# The anti-landlord legislation chickens are coming home to roost



## Brendan Burgess (13 Jun 2019)

They advocate for the outlawing of bedsits and wonder why there is a shortage of accommodation! 

Then they campaign actively against landlords and express shock at the level of homelessness caused by landlords leaving the market. 

*Most homeless families in Dublin previously in private rentals *


_Speaking on RTÉ's Morning Ireland, the Director of Advocacy at Focus Ireland said all the evidence shows that the homelessness crisis is taking place in the private rented sector.

Mike Allen said that the vast majority of the families surveyed had been living in the private rental sector without any problem until the crisis came along.

He reiterated that the vast majority of homelessness is caused by landlords leaving the market, and said families searching for HAP properties face extensive searches._


----------



## odyssey06 (13 Jun 2019)

The article only half makes sense if you think about it.

A landlord leaving the market by selling to an owner occupier does not cause homelessness, by that I mean it has not reduced the supply.

That is completely different to scenarios that actually reduce supply of housing, such as banning bedsits, or where the restrictions and demands mean a property is left empty \ short term let only rather than rented out long term. 
Banning bedsits when the alternative is a doorway, a homeless 'hub', or an overnight shelter was a disgraceful act of virtue signalling.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (13 Jun 2019)

odyssey06 said:


> A landlord leaving the market by selling to an owner occupier does not cause homelessness, by that I mean it has not reduced the supply.



It does not increase the level of homelessness,but it makes that family homeless.

I have argued the same about repossessions.  Repossessions do not increase the level of homelessness as we are not knocking down the houses. 

Brendan


----------



## Firefly (13 Jun 2019)

I would imagine that some landlords are genuinely leaving the market but others, thanks to RPZ are ending tenancies in order to increase the rent. This is probably causing those who were in situ to become homeless.

What's clearly needed is MORE legislation!


----------



## odyssey06 (13 Jun 2019)

Brendan Burgess said:


> It does not increase the level of homelessness,but it makes that family homeless.
> I have argued the same about repossessions.  Repossessions do not increase the level of homelessness as we are not knocking down the houses.
> Brendan



I would word it as - that act did not make them homeless. What made them homeless was that they could not find alternative accomodation.
I think it's very important for it to be worded that way, I can't believe the short-sightedness (I don't mean your comment) of these articles which don't consider what happened to the property next. 
As you note, it is also the case with how repossessions are reported.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (13 Jun 2019)

TBH, changes around legislation have a trivial effect compared to *the massive improvement in the economy since 2012*.

In the first quarter of 2012 there were 544k people at work who live in Dublin. Now there are 705k, *an increase of 161k  workers or almost 30%*. Nationally the increase is 23%.

These people are all earning and all need to live somewhere.

In any housing market the most marginal (lone parents, people with substance abuse issues, mental health problems, etc) are the ones most likely to get squeezed out of the bottom. 

*The real problem is that not enough new dwellings are being built!*


----------



## Firefly (13 Jun 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> *The real problem is that not enough new dwellings are being built!*



Yip, and another 60k doing their Leaving Cert as we speak....


----------



## galway_blow_in (13 Jun 2019)

Brendan Burgess said:


> It does not increase the level of homelessness,but it makes that family homeless.
> 
> I have argued the same about repossessions.  Repossessions do not increase the level of homelessness as we are not knocking down the houses.
> 
> Brendan



How do you maintain your sanity when debating that issue while sitting opposite David Hall?


----------



## galway_blow_in (13 Jun 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> TBH, changes around legislation have a trivial effect compared to *the massive improvement in the economy since 2012*.
> 
> In the first quarter of 2012 there were 544k people at work who live in Dublin. Now there are 705k, *an increase of 161k  workers or almost 30%*. Nationally the increase is 23%.
> 
> ...



A strong feature of the recovery has been the greater convergence of the economy in Dublin and the cities generally, accommodation demand pressure followed


----------



## Delboy (13 Jun 2019)

Another major problem contributing to homelessness is unlimited immigration. How can you plan for house building when hundreds of millions of people have the option to come here (usually Dublin) at a moments notice and thats just the EU element. We're lax also on non-EU migration.

