• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

Eoghan Murphy watch - track his housing policies and delivery of ACTUAL HOMES


galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,397
The pinko's that infest the councils are not interested in solving the homeless problem.
The homeless are just the latest temporary pet of the left to beat the government with.
Yep there is a deffo a correlation between the type of people who moan about the fake homeless and object to every development for one reason or another.
I think it's a mindset that's inherent in humans to resent one's betters and it manifests itself in many ways.
One reason the mob have attached themselves to the cause of junkies, dolites and Margaret Cash types is that it's another way of sticking it to those who are doing better than themselves. They want to transfer wealth from hard-working and diligent people directly over to the lowest and most worthless people and it's perverse. They do it not to help the lowest but to knock down the highest. They don't actually give a fnuk about the homeless at all really.
Of course objecting to new developments also springs from that source of resentment. They suspect that the people carrying out the developments will get rich, achieve something etc. On a sub-conscious level they can't stand the thoughts of someone else actually being successful and try to block that by casting around for plausible objections and are readily abetted by their like minded fellows in positions of authority.
 
Last edited:


Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,736
Yep there is a deffo a correlation between the type of people who moan about the fake homeless and object to every development for one reason or another.
I think it's a mindset that's inherent in humans to resent one's betters and it manifests itself in many ways.
One reason the mob have attached themselves to the cause of junkies, dolites and Margaret Cash types is that it's another way of sticking it to those who are doing better than themselves. They want to transfer wealth from hard-working and diligent people directly over to the lowest and most worthless people and it's perverse. They do it not to help the lowest but to knock down the highest. They don't actually give a fnuk about the homeless at all really.
Of course objecting to new developments also springs from that source of resentment. They suspect that the people carrying out the developments will get rich, achieve something etc. On a sub-conscious level they can't stand the thoughts of someone else actually being successful and try to block that by casting around for plausible objections and are readily abetted by their like minded fellows in positions of authority.
So much stereotyping for a single post - forelock tugging peasants looking to bring the gentry down a peg or two!!!!

The problem is really that a lot of what you say is indeed true, but not in the way you think it is.

Right now the government strategy is to rent - for perpetuity - social homes for the "junkies, dolites and Margaret Cash types" as you so eloquently call them using tax payers money - hard working and diligent tax payers who know well enough that this is insane and would like their government to BUILD cheaper dwellings to house those in need more cost effectively.

This feeds into the second point you seem to have missed too - many people don't want social homes anywhere near their homes - I know I don't - because fundamentally it will devalue my home. It's very mush tied into the first point - if the state did build specialized social dwellings there wouldn't be an issue, but because - like in Dun Laoghaire - they're just as likely to buy a luxury apartment next to a hard working and diligent owner occupier and put in "junkies, dolites and Margaret Cash types" it causes understandable mayhem to peoples lives and their hard earned wealth.

Eoghan Murphy and Simon Coveney before him aren't wed to the idea of integrated social housing - they're wed to the idea of the state renting social homes at market rates from tax free REITs for ever.
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,397
So much stereotyping for a single post - forelock tugging peasants looking to bring the gentry down a peg or two!!!!

The problem is really that a lot of what you say is indeed true, but not in the way you think it is.

Right now the government strategy is to rent - for perpetuity - social homes for the "junkies, dolites and Margaret Cash types" as you so eloquently call them using tax payers money - hard working and diligent tax payers who know well enough that this is insane and would like their government to BUILD cheaper dwellings to house those in need more cost effectively.

This feeds into the second point you seem to have missed too - many people don't want social homes anywhere near their homes - I know I don't - because fundamentally it will devalue my home. It's very mush tied into the first point - if the state did build specialized social dwellings there wouldn't be an issue, but because - like in Dun Laoghaire - they're just as likely to buy a luxury apartment next to a hard working and diligent owner occupier and put in "junkies, dolites and Margaret Cash types" it causes understandable mayhem to peoples lives and their hard earned wealth.

Eoghan Murphy and Simon Coveney before him aren't wed to the idea of integrated social housing - they're wed to the idea of the state renting social homes at market rates from tax free REITs for ever.
How can you be sure that hap is worse value for money than building and maintaining social housing, especially if the social housing is being built in places where sites cost a fortune and many social tenants don't pay the rent.
Also there is a long-term encouraging
of people to purposely not get a job in order to get social houses.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,736
How can you be sure that hap is worse value for money than building and maintaining social housing, especially if the social housing is being built in places where sites cost a fortune and many social tenants don't pay the rent.
Also there is a long-term encouraging
of people to purposely not get a job in order to get social houses.
If you simply do the maths on the cost of funding a build vs. renting over 10 years it's a no brainer.

The state can borrow at half of SFA - one of the advantages of demonstrating we'd rather pay our debts than provide decent healthcare.

You're right, though - it depends on two things - 1, NOT building on prime real-estate, social housing should be purpose built with cost effectiveness in mind, like the old council estates of old and 2, rents need to be taken from social welfare payments or from wages to avoid non-payment.
 

The Nal

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
2,238
Hes "doing everything he can" folks. Leave him alone.
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,397
If you simply do the maths on the cost of funding a build vs. renting over 10 years it's a no brainer.

The state can borrow at half of SFA - one of the advantages of demonstrating we'd rather pay our debts than provide decent healthcare.

You're right, though - it depends on two things - 1, NOT building on prime real-estate, social housing should be purpose built with cost effectiveness in mind, like the old council estates of old and 2, rents need to be taken from social welfare payments or from wages to avoid non-payment.
show me which political party advocates building social houses away from the prime locations? or the party which advocates taking rent arrears off the dole? nobody right?
anyways there are 38 social houses nearing completion around the corner from me in Taylor's Court, Rathfarnham. Based on the going rate for 3 beds around there they have got to be worth about 400k at least, possibly 500k. The average rent social tenants will pay will be about 70 euro per week and maybe 20% of tenants won't even bother to pay the rent. I'll bet that's not enough to even cover the maintenance of the houses.
How can it be cheaper for the state to forgo that much capital than to pay 1200-1400 per month in hap instead? Especially when they will receive a fair whack of that hap payment back by way of income tax?
Say the state sold the houses instead to a private company on condition that those guys took on social tenants. The private company would receive the hap payment say 1400 per month. The tenant would pay 2-300 per month to bring it up to the going rate. Now if they don't pay the rent the private company will actually go after them and have them evicted, I'll wager in that case they will definitely pay the rent, what do you think? Whereas when they don't pay the rent to the local authority nothing happens.
The state will have up to 500k in cash.
That would cover hap payments for about 30 years.
The state could earn interest if they put the 500k in the bank and thus have an income.
Or the state could use the 500k to build more houses and sell those on too.
The state would not have ongoing maintenance costs for the upkeep of the houses either. They won't have to hire lazy council staff with big fat pensions.
The state would also have a nice income from taxes levied on the rental income received by the private company.
It's a no brainer the state should not be involved in owning or running social housing.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
32,385
anyways there are 38 social houses nearing completion around the corner from me in Taylor's Court, Rathfarnham. Based on the going rate for 3 beds around there they have got to be worth about 400k at least, possibly 500k. The average rent social tenants will pay will be about 70 euro per week and maybe 20% of tenants won't even bother to pay the rent. I'll bet that's not enough to even cover the maintenance of the houses.
The reason for social housing is that there are a large number of people who can't afford to house themselves. Next time you're out walking, consider the number of people you meet who are not the full shilling. Next consider those with physical infirmities who cannot work - if you have ever strained your back, imagine what its like to seriously injure it. Consider someone who left school at 14 or 16, without qualification who works for the minimum wage. Forget about the addicts and drunks for a moment, just think of people who try to cope and fail. I live close to the centre of Dun Laoghaire and in DL parish, there is a mix of private and social housing - aka Corporation houses. There is no reason why there cannot be a mix of private and state housing in close proximity, other than profit.
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,397
The reason for social housing is that there are a large number of people who can't afford to house themselves. Next time you're out walking, consider the number of people you meet who are not the full shilling. Next consider those with physical infirmities who cannot work - if you have ever strained your back, imagine what its like to seriously injure it. Consider someone who left school at 14 or 16, without qualification who works for the minimum wage. Forget about the addicts and drunks for a moment, just think of people who try to cope and fail. I live close to the centre of Dun Laoghaire and in DL parish, there is a mix of private and social housing - aka Corporation houses. There is no reason why there cannot be a mix of private and state housing in close proximity, other than profit.
Yeah but for every one of those people who get to live in Dun Laoghaire in a council house there is working family who has to live an hour's drive away from their workplace in Wicklow because they can't afford to buy a house in Dun Laoghaire.
 

fifilawe

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
1,418
seán Canney has the Hi-Viz jacket as his UPF(Unique Photo Feature) and our Kofi Annan aka Eoghan Murphy has his blue hard hat and rolled up sleeves UPF.what I would like to know : q1. How much is our Kofi Annan Murphy claiming for his UPFs? q2. Is he submittinbg invoices receipts for claiming of "his UPFs?
q3. Who came up with his UPF?
q4. How much is this "advisor getting paid for SFA" ?
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
15,736
Yeah but for every one of those people who get to live in Dun Laoghaire in a council house there is working family who has to live an hour's drive away from their workplace in Wicklow because they can't afford to buy a house in Dun Laoghaire.
I don't think a 5 year old could design a more unfair and dysfunctional social housing system than we have in Ireland.

