Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:25 am 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 10782
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
@GaneBlame. Start here. The Citizens Information service is a good source.

Social Housing is more relevant now than ever before. You might have an ideological difficulty with it but you haven't proposed a workable alternative?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:33 am 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4351
GameBlame wrote:
The whole idea of a "housing list" is broken. It is 1990s thinking. The list is gamed by whatever sectional interest is preferred at a particular point in time (travellers, Syrians, single parents without the means to cover childcare).

We're all supposed to pretend there aren't loads and loads of people (like baristas and call centre workers) who wouldn't like and don't equally merit peppercorn "forever homes". These people aren't even on "the list". But they can end up living and paying rent in a normal commercial way in the same building as people who are on "the list" in their "forever homes" or with their 5 year tenancies for being special people.

Someone should really tell Erica.

OK, "telling Erica" that you think the system is being gamed by minorities you dislike isn't helpful. Are you suggesting that she is a member of those "sectional interests" and should just shut up and take whatever is offered, or that the system is being gamed by others and she should leave them to it?

What system are you advocating? No lifetime council house tenancy? Withdrawal of all state provision of housing combined with rent assistance? Dismantling of social welfare?

_________________
"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: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:10 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Dec 2, 2013
Posts: 2000
Coles2 wrote:
@GaneBlame. Start here. The Citizens Information service is a good source.

Social Housing is more relevant now than ever before. You might have an ideological difficulty with it but you haven't proposed a workable alternative?


You know that
1 the overwhelming majority of properties built in the last 20 years have been private
2 there has been sustained sell off of council houses to their tenants (at undervalue) for the last 40 years.

But social housing is "more relevant than ever" ? (And I'm the ideological one?)
When it's clearly less relevant than at any time since the 1920s


Last edited by GameBlame on Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:16 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Dec 2, 2013
Posts: 2000
Eschatologist wrote:
GameBlame wrote:
The whole idea of a "housing list" is broken. It is 1990s thinking. The list is gamed by whatever sectional interest is preferred at a particular point in time (travellers, Syrians, single parents without the means to cover childcare).

We're all supposed to pretend there aren't loads and loads of people (like baristas and call centre workers) who wouldn't like and don't equally merit peppercorn "forever homes". These people aren't even on "the list". But they can end up living and paying rent in a normal commercial way in the same building as people who are on "the list" in their "forever homes" or with their 5 year tenancies for being special people.

Someone should really tell Erica.

OK, "telling Erica" that you think the system is being gamed by minorities you dislike isn't helpful. Are you suggesting that she is a member of those "sectional interests" and should just shut up and take whatever is offered, or that the system is being gamed by others and she should leave them to it?

What system are you advocating? No lifetime council house tenancy? Withdrawal of all state provision of housing combined with rent assistance? Dismantling of social welfare?


Clearly Erica thinks "the solution" is for Erica and everyone in a hotel to get a "forever home". She's right. That's the best solution for Erica. The old broken system working to house who it prefers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:17 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4351
GameBlame wrote:
Clearly Erica thinks "the solution" is for Erica and everyone in a hotel to get a "forever home". She's right. That's the best solution for Erica. The old broken system working to house who it prefers.

You're still dodging the questions about what system you're advocating.

_________________
"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: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:25 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Dec 2, 2013
Posts: 2000
Eschatologist wrote:
GameBlame wrote:
Clearly Erica thinks "the solution" is for Erica and everyone in a hotel to get a "forever home". She's right. That's the best solution for Erica. The old broken system working to house who it prefers.

You're still dodging the questions about what system you're advocating.


Everyone is dodging my points while insisting I'm dodging theirs ?
Is the system broken and unfit for purpose or are you going to insist it's under resourced ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:33 pm 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: Oct 29, 2007
Posts: 11211
Location: Multiverse
GameBlame wrote:
Eschatologist wrote:
GameBlame wrote:
Clearly Erica thinks "the solution" is for Erica and everyone in a hotel to get a "forever home". She's right. That's the best solution for Erica. The old broken system working to house who it prefers.

You're still dodging the questions about what system you're advocating.


Everyone is dodging my points while insisting I'm dodging theirs ?
Is the system broken and unfit for purpose or are you going to insist it's under resourced ?



No one should be entitled to a 'forever home' unless they bought it themselves.
Otherwise what's the point in busting your ass every day for 40+ years.

