Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 469 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 ... 32  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:04 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Apr 1, 2010
Posts: 8957
Coles2 wrote:
Why can't the State provide a basic level of accommodation? Far cheaper to rent out social housing at affordable levels than to continue to pay private landlords €500 million a year to keep their rents high, €100 million a year on homelessness services, negative health and education impacts for all involved, higher costs of living across the State etc, etc.

What would count as a basic level of accommodation? Honest question -- is social housing not up to the same standard as private tenants have, and wouldn't there be an outcry if it was otherwise? Also, if the State were to build housing for the 64,000 people on rent allowance (40% of them in Dublin) the cost would run to trillions, not hundreds of millions, and they would still have to subsidise people just the same. That doesn't sound very realistic.

_________________
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" – Niels Bohr


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:12 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Feb 9, 2010
Posts: 8712
ps200306 wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
Why can't the State provide a basic level of accommodation? Far cheaper to rent out social housing at affordable levels than to continue to pay private landlords €500 million a year to keep their rents high, €100 million a year on homelessness services, negative health and education impacts for all involved, higher costs of living across the State etc, etc.

What would count as a basic level of accommodation? Honest question -- is social housing not up to the same standard as private tenants have, and wouldn't there be an outcry if it was otherwise? Also, if the State were to build housing for the 64,000 people on rent allowance (40% of them in Dublin) the cost would run to trillions, not hundreds of millions, and they would still have to subsidise people just the same. That doesn't sound very realistic.

You'd also be doing away with one of the few incentives to actually get an education and a job.

It must be hard for those on low salaries/wages commuting into Dublin City for another week's work, passing loads of well-located, city-adjacent (or central) property set aside for (some) people who don't work and have no intention of ever bothering. They must wonder why they bother. Materially, they'd be as well off if they didn't, and they would have rather more free time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:18 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 10669
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
jammyBastard wrote:
Coles2 wrote:

High rents to vulture funds leave the economy. They are a parasitic drag. There's nothing good in Fine Gael's housing policy. It's an aberration; a disgrace; a disgusting perversion.


While I think they should be paying proper taxes etc, and there's obviously lots of questionable deals, a point of order I'd make is that those vulture funds introduced capital into the economy, via NAMA, in the first place. This helped to replace some of the cash that had been borrowed short by Irish banks to fund Irish developers.

We needed foreign capital in, we can hardly then complain that the return on that capital doesn't stay in Ireland - only that said return, along with capital gains, are not being taxed appropriately.

And ALL of that foreign capital will again leave taking ALL of it's capital gain with it and ALL of it's income stream until they liquidate their investment.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:22 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4310
Barney Gumble wrote:
You'd also be doing away with one of the few incentives to actually get an education and a job.

You'd think from this discussion that council housing was some terrifying new idea. It isn't. It's worked for decades. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, we just need to start making the wheels like we did before.

I know people in who have lived in council housing all of their adult lives. They've worked and paid council rents all of their adult lives (or at least until they could no longer for health reasons). I don't think for a second they ever considered just giving up work and watching TV all day. Who would want that?

Entrenched joblessness has complex causes. An independent minded desire to freeload is not a significant one, IMO.

For the most part, people try to do the same thing as the people around them. This is why children of university educated people tend to go to university, why joblessness and crime propagates through generations, and it's why we must resist the temptation to lump all the jobless people together, because that gives no hope for their children.

_________________
"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favour"
Tyrion Lannister


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:29 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Jan 4, 2013
Posts: 16413
Location: To the right of the decimal place
ps200306 wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
Why can't the State provide a basic level of accommodation? Far cheaper to rent out social housing at affordable levels than to continue to pay private landlords €500 million a year to keep their rents high, €100 million a year on homelessness services, negative health and education impacts for all involved, higher costs of living across the State etc, etc.

What would count as a basic level of accommodation? Honest question -- is social housing not up to the same standard as private tenants have, and wouldn't there be an outcry if it was otherwise? .

Quite the contrary. Social housing is superior to many private rentals; recall the apartment blocks offered by NAMA as social housing and turned down because the units were too small, or lacked adequate public space, etc; they're considered perfectly fine for people paying their own rent though. We also know that social housing is sometimes turned down because the lease terms are not long enough for peoples' needs etc. So it seems that the bar for social housing is higher than for people paying for it themselves, instead of being roughly at parity.

_________________
Success is like being pregnant. People will congratulate you, but no one knows how many times you were fucked before you got there.

"You see a mousetrap, I see free cheese and a fucking challenge." --Scroobius Pip


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:35 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 10669
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
ps200306 wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
Why can't the State provide a basic level of accommodation? Far cheaper to rent out social housing at affordable levels than to continue to pay private landlords €500 million a year to keep their rents high, €100 million a year on homelessness services, negative health and education impacts for all involved, higher costs of living across the State etc, etc.

What would count as a basic level of accommodation? Honest question -- is social housing not up to the same standard as private tenants have, and wouldn't there be an outcry if it was otherwise? Also, if the State were to build housing for the 64,000 people on rent allowance (40% of them in Dublin) the cost would run to trillions, not hundreds of millions, and they would still have to subsidise people just the same. That doesn't sound very realistic.


Our notion of what is suitable accommodation evolves over time as our expectations change, and the building regulations are in place to reflect that expectation.