56% of the respondents to that report were migrants: 41% nonEU and 15%EU.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (13 Jun 2019)

galway_blow_in said:


> A strong feature of the recovery has been the greater convergence of the economy in Dublin and the cities generally,



This is a myth. Job growth has been spread pretty evenly across the country. For example the Border region (which contains no cities) has seen job growth of 26%, above the national average of 23%.


----------



## AlbacoreA (13 Jun 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> This is a myth. Job growth has been spread pretty evenly across the country. For example the Border region (which contains no cities) has seen job growth of 26%, above the national average of 23%.



I think he mean a general move out of rural areas to the cities, especially Dublin. Its concentrating all the demand in the one spot.


----------



## AlbacoreA (13 Jun 2019)

Firefly said:


> I would imagine that some landlords are genuinely leaving the market but others, thanks to RPZ are ending tenancies in order to increase the rent. This is probably causing those who were in situ to become homeless.
> 
> What's clearly needed is MORE legislation!



It was mentioned that, selling up to increase rents wasn't a significant factor. 

I would say its because of increased risk due to the legislation, and fear of more changes. 
The property has peaked. They probably want to sell up, clear some mortagage's and invest differently.


----------



## Delboy (13 Jun 2019)

AlbacoreA said:


> The property has peaked. They probably want to sell up, clear some mortagage's and invest differently.


Not many alternative investment opportunities out there!


----------



## AlbacoreA (13 Jun 2019)

Delboy said:


> Not many alternative investment opportunities out there!



True. Maybe they want to sell to buy back in later with a property that is more profitable to rent. or invest in a REIT.


----------



## LS400 (13 Jun 2019)

AlbacoreA said:


> Maybe they want to sell to buy back in later with a property that is more profitable to rent.



I think that is very true with 4-7 year Cgt exemption.

If you have an opportunity to jump ship from, Government persecution to the small time LLs , you would be giving it some serious thought.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (13 Jun 2019)

AlbacoreA said:


> I think he mean a general move out of rural areas to the cities, especially Dublin. Its concentrating all the demand in the one spot.



Border region has seen higher-than-average job growth.

Which are the cities in the Border region?


----------



## noproblem (13 Jun 2019)

Maybe if the whole truth was told about why certain people are finding it difficult to remain in properties. Landlords seem to get most of the blame. But maybe, just maybe, renters are on occasion not paying rent on time, not paying in full, not paying at all, not taking proper care of the property, being a nuisance to next door, to the neighbourhood, being loud, being dirty, treating someone else's property that they've been given as their right to have. Hope i'm getti ng the message across because not many Landlords I know would want to evict a good paying tenant. Then again I could be completely wrong and none of those people i'm mentioning even exist and i'm totally off my rocking horse again.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (13 Jun 2019)

noproblem said:


> But maybe, just maybe, renters are on occasion not paying rent on time, not paying in full, not paying at all, not taking proper care of the property, being a nuisance to next door, to the neighbourhood, being loud, being dirty, treating someone else's property that they've been given as their right to have.



I am not going to trade in stereotypes.

But the CSO did some analysis a few years back.

In the homeless statistics there are surprisingly large numbers of people who are married, have jobs, with third-level education etc.

When housing is in very short supply - as it is in Dublin - many demographics become impacted.


----------



## AlbacoreA (13 Jun 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Border region has seen higher-than-average job growth.
> 
> Which are the cities in the Border region?



I'm not sure where you are going with this.











						GAA plans to tackle rural-urban demographic shift
					

By John Harrington The biggest challenge facing the GAA currently and for the foreseeable future is the population shift from rural to urban areas in Ireland. Rural GAA clubs are struggling to field teams because they just don’t have the numbers, while urban GAA clubs are struggling to cater for




					www.gaa.ie
				











						Two-thirds of us are now living in urban areas, new figures show
					

People living in urban areas also living more closely together, CSO finds




					www.irishtimes.com
				






> "Ireland's 1.1pc population growth rate at present is nearly four times the current EU average of 0.3pc.
> 
> "Eurostat figures also show 10 countries of the EU 28 reporting population declines in 2016. So, the Irish experience is quite exceptional.











						Housing crisis deepens as prices rise 11pc with no slowdown in sight
					

The housing crisis is deepening at a startling pace, with the rate of price rises picking up dramatically.




					www.independent.ie
				






			finfacts.ie
		










						House prices 2019: property owners warned no deal Brexit will take Ireland 'into the unknown'
					

House prices will rise by 4.2pc in the new year – but only if there is a soft Brexit, according to a nationwide survey of estate agents.




					www.independent.ie
				





Its interesting there is a elastic band kind of effect where places like Dublin surge ahead so people look elsewhere which then causes the places lagging behind to suddenly rise dramatically. The problem with this is that when it slows, those other locations will lag in this also.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (13 Jun 2019)

@AlbacoreA 

Between Census 2011 and Census 2016 the population of rural areas (as defined by the CSO) increased by 30k to 1.763m.

The real skill of the rural lobby is convincing the world that rural Ireland is in decline. It's not.


----------



## Delboy (13 Jun 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> I am not going to trade in stereotypes.
> 
> But the CSO did some analysis a few years back.
> 
> ...


I recall a report from a few months ago which put the employment rate for the adults amongst the 10k 'homeless' at 20%. So not very high.


----------



## lff12 (26 Jun 2019)

odyssey06 said:


> The article only half makes sense if you think about it.
> 
> A landlord leaving the market by selling to an owner occupier does not cause homelessness, by that I mean it has not reduced the supply.
> 
> ...



Banning bedsits was a particularly bad policy decision because in effect most "bedsit" owners were owners of pre 1963 (often listed) properties that would have needed significant alteration to re-let as studios. In practice some landlords saw the writing on the wall 5-10 years in advance and either sold up or upgraded incrementally.  For example, 1000 "units" disappeared from the Dublin 6 market from 1999 to about 2002, but many of these would have been in buildings with 6-8 (I have lived in as many as 12!) units, so the "net" building sales was much smaller.  In many cases these were restored as family homes or knocked for further development.

The short let market definitely also "hurt" the market by diverting some properties to short lets (we talk about AirBNB but I had a landlord putting some properties up as short let on Daft circa 2009). The jury remains out on what happens to these properties now that the ban has kicked in.

I would challenge the statement that selling to an owner occupier doesn't cause homelessness: if there was a sitting tenant or tenants, and the new owner is a single owner occupier who does not plan to rent out, there is tenant(s) displacement, and if the tenancy was significantly rent capped previously, the tenant may have significant difficulty in finding a new tenancy.  Of course, if the new owner is a former tenant, THEIR tenancy will now be available so in some cases, yes, it may not impact supply quite so much, but the barriers to borrowing are so significant for new borrowers it would be unlikely that anybody earning under 70k per annum in Dublin will be able to even consider buying without inheritance or a monetary gift from Mummy and Daddy.


----------



## lff12 (26 Jun 2019)

Delboy said:


> I recall a report from a few months ago which put the employment rate for the adults amongst the 10k 'homeless' at 20%. So not very high.



Yes - that is reflective of the fact that subsidised tenants are at a particular disadvantage in the current market.
Landlords really, really seem to hate HAP in particular. Despite all the talk of the Dail being an effective landlords lobby there doesn't seem to be any sign of removing or changing HAP to suit landlords.


----------



## lff12 (26 Jun 2019)

noproblem said:


> Maybe if the whole truth was told about why certain people are finding it difficult to remain in properties. Landlords seem to get most of the blame. But maybe, just maybe, renters are on occasion not paying rent on time, not paying in full, not paying at all, not taking proper care of the property, being a nuisance to next door, to the neighbourhood, being loud, being dirty, treating someone else's property that they've been given as their right to have. Hope i'm getti ng the message across because not many Landlords I know would want to evict a good paying tenant. Then again I could be completely wrong and none of those people i'm mentioning even exist and i'm totally off my rocking horse again.



I think that's probably unfair. The reality is that a lot of landlords are now in a position to sell after up to a decade of negative equity and this is having a significant impact on supply side.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (26 Jun 2019)

lff12 said:


> The reality is that a lot of landlords are now in a position to sell after up to a decade of negative equity and this is having *a significant impact on supply side.*



Where is the evidence (not anecdote) that there is a decline in the stock of private rented properties?


----------



## Sarenco (26 Jun 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> Where is the evidence (not anecdote) that there is a decline in the stock of private rented properties?


From the latest Daft Rental Report (Q1 2019) –

"On May 1st, there were just 2,700 properties available to rent nationwide on daft.ie. *This is the lowest ever figure for stock on the market, in a series that goes back to the start of 2006.* The length of this series allows us to put the current rental shortage into perspective. During the Celtic Tiger period, rental stock bottomed out at just under 4,400 in early 2007. Only once in the 41 months and counting since the start of 2016 has the number of rental homes on the market been above this Celtic Tiger low - and that was in December of that year, an atypical month in the rental market."




__





						Irish Rental Price Report Q1 2019 | Daft.ie
					






					www.daft.ie
				



Conversely, the number of properties listed for sale on Daft has increased dramatically.  From the latest Daft House Price Report (Q2 2019) -

"The figures in this latest Daft.ie Sales Report are telling. Over 8,200 properties were listed for sale in May 2019, *the highest monthly total in over a decade*. Indeed, the last time that many properties were put on the market at the same time was April 2008."




__





						Irish House Price Report Q2 2019 | Daft.ie
					






					www.daft.ie
				



Is there a correlation between these figures?  I happen to think that Government policy regarding the private rental sector is driving stock from the rental listings to the sales listings.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (26 Jun 2019)

@Sarenco 

That's just the number of properties being advertised, not in existence.

In a hot market three things happen:
1 Landlords don't need to advertise and find tenants by word of mouth
2 Stock stays on market for shorter periods
3 Tenants stay put if they have a good deal (rent controls relevant here)

Also, new student accomodation isn't advertised on Daftvto my knowledge.


----------



## Sarenco (26 Jun 2019)

@NoRegretsCoyote 

They are all fair points.  The Daft figures show a pretty dramatic reduction in the stock of properties that are available to rent but tell you nothing about stock of properties that are already being rented.  Point taken.

The latest RTB annual report also shows a material reduction in the number of registered tenancies on a YoY basis.  I don't have much confidence in the RTB figures but the trend is certainly consistent with the Daft figures.


----------



## Nickname (20 Nov 2019)

The article gives no information on why properties are being withdrawn so I can't see how they or anyone can come to the conclusion that homelessness is being caused by owner occupiers buying rented accommodation. If someone had data showing this fair enough...


----------



## AlbacoreA (20 Nov 2019)

How did you end up replying to a thread thats been abandoned for 6 months.


----------



## Purple (26 Nov 2019)

Nickname said:


> The article gives no information on why properties are being withdrawn so I can't see how they or anyone can come to the conclusion that homelessness is being caused by owner occupiers buying rented accommodation. If someone had data showing this fair enough...


As long as the State is giving out free, or close to free, houses there will be a queue for those houses and people will game the system to jump that queue.


----------



## Saavy99 (26 Nov 2019)

Purple said:


> As long as the State is giving out free, or close to free, houses there will be a queue for those houses and people will game the system to jump that queue.



Young abled bodied people should never be given heavily subsidised housing for life. Its a ridiculous policy and leads to a dependent  culture. Im sick  of seeing young women in pyjamas standing.outside their subsidied housing.smoking and on their cell phones in the middle of the.day


----------



## cremeegg (26 Nov 2019)

Saavy99 said:


> Young abled bodied people should never be given heavily subsidised housing for life. Its a ridiculous policy and leads to a dependent  culture. Im sick  of seeing young women in pyjamas standing.outside their subsidied housing.smoking and on their cell phones in the middle of the.day



Yes but who is to blame, if the state says that is what's available, why shouldn't they take. As a landlord why shouldn't I take the money that is being paid to accommodate them.