The system is broken.
Too much is given away for too long, to too many people and too easily.

The burden on the working person is crippling.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:53 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4351
mr_anderson wrote:
No one should be entitled to a 'forever home' unless they bought it themselves.
Otherwise what's the point in busting your ass every day for 40+ years.

One does not follow from the other. People work hard for lots of reasons. Do you plan to stop working as soon as you have enough money buy the cheapest possible housing for your basic needs?

It is perfectly possible to meet people's need for shelter without destroying incentives for self-sufficiency or creating state dependency traps.

My parents-in-law live in social housing outside Dublin. It is modest but comfortable. They pay rent and work. The house was cheaply built and costs little to maintain. There is no resentment over their situation in the local community because there is plenty of nicer housing for those who can afford it.

The only reason these long, secure, affordable tenancies create aggravation in Dublin and other cities is that everyone is scrambling over each other competing for limited stock. People often act like bastards to each other when competing for limited resources, but the scarcity in housing is entirely contrived.

_________________
"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: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 2:58 pm 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: Oct 29, 2007
Posts: 11211
Location: Multiverse
Eschatologist wrote:
mr_anderson wrote:
No one should be entitled to a 'forever home' unless they bought it themselves.
Otherwise what's the point in busting your ass every day for 40+ years.

One does not follow from the other. People work hard for lots of reasons. Do you plan to stop working as soon as you have enough money buy the cheapest possible housing for your basic needs?

It is perfectly possible to meet people's need for shelter without destroying incentives for self-sufficiency or creating state dependency traps.

My parents-in-law live in social housing outside Dublin. It is modest but comfortable. They pay rent and work. The house was cheaply built and costs little to maintain. There is no resentment over their situation in the local community because there is plenty of nicer housing for those who can afford it.

The only reason these long, secure, affordable tenancies create aggravation in Dublin and other cities is that everyone is scrambling over each other competing for limited stock. People often act like bastards to each other when competing for limited resources, but the scarcity in housing is entirely contrived.


Without a doubt, supply is being artificially constrained.
But I've always believed that those who work should have preference over those that don't when it comes to housing.
Simply because the former are paying for the latter.
Would you agree ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:04 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4351
mr_anderson wrote:
...I've always believed that those who work should have preference over those that don't when it comes to housing.
Simply because the former are paying for the latter.
Would you agree ?

Do you mean if there are two equally poor people with identical needs, one of whom works and the other is unemployed, then the person who works should be given first dibs on council-administered housing?

I'd probably agree with that, but it's probably not what you mean.

_________________
"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: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:10 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Dec 2, 2013
Posts: 2000
The problem with the system is that it fosters inequality while wrapping it up in piety - bumping people up and down the list.

I think the working vs not working thing is more piety and moralising actually. Who knows why someone isn't working - addiction, mental health, abuse, habit

A person is a person. They should be treated with individual respect. Instead we have this broken monster.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:52 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Apr 9, 2014
Posts: 1657
Look on the brights side - we have an army of public servants to administer this monster :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:00 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Aug 8, 2008
Posts: 2793
Location: Cathair na dTreabh
Luan wrote:
Look on the brights side - we have an army of public servants to administer this monster :)

That we do.
31 local authorities, each with their own massive costs structures.
75+ homeless charities, most of whom are in receipt of State funds, with dupliciting structures


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:29 pm 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: Oct 29, 2007
Posts: 11211
Location: Multiverse
Eschatologist wrote:
Do you mean if there are two equally poor people with identical needs, one of whom works and the other is unemployed, then the person who works should be given first dibs on council-administered housing?

I'd probably agree with that, but it's probably not what you mean.


It is what I mean.
People who work should have priority over those who don't.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Councils legally obliged to house the deliberately homel
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 4:55 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail

Joined: Sep 13, 2012
Posts: 4351
mr_anderson wrote:
Eschatologist wrote:
Do you mean if there are two equally poor people with identical needs, one of whom works and the other is unemployed, then the person who works should be given first dibs on council-administered housing?

I'd probably agree with that, but it's probably not what you mean.


It is what I mean.
People who work should have priority over those who don't.

But presumably you don't mean "two equally poor people with identical needs", since that's never the case.

How would this work? Have two housing lists, one for working people and the other for the unemployed, and don't house anyone from the second list until the first list is empty?

_________________
"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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [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: