Not for the people in those luxury apartments.

The housing crisis is for those working who have put having kids on hold, getting married etc while they try scrape together a mortgage deposit while paying a landlords very high boom time mortgage.

By hey, live and let live ...

Btw

These are not luxury apartments ..they are normal longterm homes.

Houses built in tallaght maybe 40 yrs ago ...would have been looked at as the same.

And people would have said the same things.

This is the new middle class.

Wibbs

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I'd prefer Trumps America compared to how we are living in this country now like bloody idiots.

While I fully understand the anger involved AD and lord knows we have issues here in desperate need of review and improvement, but you really wouldn't want to live in Trump's America. Or America in general, trump is just the symptom of something much deeper. The American Dream propaganda is one thing, but it papers up the deep and long term cracks in that culture. The wealth gap there is wide and getting wider and the middle classes are just as squeezed and a lot more vulnerable. Rent control is variable or nonexistent, they have the highest eviction rate on the planet(rent or mortgage), the homeless situation is insane in many states and a scary percentage of those homeless are employed and a fair number are middle class people that because of divorce, or an illness that insurance didn't cover end up on the streets. Check youtube vids for "living in your car" and they're all American. In some areas charities set up field hospitals that look like something you'd find in a natural disaster or war zone to provide basic healthcare to American citizens, basic healthcare we take for granted. That's before we get to the costs of education and a host of other things we take for granted. The crazy joke is someone like trump has more support in those poorer areas, even though he wants to screw them into the ground even more.

Omackeral

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I avoid negative people so ...i think i will exit thread.

ILoveYourVibes

malinheader wrote: »

Alot of the Time the council purchase these houses after alot of buying customers have bought.

But hey John and Mary need to wise up is your answer.
Tells me alot about you. So end of I think.

No need to be so personal.

But I hope it does tell you a lot about me. I am no sucker. No one rips me off.

thomas 123

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Btw

These are not luxury apartments ..they are normal longterm homes.

Houses built in tallaght maybe 40 yrs ago ...would have been looked at as the same.

And people would have said the same things.

This is the new middle class.

Why do you continue to skirt around my actual points? Focus on what I am saying and tell me I am wrong and why I am wrong.

I’m Starting to think your writing to us from one of these apartments(took “luxury” out for you).

TomTomTim

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

No need to be so personal.

But I hope it does tell you a lot about me. I am no sucker. No one rips me off.

Weren't you a big supporter of the Communist/Anarchist commune that went tits up?

Mad_maxx

It's a Kitty Holland article, all you need to know

Cyrus

macnug wrote: »

How is a roof terrace not the same as a green. There not even allowed to contribute to the cost themselves. Its not even a cost thing its, if it was they wouldn't have spent 700k per unit.

The logic behind integrated social housing is that (in theory) by putting a non-productive person in a group of productive people, they (or more likely their children) become more productive through basically peer-pressure. But in order for it to work they have to feel apart of the group, or they become social "deviants".

Anyway as I said I don't agree with this policy/theory but if your going to do it, do it right.

I was referring to the gym

There is no roof garden on their block as I understand it and there never was, they wouldn’t be entitled to use another blocks roof garden who also wouldn’t be entitled to use a roof garden in a block different to theirs .

Bullocks

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Anyway ..i have just checked highest weekly rent is 265 per week for a council residence. SO per month ..they would be more than likely be paying something like that.

It would be 1006k rent a month.

Not everyone in a council house pays 65 euros a week. There is a scale.

Have you a link to that info?

Gardesana Pecher

ElJeffe wrote: »

Thankfully we aren't living in Trump's America or are never likely to be. Integration and not segregation is the answer.

In that case shouldn't the council tenants be integrated into the gyms and other facilities? Have the council pay the extra fees, and put it on the tax bill.

Topgear on Dave

Mad_maxx wrote: »

It's a Kitty Holland article, all you need to know

+1

Rathgar, nice.

Plenty of gaffs getting built out in Kilcock, Naas, Dunshsughlin etc for the rest of us.

ILoveYourVibes

Bullocks wrote: »

Have you a link to that info?

The average weekly rent is €69.41 with the highest weekly rent charge registered as €265.87. The weekly rent is determined in accordance with the council's 2019 Differential Rent Scheme which is linked to household income and is calculated at 15% of the household's biggest earner.

https://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-city-council-5-4956180-Jan2020/

Its actually an article about how top earners are more likely to default on council rent. SO its hardly biased in fav of council tenants.

ILoveYourVibes

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

+1

Rathgar, nice.

Plenty of gaffs getting built out in Kilcock, Naas, Dunshsughlin etc for the rest of us.

Rathgar is not that nice tbh.

listermint

Omackeral wrote: »

Begrudgery is painted as such a negative word these days and it’s a lazy response. You’re damn right I’d begrudge someone getting a luxury house if they’ve never lifted a finger in their life, while most of us are up and out before it gets bright and home when it’s dark.

The notion that someone in receipt of housing assistance or a social house from the local authority has never lifted a finger in their life really puts front and centre your ignorance on the subject. I mean it's daily mail level of insight and knowledge and no one should be proud of such a view point.

You really don't have a grasp of the subject matter at all , frankly I'd be embarrassed to be this sure footed when spouting nonsense.


I think people who shout this crap should be given a weekend course in the circular Economy. Where social assistance goes and what the true cost to the state is .

ILoveYourVibes

thomas 123 wrote: »

Why do you continue to skirt around my actual points? Focus on what I am saying and tell me I am wrong and why I am wrong.

I’m Starting to think your writing to us from one of these apartments(took “luxury” out for you).

You are paranoid.

I live nowhere near rathgar. And i have never lived in social housing or mixed housing for that matter.

My environment is very important to me. I'm lucky to love where i live.