By the way in many cases its not subsidised accommodation its fully funded. HAP pays 80 to 90 % and the remainder comes from social welfare payments the client receives.

In a way who is to blame is the wrong question, the proper question is who loses out.

The general taxpayer, not really, sure they have to pay for it, but I dont see any alternative that would be any better from the taxpayers point of view. Would the taxpayer rather they became homeless. I dont think so.

The private renter, maybe, rents might be cheaper if HAP was abolished, but I am not convinced.


----------



## noproblem (26 Nov 2019)

Maybe if those getting a free ride in society today had to pay a bit more of the money they get for nothing, they might have more respect for not only the property they've been given, but for everyone else as well. It's not that there's beginning to be a division in society today but money for nothing needs a thorough overhauling. Hard to believe we have almost full employment in this country today yet able bodied men and women getting everything handed to them. Is it any wonder people are getting totally pixxxed off and that's being very mild.


----------



## Saavy99 (26 Nov 2019)

noproblem said:


> Maybe if those getting a free ride in society today had to pay a bit more of the money they get for nothing, they might have more respect for not only the property they've been given, but for everyone else as well. It's not that there's beginning to be a division in society today but money for nothing needs a thorough overhauling. Hard to believe we have almost full employment in this country today yet able bodied men and women getting everything handed to them. Is it any wonder people are getting totally pixxxed off and that's being very mild.



Very.well said. Its sickening.these.pyjamas.clad young.people.paying 20.euro a week.from their.dole.for their.house, receive.over 500 euro to heat.it and are.left.with.over.150 euro a week to spend on fags, dope, chip shop junk and slabs.of beer while the hard working tax payer have hardly.2 cents.left over after.paying.their own way.


----------



## Saavy99 (26 Nov 2019)

Its hard to say the above, but thats exactly whats going on, they simple getting too much tax payers money to abuse their bodies and its time.a frank discussion was commenced about.it. i am not slating everyone.on welfare as im well.aware they.are many genuine and compassionate  cases out there  but as for.the tossers.out there, they make.me feel ill


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2019)

noproblem said:


> Maybe if those getting a free ride in society today had to pay a bit more of the money they get for nothing, they might have more respect for not only the property they've been given, but for everyone else as well. It's not that there's beginning to be a division in society today but money for nothing needs a thorough overhauling. Hard to believe we have almost full employment in this country today yet able bodied men and women getting everything handed to them. Is it any wonder people are getting totally pixxxed off and that's being very mild.


Do remember that the State took on tens of billions to bail out the pensioners in the form of their deposits and their pension funds (the bondholders) and tens of billions to continue to pay State employees wages which are still unsustainable. While I agree that people who don't work but could should get nothing there are plenty of groups within Irish society who are living off other groups (look at the beef farmers today; 2/3 of their income is already welfare and they are blocking Dublin to get more) so I wouldn't get too sanctimonious about housing.

At t who loses out; working people on low wages. That's who loses out. They are the people social housing should be for.


----------



## cremeegg (27 Nov 2019)

Purple said:


> Do remember that the State took on tens of billions to bail out the pensioners in the form of their deposits and their pension funds (the bondholders) and tens of billions to continue to pay State employees wages which are still unsustainable. While I agree that people who don't work but could should get nothing there are plenty of groups within Irish society who are living off other groups (look at the beef farmers today; 2/3 of their income is already welfare and they are blocking Dublin to get more) so I wouldn't get too sanctimonious about housing.
> 
> At t who loses out; working people on low wages. That's who loses out. They are the people social housing should be for.



Not up to your usual high standards Purple. The points you make about the bail out and the beef farmers are well made, however they do not address the issues raised above.


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2019)

cremeegg said:


> Not up to your usual high standards Purple. The points you make about the bail out and the beef farmers are well made, however they do not address the issues raised above.


