Home Sweet Home - Apollo House Takeover


#581

I think SF should propose banning foreigners, or non-EU nationals at least, from buying houses. They should say “New Zealand did it, it’s hardly a communist basketcase”.

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 couldn’t really accuse them of being racist.


#582

I agree that it’s a much, much bigger problem than just housing ---- it’s everything feeding into each other — 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 you’re right - house prices have risen 500% in the lat 20-30 years — whereas wages are still at 1990s house prices :open_mouth:

If we put a roof over the country we would’nt need houses - tents would do - has anyone thought of that?


#583

Ah here the smell would be unreal. The gobshites would forget to put in air conditioning.


#584

Some lads here haven’t 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.


#585

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.


#586

So are you saying that we need to build or not?


#587

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 — how the fuck does that happen? cash in hands and cooking the books? Both are busying enough .


#588

Fuck it though it’s great to see @ProjectX and his cousin getting set up after all those years living in the caravan.


#589

stop peddling this nonsense, 50-100 of these homes would have been occupied by poor people on the housing list


#590

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.


#591

but sure the problem is that they arent social houses, they are “forever homes”


#592

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 area’s on the northside.


#593

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.


#594

So you’ve finally accepted that that Cash tramp cheated the system?


#595

I’m absolutely saying we need to build - supply is the key. I don’t think anyone doubts that. The details of building are pretty complex though. Just saying the “state should build houses” is sloganeering of the highest order

The state doesn’t have the ability/resources to build. At a simple level it doesn’t 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. I’d 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. Don’t forget the construction costs are inflating rapidly because of all the demand on the sector. Also the lag factor applies here too.

So, it’s 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 I’ve yet to hear a credible plan from the opposition. It’s 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 don’t 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.


#596

Thats awful auld nonsense.


#597

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;

  • using extreme cases of the junkies dying on the street as an campaign material. It is a different problem to what we have and it is exploitation of another issue
  • the idea that the “market” failed. Most countries justifiably have huge controls over the property market, in Ireland we have had even more. This goes back to the Tiger years and right through to the NAMA years. Political decisions were taken for popularity reasons. People were itching to lambaste NAMA for making losses, so when a profit came they sold. People are using hindsight over many of the sales.
  • again with the market. People claim it has failed- but it is demonstable that developers avoided residential properties due to development costs. Many of these development costs were to do with regulations on size and car parking spaces, designed to improve the lives of people. You can’t on the one hand demand all of these regulations and then criticise people for avoiding building those properties when they are far more costly.
  • the idea that the “establishment” have unfairly targeted the vulnerable. The Irish courts have been extremely lax in issuing enforcements. People have quite frankly taken the piss. This isn’t the market at work.
  • we still have a huge issue with planning at local levels. All politicians encourage NIMBYism.

Whilst I do agree and think it’s 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 didn’t 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 don’t 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 doesn’t work unless we create a budget the size of our health budget.


#598

Leo Varadkar was pillioried for pointing this out.

Square that circle.

That said, I can’t 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 Fáil who wanted a goodie they could run to the grey vote with.


#599

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 ‘crisis’ encompasses everything that’s 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, i’m going to voice my anger at our next marching drill in 2 weeks time. Hopefully Donnchadh is present on the night and i’ll give him both pretend barrels with my hurley.


#600

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.