You truly are a joker.
The quote of mine that you highlight, nowhere do I try to "justify" the refusal of non-payment of rent.
My comment merely points to on-going realities of life that may be contributory factors for the arrears of LA authority rents and the complexities of finding suitable accommodation for homeless families.
Are you denying that factors other than a straight refusal to pay are not contributing to the arrears?
And that's how I took it. My question simply related to how you thought homeless people refusing offers of housing was connected to arrears rates / refusal to pay.
'you brought it up in the context of trying to justify why LA tenants might be refusing to pay rent.'
I think it's clear that I haven't commented one way or the other.
So you now agree that a tenant cannot legitimately refuse to pay their rent because a property may require renovations
I acknowledged your point as being in fact correct from 4 pages back
I still have no idea therefore what point you are trying to make on this thread,
I suspect In Ireland it is the Capitalist gone wrong you need to watch there are no Socialist in Ireland worth talking about only Capitalist ripping off other not so smart Capitalist or smart people with no cop on,I think that's the crux of the matter; the rest of us just aren't as smart as you. How could we be, otherwise we'd all be socialists, right?
How convenient that is for you.
But you have commented, you have accused me of diversion, 'rabbit holes' and have misrepresented my views, without offering a comment of your own on the points raised in the topic.
Your arrogance is palpable.
I'm far from the only one who accuses you of that here and in other threads
Just because I haven't offered my own opinion on the subject matter does not preclude me from pointing out the flaws in your arguments
trying to justify why LA tennnts might be refusing to pay rent.
But you haven't pointed out any flaws in my argument. By your admission "you haven't commented one way or another".
Ah, what about pointing out that homeless people refusing housing offers has no bearing on LA rent arrears?
My comment merely points to on-going realities of life that may be contributory factors for the arrears of LA authority rents and the complexities of finding suitable accommodation for homeless families.
And that's how I took it.
Yet, you persist with repeating questions, in similar fashion to other posters, that I have already answered directly.
That is what I would call digging a 'rabbit-hole'.
You can't just answer the question then?
I did answer, and tried to elaborate somewhat on the idiocy of what is being proposed.
But you like to simplify complex issues, so I will simplify my answer for you.
A homeless family refusing an offer of accommodation has nothing to do with a LA tenant refusing to pay rent when they have been assessed as being capable of doing so.
Why do you ask?
I ask because you brought it up in the context of trying to justify why LA tennnts might be refusing to pay rent.
Considering my very last post contains details of the numerous occasions where I say the complete opposite, how did you deduce that I try to justify refusal of rent payment?
Well, what I really said was 'you brought it up in the context of trying to justify why LA tenants might be refusing to pay rent.'
My comment merely points to on-going realities of life that may be contributory factors for the arrears of LA authority rents and the complexities of finding suitable accommodation for homeless families.
And that's how I took it. My question simply related to how you thought homeless people refusing offers of housing was connected to arrears rates / refusal to pay.
And I answered that question
Ah, what about pointing out that homeless people refusing housing offers has no bearing on LA rent arrears?
I'm not repeating questions
Rabbit hole.
More fool me for following you down.
What's interesting from that article is that so many families would rather stay in a hotel or B&B than go into private rental accommodation. That tells me that the Local Authority Housing sector is far more favourable than the private rental sector. Why is the State providing better housing packages (taking location, cost and security of tenure into account) than is available to the majority of working families who rent?Philip Ryan has an interesting article on the housing and homeless crisis in the Indo from June 24.
It focuses on some of the complexities of the issue. Its still on line.
https://m.independent.ie/opinion/co...bare-in-stark-facts-and-figures-37042744.html
Do you think it is fundamentally fair that the people who work and pay income taxes at a sufficientkly high level to be deemed capable of renting their own homes should have their taxes spent providing rental accomodation at more favourable T's and C's to people who don't work/work as part or pay less tax? I'm all for a social safety net but not one suspended above those who provide it.if it were true that the State is providing better housing packages than the private rental sector then probably best that private landlords who charge market prices but provide standards less favourable than LA move out of the market altogether.
We ignore facts as our peril; emotion is no way to set government policy.First off, it is worth noting that homelessness is not an issue that can be fully evaluated using facts and figures. Each case involves a unique set of circumstances. Reducing people in vulnerable circumstances to a number demeans their situation.
Of course it should be considered but it should be considered in a considered way.God forbid, in a issue as crucial to sustaining a civil society, the plight of children be considered.
See that's just meaningless emotive clap-trap. It's the hand-wringing left wing equivalent of the Daily Mail nonsense about being overrun by immigrants.Behind each number there is a face - in 3,689 cases it is currently a child's face, which in itself paints a vivid picture.
Do you think it is fundamentally fair that the people who work and pay income taxes at a sufficientkly high level to be deemed capable of renting their own homes should have their taxes spent providing rental accomodation at more favourable T's and C's to people who don't work/work as part or pay less tax?
Local Authority Housing sector is far more favourable than the private rental sector
We ignore facts as our peril; emotion is no way to set government policy.
See that's just meaningless emotive clap-trap. It's the hand-wringing left wing equivalent of the Daily Mail nonsense about being overrun by immigrants
We do indeed. Maybe if the State provided social housing of the same level as provided in the private sector we wouldn't have all those people on the housing wasting lists.If there are 3,689 children in homeless emergency accommodation then that is simply a fact. We ignore facts at our peril.
It is indeed but we've one of the best educated workforces in the world and amongst the best education system (just ask a teacher, they'll tell you) and we have absolutely brilliant, dedicated and hard working Civil and Public Servants (just ask one, they'll tell you) so, given that as a species we can land a spaceship on an asteroid, I'm sure that all those brilliant minds can improve the current system without spending any more money.Who knows? Its a complex issue for sure.
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?