If the government built 100,000 house for €100k each it would cost €10 Billion. I have already shown how housing can be built for that cost, and no doubt others could find savings. A €10 Billion capital cost could easily be financed by the €500 million per annum that the government uses to inflate rents, the €100 million spent on homelessness services and by the rent roll of €300-500 million per annum that the properties could generate. If necessary the State could dispose of a portion of the housing to raise further capital for more housing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:35 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 10669
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
ps200306 wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
Why can't the State provide a basic level of accommodation? Far cheaper to rent out social housing at affordable levels than to continue to pay private landlords €500 million a year to keep their rents high, €100 million a year on homelessness services, negative health and education impacts for all involved, higher costs of living across the State etc, etc.

What would count as a basic level of accommodation? Honest question -- is social housing not up to the same standard as private tenants have, and wouldn't there be an outcry if it was otherwise? Also, if the State were to build housing for the 64,000 people on rent allowance (40% of them in Dublin) the cost would run to trillions, not hundreds of millions, and they would still have to subsidise people just the same. That doesn't sound very realistic.


Our notion of what is suitable accommodation evolves over time as our expectations change, and the building regulations are in place to reflect that expectation.

If the government built 100,000 house for €100k each it would cost €10 Billion. I have already shown how housing can be built for less than that cost and still meet the regs , and no doubt others could find savings. A €10 Billion capital cost could easily be financed by the €500 million per annum that the government uses to inflate rents, the €100 million spent on homelessness services and by the rent roll of €300-500 million per annum that the properties could generate. If necessary the State could dispose of a portion of the housing to raise further capital for more housing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:59 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Feb 9, 2010
Posts: 8712
Eschatologist wrote:
Barney Gumble wrote:
You'd also be doing away with one of the few incentives to actually get an education and a job.

You'd think from this discussion that council housing was some terrifying new idea. It isn't. It's worked for decades. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, we just need to start making the wheels like we did before.

I take your point, but I don't think you can compare social welfare provision in the 1950s and 60s (when my widowed grandmother was a 'beneficiary') with that of today.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:00 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4310
Barney Gumble wrote:
Eschatologist wrote:
Barney Gumble wrote:
You'd also be doing away with one of the few incentives to actually get an education and a job.

You'd think from this discussion that council housing was some terrifying new idea. It isn't. It's worked for decades. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, we just need to start making the wheels like we did before.

I take your point, but I don't think you can compare social welfare provision in the 1950s and 60s (when my widowed grandmother was a 'beneficiary') with that of today.

Why not?

_________________
"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favour"
Tyrion Lannister


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:05 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Feb 9, 2010
Posts: 8712
Eschatologist wrote:
Why not?

Because my grandmother was concerned with her children being malnourished, was unable to afford secondary education for all of her children, and the notion of a foreign holiday was laughable.

Is that the case today?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:24 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4310
Barney Gumble wrote:
Eschatologist wrote:
Why not?

Because my grandmother was concerned with her children being malnourished, was unable to afford secondary education for all of her children, and the notion of a foreign holiday was laughable.

Is that the case today?

But life was probably better for her than for her grandmother. And so on.

People are motivated by their immediate environment and peer group. They don't stop wanting a better life when they get central heating and Netflix.

_________________
"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favour"
Tyrion Lannister


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:39 pm 
Offline
Property Magnate

Joined: Oct 11, 2012
Posts: 612
Coles2 wrote:
And ALL of that foreign capital will again leave taking ALL of it's capital gain with it and ALL of it's income stream until they liquidate their investment.


You can't have it both ways - foreign capital investment has hugely benefited Ireland over decades. Going back to an autarkic economic model would be to step back to the 1950s.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:56 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Feb 9, 2010
Posts: 8712
Eschatologist wrote:
People are motivated by their immediate environment and peer group. They don't stop wanting a better life when they get central heating and Netflix.

That's actually quite a big claim. Nobody would quit work and spend their time in leisure once their material needs and desire for entertainment are met?

I'd suggest that there are posters on this very forum who meet that description.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 6:42 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4310
Barney Gumble wrote:
Eschatologist wrote:
People are motivated by their immediate environment and peer group. They don't stop wanting a better life when they get central heating and Netflix.

That's actually quite a big claim. Nobody would quit work and spend their time in leisure once their material needs and desire for entertainment are met?

I'd suggest that there are posters on this very forum who meet that description.

I fully support your argument that there is a moral equivalence between living on the dole and retiring to argue on the internet. :D

_________________
"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favour"
Tyrion Lannister


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Apollo House 'taken over' by Activists
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 6:56 pm 
Offline
Old Time Landlord

Joined: Apr 27, 2014
Posts: 396
werpen wrote:
Mantissa wrote:
Is there any possible end game here other than that every Irish person will be given a house by the state when they turn 18?


Well at least that would lower renting costs and increase competitiveness in the economy. rather than lining the pockets of landlords. What % of TDs are landlords.
Who really wants high rent and property prices


There are just over 2 million housing units in the country.

There are around 3.5 million people aged 18 and over in the country.

Are you really and seriously suggesting that the state should build another 1.5 million housing units so everyone over the age of 18 has their own home when we can't even build the actual 30,000 homes a year that are really needed? At a cost of many hundreds of billions? Where does all this money come from?

How would this lower rent cost? How would spending hundreds of billions increase competitiveness?

What happens if two such people want to live together? Are they obliged to give up one of their state-supplied homes? Of do they get to keep it and sublet it? Who gets to decide - some Narodnykommisar of Peoples Housing? Is there some vast home allocation bureaucracy that arbitrates and decides on and allocates supply in accordance with officially decided accommodation needs?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 469 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 ... 32  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to: