I think SF should propose banning foreigners, or non-EU nationals at least, from buying houses. They should say âNew Zealand did it, itâs hardly a communist basketcaseâ.
It would make it look like SF had real policies and cared more than the others. It would be slightly edgy but not too edgy. It would win support of resentful bitter working-class types but you couldnât really accuse them of being racist.
I agree that itâs a much, much bigger problem than just housing ---- itâs everything feeding into each other â But it has to be tackled and building is just one part of it⌠it has to be a long term fix.
The cost of living/ inflation in this country is just as crippling as rents.
But youâre right - house prices have risen 500% in the lat 20-30 years â whereas wages are still at 1990s house prices 
If we put a roof over the country we wouldânt need houses - tents would do - has anyone thought of that?
Ah here the smell would be unreal. The gobshites would forget to put in air conditioning.
Some lads here havenât figured out the whole supply concept at all and that more houses/apartments overall, for either rent or sale, is the main way to resolve most of the issues. No wonder the argument is reduced to slogans.
I worked on a project recently where specified social housing was built in a fairly well to do estate. Didnt go down well at all, but anyway, it was done and they were occupied as soon as they were completed. Called back to look at snags on one of them, the people who had moved in had stripped out the attic and built an attic conversion less than 1 month after moving in. They cut back all the prefab trusses to form the attic room, with no structural engineer involved and built this room. So there is no way the builder was getting involved then and told the council he has nothing to do with that anymore as the structural integrity of the entire roof of all the houses would be affected by that. How these people had the funds to do this so quick astounded me.
So are you saying that we need to build or not?
Sad fact is that there is a culture of this carry on in the country - everyone on here probably knows stories of people cheating the system. I heard one the other day where a couple, both self employed, him a sparky and her a hairdresser, got some kind of affordable/social housing â how the fuck does that happen? cash in hands and cooking the books? Both are busying enough .
Fuck it though itâs great to see @ProjectX and his cousin getting set up after all those years living in the caravan.
stop peddling this nonsense, 50-100 of these homes would have been occupied by poor people on the housing list
Social housing would be great if it worked properly, where families had to move on when things improved. The problem is once a family get a council house then thats it they wont move on ever, regardless of whether they are working or not .
Where I grew up there was a council estate, you had your mix of good and bad mostly good, but now when I go back to visit my mam, the same families are still living in those houses, most have probably bought them from the council. None of the people in these houses were asked to move once circumstances changed for the better. Like I said Social housing should only be temporary and as soon as families are back on their feet they need to move on and let other families move in.
but sure the problem is that they arent social houses, they are âforever homesâ
In your fucking dreams there was not a hope in hell that any social housing was going to be built there, regardless of the rules. The Developer would just buy their way out of providing social housing. The houses were off Vernon Avenue one of the most expensive areaâs on the northside.
Exactly. If someone is housed in social housing their circumstances need to be reviewed every 5 years or so to see that they still meet the thresholds for social housing, if it is found that their circumstances have changed for the better then they should be told you need to move on and let another needy family move in.
So youâve finally accepted that that Cash tramp cheated the system?
Iâm absolutely saying we need to build - supply is the key. I donât think anyone doubts that. The details of building are pretty complex though. Just saying the âstate should build housesâ is sloganeering of the highest order
The state doesnât have the ability/resources to build. At a simple level it doesnât have builders on its staff. Therefore it has to contract the dreaded private sector to do it. The construction sector in the private sector is probably already at capacity - it has limited ability to produce extra output, the main effect of demanding more is that construction costs increase.
In addition, with planning, public tendering rules and the actual construction - there is a significant lag between deciding to build a house in a location and final house. Iâd imagine most of the houses being completed this year were envisaged in 2015/2016.
So straight away you have the issue of a time lag, absolute requirement to use the private sector and and construction capacity.
An alternative way of increasing the supply is from the private sector. Developers have a big issue accessing funding for development with the banks highly risk averse after the last crash. In addition, the central bank rules which are correctly in place to protect us from ourselves, limit the amount of borrowing that can be provided further minimising the amount of capital that can be put towards development. There is opportunity in non-residential with better finance and returns - what a surprise that many developers have focused efforts there. The government can try and incentivise etc but it still remains a catch-22 situation, particularly when prices are at or near construction costs. Donât forget the construction costs are inflating rapidly because of all the demand on the sector. Also the lag factor applies here too.
So, itâs a complete shitshow to build houses in any meaningful quantity quickly. On top of the things I mentioned you have NIMBYism, population growth, urban concentration etc etc
These issues would apply to all political parties and Iâve yet to hear a credible plan from the opposition. Itâs easy to criticise - not so easy to solve. If the gov had started building houses in 2011 and increased taxes or reduced services to do it they would have been hounded by the opposition. I donât recall a post on here or many national commentators calling for house-building. Yet thats the root of the problem.
To summarise, yes we need houses, no its not simple, any one suggesting a simple solution to a multi-factorial complex problem is either a fool or a knave and I think this is going to continue for several years to come.
Thats awful auld nonsense.
Not true at all.
I see it as the joint biggest failure of this Government and the last one, alongside a failure to properly reform the public sector.
However the factors that have lead to this are so multi faceted that simplicities arguments and solutions do not hold.
What I despise is;
Whilst I do agree and think itâs disgraceful that the older generations are benefitting from this crisis, I do think there is a woe is me attitude out there.
People are not starving. People have an amundance or recreation and technology options they didnât have even 30 years ago. Maybe people are more unhappy with their lot despite that, but is the human condition really the fault of the State?
People who sleep on the street do it by choice. It is not ideal to be forced into a hotel or emergency accomation, and in a place you donât want to be, but the State do provide a safety net. Ireland has a generous safety net paid through progressive taxation. The constant refrain though is that the State and society do little.
The people who sleep rough mostly have huge personal demons, separate to housing. The people unhappy despite having an ambundance of resources considered as needed to live well, have mental health conditions. The idea here is to spend more money on these things by the State, but again those are separate problems.
As for the rent supplement. The State are projecting they will spend 600m a year for the next five years. That is a drop in the ocean in comparison to building thousands of homes. Dublin City Council estimate it costs 330k to build a home even when they own the land- the math doesnât work unless we create a budget the size of our health budget.
Leo Varadkar was pillioried for pointing this out.
Square that circle.
That said, I canât respect Varadkar for doing that and then putting in across the board increases in social welfare, where in order to get the same increase in your weekly income from tax decreases you would need to be earning 50k annually to see the same. All in a growing employment market and all just to corner Fianna FĂĄil who wanted a goodie they could run to the grey vote with.
Informative @tallback and @Tim_Riggins - And I agree 100% that there is no single or easy solution and political point scoring serves no purpose here - this âcrisisâ encompasses everything thatâs wrong / or at fault currently in the country and I think all parties should be putting aside their petty mud-slinging and come together to put forward solutions⌠will never happen tho. And as stated - governments on 5 years terms looking to save their ass wont make some of the hard calls needed for long term stability.
Rest assured tho, iâm going to voice my anger at our next marching drill in 2 weeks time. Hopefully Donnchadh is present on the night and iâll give him both pretend barrels with my hurley.
we simply need to empower our private developers. they have the expertise the drive and the vision to get homes built. lets all get over the fact that these companies will benefit by means of a financial profit, our citizins need to be mature about this and look at the bigger picture. when we get the housing crises solved then you can all get back to pushing for a socialist state again.
the state must help with funding and also to provide a planning system that compliments rather than hinders the need for homes to be built fast.
we can all work together to fix this.