I know. Where's Social Justice Ireland when you need them? I feel ashamed, although I'm part of the problem; I also moved away because I couldn't afford to buy in the area.
I feel like the guy who shot Bambi's mother...
I know. Where's Social Justice Ireland when you need them? I feel ashamed, although I'm part of the problem; I also moved away because I couldn't afford to buy in the area.The shame! How ARE they coping? No wonder society has broken down. How can we as taxpayers look at ourselves in the mirror knowing that we are treating our fellow citizens with such impunity and forcing them to the wilderness like cattle?
I'd be straight onto Rich Boyd Barrett if I were you. Oh and get yourself a medical card to while your at it.I also moved away because I couldn't afford to buy in the area.
I'll email him, thanks.I'd be straight onto Rich Boyd Barrett if I were you. Oh and get yourself a medical card to while your at it.
I'm proposing they pay the market rate of rent. How many time do I have to say the same thing?
At the same time people are wondering why would I ever bother to get a job, work hard, buy a home and generally pay my own way as a competent adult, after all;
That's the average. It would imply a cohort earning more.
they're getting a house for next to nothing and even if they have spare rooms they can stay there whilst a family with young children "lives" in emergency accommodation.
You are avoiding the reality. People living in social housing do not, in the main, earn incomes high enough to buy or rent in the private market.
I'm happy it's called a home, just not with the permanency of it. Lots of people rent and have various "homes" in their lives.I've highlighted 'principle home' to emphasis that the property is now the home of the tenant.
If everyone living in social housing was assessed there could be many, many suitable house types available.And as for your family with young children, you do realise that not every social home is suitable? You do realise that even if you evict a working woman, who raised a family, who pays her taxes, pays housing rent, that the home you want to evict her out of may not actually be suitable for the family in the hostel? Or do you think people and their families can just be herded to wherever suits?
What if the woman in the house by herself lives in Dublin, but the family in the hostel or hotel are located in Letterkenny, and one of the family is working in Letterkenny? Are you suggesting they give up their job in order to get the house to evict the woman who now ends up depressed living in a hostel, because of the housing crisis she is not able to find suitable accommodation (because she earns a low income) to get to her job everyday, so she then loses her job, and the family in the house are depressed because they cant get work and have been taken out of their community and the kids are upset.
Very valid concern and they would be the first to go in my book and preferably an extended holiday in the JoyIs there any concept that a working family, who after the economic crisis, lost their home, their business, their high standard of living, may....just may feel, that a LA house in a run-down estate, with drug dealers and crime gangs prevalent in the community, that this is not suitable for their children? That perhaps the hotel or hostel is preferential?
Because they don't have to! They can stay where they are knowing well that they will continue to occupy council housing even if someone with a greater need is in emergency accommodation.
I'm happy it's called a home, just not with the permanency of it. Lots of people rent and have various "homes" in their lives.
If everyone living in social housing was assessed there could be many, many suitable house types available.
Very valid concern and they would be the first to go in my book and preferably an extended holiday in the Joy
If they are paying lower rents than their neighbour who is renting privately then they are being subsidised. I have no problem with that unless they can reasonably afford to pay the market rents. I don't like poor people subsidising richer people. I don't like welfare payments covering the cost of a holiday when they could be used to cover the cost of getting someone out of a hostel.If they are paying taxes and a rent that is linked to their income (the Differential Rate Scheme) they are paying their way.
Same family; he inherits his parents home, the wife inherits her parents home and €70,000 in cash. they do up and rent out those homes, getting €2,000 a year for each. Their household income is now €103,000 a month. Their son gets a new girlfriend and they have a baby. Rather than live in one of his parents houses he goes on the housing list. The parents never pay the market rate for their council house.I hate to put a pin in the bubble of your 5yr Plan - but a married couple, both working in low income employment, she a hairdresser, he a cleaner in a factory. They occupy a social house, earn €55k a year are in their mid 50's. They have two kids, 18yr old girl who has aspirations of being a model, 20 yr son apprentice mechanic. Both living at home in the social house all their lives. The son qualifies as a mechanic and now earning a wage decides with his girlfriend to move into together in private rental accommodation. They decide they want to stand on their own two feet, how good is that? The daughter, hired by a modelling agency gets a contract to work in England for six months.
Both kids have flown the nest.
You send your assessor around to the home as part of your State controlled 5yr plan. The assessor decides that this 3 bed terrace is not suitable anymore (too big) and that in the grip of a housing crisis others are more needy. The State assessor orders them to move to a more suitable 1 bed apartment, or buy a place of their own. Buying or renting in the private market is out of the question with today's prices and the banks won't give them a mortgage in their mid 50's on the incomes they have, or what mortgage they would give, wouldn't buy a garden shed in Killiney! The new apartment it's a little further away from where they work, but only two bus rides to and from new home to employment. The 3 bed is now occupied by a family with no income, two kids, but they are more needy!
Six months after the assessment circumstances have changed - the son has broken up with his girlfriend (not his fault, she dumped him) neither can afford the apartment on their own so they have to leave, the daughter discovered the modelling agency in the UK was not all that it was cracked up to be, broken dreams (stuff like this does happen).
Both the son and the daughter return home only to find that you, under your plan, have evicted their parents to a one bed apt. There is nowhere now for them to stay. The son is looking for alternative accommodation but by himself he is in the same boat as all the other first time buyers. The daughter has no income until offered a trainee hairdresser position for €8 ph. But as she has nowhere to stay, as her home has been taken, she and her brother qualify for social housing and in turn are placed in emergency accommodation.
The family that now occupy the house have no employment - why should they? They don't need to work, they have been gifted a free house by the taxpayer which they can stay in for the rest of their lives and the working family, the mother, father, son and daughter have all been rightly screwed. But what's worse is, the house next door to one they live in was also assessed. At the time of the assessment it was fully occupied, but six months on, the two children in that house flew the nest. It is now perfectly suitable for the working family to return home (albeit next door) and live together again. But as your plan is to assess the accommodation needs of each family every 5yrs, then this house won't be assessed for another 4.5 yrs - shame!
Have you anything to back this up? Again, I ask you, Cork City has reported a 50% refusal rate in their offers of accommodation. I'm guessing suitability is a key factor here, particularly when it comes to employment opportunities.
I hate to put a pin in the bubble of your 5yr Plan - but a married couple, both working in low income employment, she a hairdresser, he a cleaner in a factory. They occupy a social house, earn €55k a year are in their mid 50's. They have two kids, 18yr old girl who has aspirations of being a model, 20 yr son apprentice mechanic. Both living at home in the social house all their lives. The son qualifies as a mechanic and now earning a wage decides with his girlfriend to move into together in private rental accommodation. They decide they want to stand on their own two feet, how good is that? The daughter, hired by a modelling agency gets a contract to work in England for six months.
Both kids have flown the nest.
You send your assessor around to the home as part of your State controlled 5yr plan. The assessor decides that this 3 bed terrace is not suitable anymore (too big) and that in the grip of a housing crisis others are more needy. The State assessor orders them to move to a more suitable 1 bed apartment, or buy a place of their own. Buying or renting in the private market is out of the question with today's prices and the banks won't give them a mortgage in their mid 50's on the incomes they have, or what mortgage they would give, wouldn't buy a garden shed in Killiney! The new apartment it's a little further away from where they work, but only two bus rides to and from new home to employment. The 3 bed is now occupied by a family with no income, two kids, but they are more needy!
Six months after the assessment circumstances have changed - the son has broken up with his girlfriend (not his fault, she dumped him) neither can afford the apartment on their own so they have to leave, the daughter discovered the modelling agency in the UK was not all that it was cracked up to be, broken dreams (stuff like this does happen).
Both the son and the daughter return home only to find that you, under your plan, have evicted their parents to a one bed apt. There is nowhere now for them to stay. The son is looking for alternative accommodation but by himself he is in the same boat as all the other first time buyers. The daughter has no income until offered a trainee hairdresser position for €8 ph. But as she has nowhere to stay, as her home has been taken, she and her brother qualify for social housing and in turn are placed in emergency accommodation.
The family that now occupy the house have no employment - why should they? They don't need to work, they have been gifted a free house by the taxpayer which they can stay in for the rest of their lives and the working family, the mother, father, son and daughter have all been rightly screwed. But what's worse is, the house next door to one they live in was also assessed. At the time of the assessment it was fully occupied, but six months on, the two children in that house flew the nest. It is now perfectly suitable for the working family to return home (albeit next door) and live together again. But as your plan is to assess the accommodation needs of each family every 5yrs, then this house won't be assessed for another 4.5 yrs - shame!
Good God you should consider writing a fantasy novel, you could make a fortune!
Same family; he inherits his parents home, the wife inherits her parents home and €70,000 in cash. they do up and rent out those homes, getting €2,000 a year for each. Their household income is now €103,000 a month. Their son gets a new girlfriend and they have a baby. Rather than live in one of his parents houses he goes on the housing list. The parents never pay the market rate for their council house.
Does that sound fair to you?
What empty rooms are you talking about? 25% of social housing is already over-crowded
SO the children of wealthy families should get social housing. Then when that son's parents die he'll live in a house provided by the State, paying subsidised rent, while renting out the three houses he owns. Do you think that's fair?How can the son, girlfriend and new baby live in one of the inherited houses when they are already occupied in the private rental market? Are you suggesting that multiple families live in the same house?
Unfortunately when it's obvious that the futility of your proposals cannot sink in
So, unlike Purple, your issue isn't just with people who can "well afford to buy", your issue is with those who cannot afford a place of their own also? You think taking people out of social housing who can't afford to stay anywhere is a good idea so that people in emergency accommodation can be looked after? So the low paid workers who cannot afford anywhere else can presumably move into the emergency accommodation?
Yes, so what? I'm in my fifth home now, I intend to settle down now. I pay for it myself, but if it were social housing I don't think I could fathom many more changes.
