The Celtic Phoenix - A thread to list the economic miracles of Michael Noonan & Fine Gael


#1864

Most States can’t afford to build houses in the last decade . They can’t afford to cover day to day expenditure . Huge social housing projects have failed society and the market solution has failed .


#1865

Huge social housing projects failed meaning ghettos? That’s a separate issue.


#1866

You cannot on the one hand demand more money and on the other fail to analyise one of the largest receipients and net influences on public services.


#1867

Yes . It has worked well in rural areas but in big cities ( yours and where I was born) a disaster.

Let’s be honest the idea that delelopers provide a % of housing to social housing is utterly laughable .

The social and market ideas have failed utterly . I want a solution thought through by rational people without a agenda .


#1868

The idea that we have a market solution in Ireland, pre the crash or since, is pure nonsense.

It is one of the most regulated markets out there for a variety of reasons.


#1869

Half of Europe lives in what we consider ghettos. Take a look at any Italian city. The centres of Bologna, Milan and Genoa contain working class housing that is similar to the worst parts of West Belfast or Dublin. Most of the deprived areas of Irish cities actually have better housing than you’ll find in German, Italian or Belgian cities.
A lot of it is to do with expectation.


#1870

The market solution was never thought through . It evolved in a era of superabundance of credit . It happened by chance and was seen as a virtue out of necessity .

That was the final party for big long term loans .


#1871

Nail on the head kid .

A council house in say Kilrea , magherafelt or crossmaglren are far better structure that £600 k gaffs in islington .


#1872

That isn’t the market.

It has been proven that there was no true oversupply of homes in Ireland for the pace of population growth.

We built houses in the wrong places and some people were allowed to borrow too much. The market was never allowed to correct itself on the latter, on the former you can blame planners and politicians i.e. regulations.


#1873

The school I used to work in had this ‘lab technician’, fancy term for washing test tubes and setting up experiments. 16k a year. He spoke four languages, could read in several, wrote off the wall philosophical articles that had been published by newspapers - including the guardian. I knew him well enough to ask him what he was doing earning a third of what the halfwits in the teaching staff were earning. He said he had spent years living in London and he’d have to be a millionaire to own a three bedroom house with a bit of ground, be able to fish any time he wanted and have a car etc.
It’s simple I suppose


#1874

It was the market . Houses were built where private capital thought they were viable . Are you suggesting that developers should have been “incentivized “ or got state subsidies to build social houses in Dublin ??


#1875

That is not the market.

We are property laws.
We have planning laws including zoning.
Incentives to build ancillary supports.

That is distorting the market.

Of course people will go and build in the wrong places and the market should give them a kicking, but the idea it was close to that in Ireland is hilarious.


#1876

That local authorities and government policies were were stupid is beyond any question .

My point was that the market could not be expected to solve social housing need and that the old idea of building large stocks of social housing is no longer a viable solution either .

New ways are needed in a changing world .


#1877

Why not?


#1878

The building of huge sprawling local authority estates in the 70s and 80 s was an utter disaster . Are you suggesting another South hill ???


#1879

Why do we have to build huge sprawling estates like moytoss or south hill? You sound like the only option for government to build houses is to build ghettos. Obviously it’s not.


#1880

I never said it was ( it patently is not ) . I don’t think you are listening to my arguement . Neither is Tim either .


#1881

You said building large stocks of housing isn’t a viable solution. Why not? They don’t have to all be in the one place or be sprawling estates.


#1882

Cluid model works quite well as far as I can see


#1883

I said sprawling estates are a problem . The sprawling estates were built then because let’s be honest they were a cheap option and they minimized NIMBYism .

The LA housing in Lk went from the lanes , to the 40s/50s scheme like the Borough , island etc. to 70s /80s Sothill . They kept moving further .

Your idea is not bad but no so easy to implement .