I'm not saying that we should be giving out free houses to people who can't be bothered to work. I'm saying that they are far from the only group with a sense of entitlement and bailing out the pensioners cost us far more than the scroungers above.


----------



## cremeegg (27 Nov 2019)

Purple said:


> I'm not saying that we should be giving out free houses to people who can't be bothered to work.



I understand that.



Purple said:


> I'm saying that they are far from the only group with a sense of entitlement and bailing out the pensioners cost us far more than the scroungers above.



Just because they are not 'the only group with a sense of entitlement' does not mean that a discussion of this particular group/issue is not valid.


----------



## noproblem (27 Nov 2019)

Purple said:


> Do remember that the State took on tens of billions to bail out the pensioners in the form of their deposits and their pension funds (the bondholders) and tens of billions to continue to pay State employees wages which are still unsustainable. While I agree that people who don't work but could should get nothing there are plenty of groups within Irish society who are living off other groups (look at the beef farmers today; 2/3 of their income is already welfare and they are blocking Dublin to get more) so I wouldn't get too sanctimonious about housing.
> 
> At t who loses out; working people on low wages. That's who loses out. They are the people social housing should be for.


Why target pensioners, they're not the only people who had deposits. I'd imagine you might be a depositor of some sort yourself and if not a pensioner yet, you will be some day, hopefully. As for 2/3 of farmers income being welfare, i'd like to see the link to that stating that it's welfare?


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2019)

noproblem said:


> Why target pensioners, they're not the only people who had deposits. I'd imagine you might be a depositor of some sort yourself and if not a pensioner yet, you will be some day, hopefully.


Maybe. If I do end up being a pensioner, getting a State pension I came nowhere close to paying for, and I am bailed out by my grandchildren, I'll try to be more grateful and less entitled that the current batch of pensioners.


noproblem said:


> As for 2/3 of farmers income being welfare, i'd like to see the link to that stating that it's welfare?


I stand corrected; welfare payments account for 74% of all farm income;
_"Decoupled income payments were introduced as part of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 2005. Since their introduction, these payments have, on average, accounted for 74.3 percent of farm income "_
Given that Beef is a low income sector that percentage may be higher. CAP payments are welfare payments, what used to be known as "Farmers Dole".


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2019)

cremeegg said:


> Just because they are not 'the only group with a sense of entitlement' does not mean that a discussion of this particular group/issue is not valid.


 I agree. I'm just saying that we need to be careful about throwing the first stone.


----------



## odyssey06 (27 Nov 2019)

It's one thing to provide support to sections of society who at some time or another have put their shoulder to the wheel.
The cohort being talked about is the can't pay, won't pay, if they break something it is someone else's problem, to hell with all rules of civilised society.

And in relation to the topic here, that cohort of society is certainly one no private landlord would want to deal with, except in a dump of a property.
And no one would want to be neighbours to.
Corporate landlords can absorb the bad tenants and balance off versus the good tenants.
A private landlord with a single property, faced with a tenant like that who won't pay, wrecks the place, causes disruption, has to deal with everything in a costly civil manner. 

In the recent legislation it has all been about protecting tenants - and good tenants should be protected. The only story was bad landlords and good tenants.
But - maybe I missed it - but there didn't seem to be anything about bad tenants.
I think that is as big a factor as the rent controls in landlords exiting the market..


----------



## noproblem (27 Nov 2019)

Purple said:


> Maybe. If I do end up being a pensioner, getting a State pension I came nowhere close to paying for, and I am bailed out by my grandchildren, I'll try to be more grateful and less entitled that the current batch of pensioners.
> 
> I stand corrected; welfare payments account for 74% of all farm income;
> _"Decoupled income payments were introduced as part of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in 2005. Since their introduction, these payments have, on average, accounted for 74.3 percent of farm income "_
> Given that Beef is a low income sector that percentage may be higher. CAP payments are welfare payments, what used to be known as "Farmers Dole".



