Nama moving into the demolition game

S

Sansan

Registered User
Messages
74
Hi all, just wondering if you could enlighten me as to why Nama if the news is to belived is going to demolish loads of half built houses, now I know many estates are just left half built and over time will just crumble, but I am confused as to at a time when people are loseing their homes and county councils housing lists are through the roof, and it's proving so hard to get a mortage, and dole ques that put in a straight line would reach the moon. Why are these not handed over to councils to be finished and sold at cost price, people would have a home, people would have work in building them and local economic conditions would emprove, I don't want to sound like a card carrying comunist, but it just makes no scence to me, I might be looking at a micro not macro level, but it makes my blood boil
 
I assume the intention is to demolish unfinished and unserviced developments whose cost of completeion would be higher than their market value. In any case there are probably enough vacant completed properties to house everyone in the country.

Also you can't just take people off housing lists in Dublin and send them to Leitrim.

In time I expect we will see many of the completed NAMA properties making their way onto the social housing stock, this will take time but hopefully will be one of the medium to long term benefits of our over supply of residential property
 
You do make a very vaild point, it just seems like such a waste, I wonder after the estates are demolished will we be left with big mountins of rubble for grass to overgrow, I just know this won't be done properly, I heard eammon keane on newstalk mention that the bond money a builder puts down for planning is nothing in relation to the demolation cost envloved, I swear I sometimes think my 6 year old has more cop on
 
It's totally ludicrous, isn't it. Bob Geldof was right a long time ago when he sais we live in a "Banana Republic"
 
There is more on this subject on "morgan kelly on bank robbers" thread.
Sadly I am not surprised because one of NAMA s aims is to stabilise house price declines. By demolishing estates , it will reduce the supply.The irony is that the taxpayer will pay thru`nama for the cost of the house and its demolition and then the inevitable increase in rent or house price than would otherwise be.
This stupid nama would love to demolish thousands of estates and have countless other thousands homeless and on waiting lists,all so that they can achieve their target inflated unaffordable (to the ordinary joe and jane soap)house price at some future date.
 
One of the problems in the country is all the people on housing lists.. and if you housed them all in properties in the middle of nowhere (like a lot of those half-build estates) we would end up with slums of council estates all over the country.

Would it not make more sense for workers to be able to afford homes first? The problem with these half-build estates is some of them are not even within commuter distance. During the boom people may have settled to live in the middle of nowhere to get on the property ladder, now people won't be so fussy.

I think we need to recognise those estates for what they are.. overvalued but ultimately worthless land with poor infrastructure, no facilities, with the beginning of shoddily build buildings whose wooden structures are badly damaged by now.
 
Also you can't just take people off housing lists in Dublin and send them to Leitrim.
Click to expand...

Never understood why this is the case - surely you can house unemployed people anywhere in the country? As they dont have jobs, then commuting distance does not exist. Might help with the problem of rural depopulation. Would also help break the cycle of poverty with those sectors of society where unemployment passes through the generations - a fresh start in a new environment would shake them up a bit and their kids would benefit from attending the local school instead of (non) attendance at a failed school in a ghetto.
 
csirl said:
their kids would benefit from attending the local school instead of (non) attendance at a failed school in a ghetto.
Click to expand...
Here's a mad idea - why not fix the 'failed school in a ghetto', so that all the pupils get a fair chance at success?
 
Complainer said:
Here's a mad idea - why not fix the 'failed school in a ghetto', so that all the pupils get a fair chance at success?
Click to expand...

The only way to improve a failed school is to change the socio-economic mix of the pupils - most of the pupils in these schools come from the lower socio-economic sections of society. You can't "fix" them with extra staff, money etc. You have a greater chance of success if you take the pupils from the failed school and disperse them among schools with a more varied socio-economic mix of pupils so that they are in the minority rather than in the majority.
 
MANTO said:
and moving the parents from one part of the country to another will make no difference.
Click to expand...

It might because its breaking the cycle. If you leave these people in the same area, surrounded by the same people, with the same peer pressure, in the same failed community, then they will never change. You need to change something to have any hope of improvement.
 
csirl said:
Never understood why this is the case - surely you can house unemployed people anywhere in the country? As they dont have jobs, then commuting distance does not exist.
Click to expand...

Whilst theoretcially beneficial when condidered in a vacuum I don't think mass relocation of the unemployed is a good idea in practical terms.

Employed or unemployed, most people do not like to be relocated to far away locations.
 

You need to change peoples attitudes, values, beliefs and mindsets - but they have been instilled since birth and very hard to change.

I would rather use my time and energy to improve my own families life rather than those who cant see past the end of their noses.
 
kids from bad backgrounds bring down the rest of the class. that's the problem.
Their 24 year old pajama-wearing mother's drop the kids to school, hang around outside smoking a fag, consider complaining to the teacher about something, then go for a fry.. urgh.. it's disgusting really. Then when their kids finish school the parents bombard them with questions like "was the teacher being mean to you again - don't worry i'll sort her out.. you never had a problem with ms x did you?" then they go by the chipper on the way home. Those kids will grow up with such a sense of entitlement and no concept of hard work. They'll probably be pregnant while sitting their leaving cert knowing that the government will give them a free house, social welfare, child benefit, then back to education grants to go to college!!! All the time complaining that their free house isn't good enough because there's too many scumbags in the area!!
 
Is war against social walfare career people the new private Vs Public sector?
I hope not because it's boring. There's already a thread on here about it.

Back to Nama please.

This, posted by Sunrock, makes the most sense to me:
Sadly I am not surprised because one of NAMA s aims is to stabilise house price declines. By demolishing estates , it will reduce the supply.
Click to expand...
The Irish government is desperately trying to shore up property prices. It won't work though. The only thing that will work is jobs.
 
Towger said:
A waste of time, the problem starts with the parents.
Click to expand...
Right, now start tracing back - what kind of schooling did the parents get?


This is your own personal classist view, and has no basis in reality. Talk to any teacher in any of these schools and they know exactly what is need to address the schooling problems (which are just one of a whole host of problems facing these communities). A policy of 'dispersal' is not the solution.

This is classist nonsence. If you made the same comments about people of a certain race or ethnicity, you'd find yourself in court. It is absolute rubbish of course. There are good and bad parents in every school in the country. Wearing pyjamas and eating fries does not make you a bad parent, and does not make you better or worse than the yummy-mummies in the designer tracksuits who rush off to spend the hubby's hard earned cash in BTs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register