Have you anything to back this up? Again, I ask you, Cork City has reported a 50% refusal rate in their offers of accommodation. I'm guessing suitability is a key factor here, particularly when it comes to employment opportunities.
I hate to put a pin in the bubble of your 5yr Plan - but a married couple, both working in low income employment, she a hairdresser, he a cleaner in a factory. They occupy a social house, earn €55k a year are in their mid 50's. They have two kids, 18yr old girl who has aspirations of being a model, 20 yr son apprentice mechanic. Both living at home in the social house all their lives. The son qualifies as a mechanic and now earning a wage decides with his girlfriend to move into together in private rental accommodation. They decide they want to stand on their own two feet, how good is that? The daughter, hired by a modelling agency gets a contract to work in England for six months.
Both kids have flown the nest.
You send your assessor around to the home as part of your State controlled 5yr plan. The assessor decides that this 3 bed terrace is not suitable anymore (too big) and that in the grip of a housing crisis others are more needy. The State assessor orders them to move to a more suitable 1 bed apartment, or buy a place of their own. Buying or renting in the private market is out of the question with today's prices and the banks won't give them a mortgage in their mid 50's on the incomes they have, or what mortgage they would give, wouldn't buy a garden shed in Killiney! The new apartment it's a little further away from where they work, but only two bus rides to and from new home to employment. The 3 bed is now occupied by a family with no income, two kids, but they are more needy!
Six months after the assessment circumstances have changed - the son has broken up with his girlfriend (not his fault, she dumped him) neither can afford the apartment on their own so they have to leave, the daughter discovered the modelling agency in the UK was not all that it was cracked up to be, broken dreams (stuff like this does happen).
Both the son and the daughter return home only to find that you, under your plan, have evicted their parents to a one bed apt. There is nowhere now for them to stay. The son is looking for alternative accommodation but by himself he is in the same boat as all the other first time buyers. The daughter has no income until offered a trainee hairdresser position for €8 ph. But as she has nowhere to stay, as her home has been taken, she and her brother qualify for social housing and in turn are placed in emergency accommodation.
The family that now occupy the house have no employment - why should they? They don't need to work, they have been gifted a free house by the taxpayer which they can stay in for the rest of their lives and the working family, the mother, father, son and daughter have all been rightly screwed. But what's worse is, the house next door to one they live in was also assessed. At the time of the assessment it was fully occupied, but six months on, the two children in that house flew the nest. It is now perfectly suitable for the working family to return home (albeit next door) and live together again. But as your plan is to assess the accommodation needs of each family every 5yrs, then this house won't be assessed for another 4.5 yrs - shame!
Great, I'm guessing you have another back of the envelope solution to the drug problem that has plagues Western societies for the last 50yrs or so. When you have all the drug dealers in prison come back and we can discuss how we can accommodate the homeless more.
Which means 75% isn't and of that 75% I am sure that there are spare bedrooms wouldn't you think? Lots of people whose kids have flown the nest with spare bedrooms, even in your example above!
You appear to believe that people should take no responsibility for the circumstances they find themselves in.
As part of the allocation of social housing people are advised that your housing needs are assessed every 5 yrs to consider both over and undercrowding. If the property is to big for you then you know when you got the property in first place that your situation will be assessed every 5 yrs and you could and would be moved if the property is no longer suitable.
Life sucks, we all have problems, life never turns out the way we want.
When you start dictating to citizens where and when they can live, you are only a short hop and jump away from then dictating where and when they should work. And that instance, welcome the to Stalins USSR!
Im sure there are spare rooms. But you cant devise a housing policy based on the narrow prism of a persons income nor how many spare rooms a household has. There are too many other intrinsic, complex and variable factors to consider that will impede any such system from working properly – such as current employment location, employment opportunities, healthcare, access to education other social services, the condition of the property, community ties, crime levels in the location of social house (perceived or real). These factors are pertinent to the viewpoint of the existing tenant and the prospective tenant in emergency accommodation.
And despite the made-up scenario I gave, things do like that do occur – when the young ones leave the nest, sometimes they do return. Sometimes it takes a number of attempts before they finally establish themselves outside of their home. I left home when I got my first job in Tallaght, I rented digs with three others. When I changed jobs for a job in city centre I returned home to my parents on the northside for another 12 months. I moved to Australia, I was offered a sponsorship to stay and work permanently. My then girlfriend wasn’t offered a sponsorship. We returned to Ireland and again we moved back to my parents to save a deposit for a house in Dublin.
How would have all of that worked out for me, working and paying taxes, if having moved out my parents were then evicted to a 1 bed apartment? Truth is, I probably wouldn’t have left home at all in the first place. I would have stayed in the house with my girlfriend insuring that I would have somewhere to live long-term.
Your proposal puts a block on mobility, a barrier to risk-taking, imposes increased hardship, uses up more State resources than could ever be possibly saved – (nevermind the administration, but the mental healthcare costs associated with eviction would spiral) would get tied up in legal challenges.
When you start dictating to citizens where and when they can live, you are only a short hop and jump away from then dictating where and when they should work. And that instance, welcome the to Stalins USSR!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?