Wow, you sure do have a big chip on that shoulder. Your big gripe would seem to be with pensioners and farmers and what they take from the system but you conveniently forget to mention their contribution to the state over their lifetimes. Have a throwaway remark and highlight it if you like about farmers dole and entitled pensioners but you're totally missing the point being made about hand outs to some of society who have never given and will never give anything to the country. As for other remarks about Cap Payments and European payments to farmers, etc, they are not welfare payments and farmers work bloody hard to fulfill obligations in order to qualify for many of these incentives. Laugh if you like but no one in central Dublin is laughing today and most people in Ireland are not too far away from a farming background in any case. Be thankful Sir of your heritage, you are but a generation or two away from tough times and probably from the earth of this farming country whether you like that or not


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2019)

noproblem said:


> Wow, you sure do have a big chip on that shoulder. Your big gripe would seem to be with pensioners and farmers and what they take from the system but you conveniently forget to mention their contribution to the state over their lifetimes.


 I don't forget their contribution but I don't overestimate it either. Retired scroungers are called pensioners. To paraphrase This post will be deleted if not edited immediately; the scrounger has always been with us. 



noproblem said:


> Have a throwaway remark and highlight it if you like about farmers dole and entitled pensioners but you're totally missing the point being made about hand outs to some of society who have never given and will never give anything to the country.


 How so?



noproblem said:


> As for other remarks about Cap Payments and European payments to farmers, etc, they are not welfare payments and farmers work bloody hard to fulfill obligations in order to qualify for many of these incentives.


 Most do work hard but they are still welfare payments. 



noproblem said:


> Laugh if you like but no one in central Dublin is laughing today and most people in Ireland are not too far away from a farming background in any case.


 I'm not laughing. I just suggest that many small farmers are divorced from reality and that reality is grim. 


noproblem said:


> Be thankful Sir of your heritage, you are but a generation or two away from tough times and probably from the earth of this farming country whether you like that or not


 I am indeed. My Dublin grandfather worked in an industry which has also disappeared. Those people had to move on without expecting others to fund their unviable industry.


----------



## The Horseman (27 Nov 2019)

Purple said:


> Do remember that the State took on tens of billions to bail out the pensioners in the form of their deposits and their pension funds (the bondholders) and tens of billions to continue to pay State employees wages which are still unsustainable. While I agree that people who don't work but could should get nothing there are plenty of groups within Irish society who are living off other groups (look at the beef farmers today; 2/3 of their income is already welfare and they are blocking Dublin to get more) so I wouldn't get too sanctimonious about housing.
> 
> At t who loses out; working people on low wages. That's who loses out. They are the people social housing should be for.




Whether you like it or not we needed to bail out the depositors and the bondholders. We need a functioning banking system for the economy to function on a day to day basis. It is ackowledged the banking sector specifically the mortgage sector is not functioning right but that is for a different thread. 

In terms of pensioners, some of these people earned their money over their lifetime, paid PRSI (and got very little in return during their working lives). 

These are the self same people who could not afford private pensions, had to pay for everything, had high interest rates etc. I personally don't have an issue with how we treat our pensioners. 

I do agree that those who contribute nothing to society should get only the basics (unless sick or have a legitimate inability to work). 

Yes those who do loose out are those in the middle, earning too much to avail of social housing, not earning enough to buy a house.


----------



## josh8267 (27 Nov 2019)

Purple
Seeing this tread is being used to have a cut at people already retired and other things not connected to post no one

You say your are a trademan ,So lets Have a look at the amount paid into the system by a 67 year old retiree fitter/trademan in  income taxes employers/employees over there working life,
Most would have started serving there apprenticeships aged 15/ 16 , so they would have started work around 1966/67/68

Anco Who looked after apprenticships back then worked off a full trademans weekly wage set at 8.50 pounds a week
First year apprentice would get 1.70 per week less Prsi stamp was .5 of a pound no matter how much you earned all taken from employees wage
back then,

First year if you were under 16  you got 1.7 per week when you reached 16 you weekly wage fell to 1.3 pound a week all of the Insurance stamp came out of the employees wage back then so 29.4% of your wage went in Insurance stamp,
it went up by 1.70 each year reaching full trademens wage  in year five 1971/72/73 by then you were well into the income tax net ,

When you get a chance Inform yourself on the % of weekly payroll taken in Employees/employers prsi + income tax taken from a trademan in 1967
Do the same thing in 1972 and every five years untill the retired ,
Come back and let us know how you got on ,It will be interesting to hear back from you ,

Best if you start a new tread with your findings not to be gatecrashing posts not connected to State Contributory retirement Pension,


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2019)

josh8267 said:


> Purple
> You say your are a trademan ,So lets Have a look at the amount paid into the system by a 67 year old retiree fitter/trademan in  income taxes employers/employees over there working life,
> Most would have started serving there apprenticeships aged 15/ 16 , so they would have started work around 1966/67
> Anco Who looked after apprenticships back then worked off a full trademans weekly wage set at 8.50 pounds a week
> ...


The average prsi contribution is about €1800 a year. The pays for lots of things including pensions. Therefore the average contribution towards state pensions is less than €1000 a year. That is about a quarter of the cost of funding the State pension.

But don't forget about the pensioners who never worked a day in their life.


----------



## noproblem (27 Nov 2019)

Purple,
 "Retired scroungers are called pensioners" .

That is an awful statement to make, a tragic view of your parents, of mine, everyone else's and indeed myself. No further debate needed with you after such a comment and I genuinely feel sorry for anyone with that mindset. Good luck in life.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (27 Nov 2019)

Purple said:


> The average prsi contribution is about €1800 a year.



You are forgetting employers' PRSI.


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2019)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> You are forgetting employers' PRSI.


That's not a contribution made by the employee (the hint is in the name).


----------



## Purple (27 Nov 2019)

noproblem said:


> Purple,
> "Retired scroungers are called pensioners" .
> 
> That is an awful statement to make, a tragic view of your parents, of mine, everyone else's and indeed myself. No further debate needed with you after such a comment and I genuinely feel sorry for anyone with that mindset. Good luck in life.


Why? Do you think scroungers all die-off before  the pension age?

My parents generation ran the country during the boom and the bust, along with some people from my generation. They are the generation of planning corruption which has sentenced their grandchildren to 90 minute commutes, rubbish infrastructure and a housing crisis. They are the generation of clerical sex abuse, homophobia, terrorism, climate change and economic ruination. They are the generation which gave out pensions, pay rises and public services to themselves which were unaffordable and when the crash happened they looked after themselves first by mortgaging their grandchildren's future.
And worst of all they feel entitled to be fawned over and thanked for it!

Mind you my generation isn't much better. The so called millenials and the snowflakes are actually a much better, more liberal, more tolerant, more honest and ethical and harder working generation. Hopefully they will  sort out the mess we've made of the place.

To bring this thread somewhat back on topic what we are seeing now is generations of corruption, greed, incompetence and stupidity coming home to roost.


----------



## josh8267 (27 Nov 2019)

I dont want to take this tred off topic so I will not be replying but you need to start checking your facts,
I have worked all of my life on a Fitter trademans wage starting off when the employee paid it all on there own ,
Later it got changes to both employer/employee over my Working Life Payroll PRSI stoppeges came to around 19%

If you say trademan is only seeing 1800 euro stopped in PRSI a year from payroll they are only earning 9000 per year , I would not call them trademen ,
They must be fiddeling the system,


----------



## josh8267 (27 Nov 2019)

Purple you have to include Employers Contributions, In my own case I was the  only member of my family not to emigrate, I remained because I got a job in Ireland ,
By employing me this has a long term cost to the Irish state in Contributary pension on reached retirement age.

If I emigrated there would be no employers/employees  contributions paid to the Irish State and no Contributary pension to be paid out after paying in for fifty years,

They work I did has to pay for  Employers  PRSI contributions in the private sector before I add value for my employer,
Do you understand ?,


----------



## Brendan Burgess (27 Nov 2019)

This has gone too far off topic for me to be able to separate out the various threads.

Brendan


----------