I'm caught between two beliefs - one, that we need to build social homes to house people who can't afford to house them selves and two, that no social home should interfere with the private housing market. I agree 100% that it's insane to have social homes in areas where they make it impossible for people to buy homes.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
32,385
Yeah but for every one of those people who get to live in Dun Laoghaire in a council house there is working family who has to live an hour's drive away from their workplace in Wicklow because they can't afford to buy a house in Dun Laoghaire.
My point is that there is a mix in Dun Laoghaire town because corporation houses were built near private houses by default when the town was being built, the idea of large corporation estates built in isolation was a later development so there is no reason not to change again.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
3,769
Yep there is a deffo a correlation between the type of people who moan about the fake homeless and object to every development for one reason or another.
I think it's a mindset that's inherent in humans to resent one's betters and it manifests itself in many ways.
One reason the mob have attached themselves to the cause of junkies, dolites and Margaret Cash types is that it's another way of sticking it to those who are doing better than themselves. They want to transfer wealth from hard-working and diligent people directly over to the lowest and most worthless people and it's perverse. They do it not to help the lowest but to knock down the highest. They don't actually give a fnuk about the homeless at all really.
Of course objecting to new developments also springs from that source of resentment. They suspect that the people carrying out the developments will get rich, achieve something etc. On a sub-conscious level they can't stand the thoughts of someone else actually being successful and try to block that by casting around for plausible objections and are readily abetted by their like minded fellows in positions of authority.
The main enemies of new housing are big city councillors who pander to NIMBY home owners because of their high voting turnout and national governments who fail to curb councils' red tape that hobbles housing.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
3,769
I don't think a 5 year old could design a more unfair and dysfunctional social housing system than we have in Ireland.

I'm caught between two beliefs - one, that we need to build social homes to house people who can't afford to house them selves and two, that no social home should interfere with the private housing market. I agree 100% that it's insane to have social homes in areas where they make it impossible for people to buy homes.
Leaving all the low income people together in ghetto social housing has proved socially disastrous ever since the prosperous working class moved out since the 1970s.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
3,769
The reason for social housing is that there are a large number of people who can't afford to house themselves. Next time you're out walking, consider the number of people you meet who are not the full shilling. Next consider those with physical infirmities who cannot work - if you have ever strained your back, imagine what its like to seriously injure it. Consider someone who left school at 14 or 16, without qualification who works for the minimum wage. Forget about the addicts and drunks for a moment, just think of people who try to cope and fail. I live close to the centre of Dun Laoghaire and in DL parish, there is a mix of private and social housing - aka Corporation houses. There is no reason why there cannot be a mix of private and state housing in close proximity, other than profit.
Not necessarily profit. The highest profits often come from the highst density housing which can include social and affordable housing.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
3,769
I love this....

Self obsesses Murphy has Tweeted his interviews with Ivan Yates and Sean O'Rourke

Eoghan Murphy on Twitter:

Interestingly he said the "constitution" provides too much protection to land owners and that there has been no time for any constitutional changes, so they continue to work on Plan A - siphon €bns into REITS.

Oddly, IMHO, they seem to have had PLENTY of time to change the constitution where it has suited their own agenda...there have been 5 referenda singe the housing crisis started to become apparent - gay couples can marry, the president still has to over a certain age, there's still a Seanad, Children have better rights (?) and some guff about blasphemy and the fiscal compact....but nothing about making it possible to CPO land being horded for speculation.

Funny that - I'd say a majority of folk would vote for a change that allowed the state house its citizens even if it meant a very few land owners were only going to be paid a fair market value for their property.
CPOs of private land for commercial developments have been abused in the Spanish Costas with many politicians jailed. Developers colluded with politicians to CPO valuable land for way less than market value.
In the English speaking world, land banks provide an essential function in slowly accumulating land for big projects to prevent price acceleration and providing development land parcels to the great majority of builders who don't have deep pockets. Without land banks, there would be a mad scramble for land in building cycle expansions which few could afford and a resulting scarcity of land.
Land speculation can be a problem where governments hobble building development with copious red tape, making it profitable to speculate on government actions to change course when there is public pressure to build.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
3,769
I'll open by admitting I can't find a link to the reason for this update - basically I was listening to a discussion, I think on Drivetime where some construction group/federation/oligopoly came out to say there wasn't a chance in hell that the industry would deliver the 35k homes required this year, or next or even after that.

Basically Murphy and FG's fake faith in "the market" is blown so while the sector make out like bandits...



...the citizens are being treated like fools...

Home loan scheme has not closed - Murphy

...it's not closed, it's just not open.

For 5 years now the logical and, now it seems only, solution has been to build purpose build affordable social homes using outside contractors, but FG have spent €bns on various half-baked and highly lucrative (for landlords) solutions.
21 STORIES FOR RENTAL HOUSING A BIG BREAKTHROUGH
That will treble the housing units in a given area at a maximum barring other constraints than the former 7 stories limit. Three cheers for that!
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,397
An Taisce said it would have a negative impact on important conservation areas such as Trinity College, the Liffey Quays, College Green and O’Connell Street.

“Long-established height protections for the historic centre of Dublin were recklessly scrapped in new guidelines brought in by Minister Eoghan Murphy last year,” it added.
The allowing of highrise towers in the centre of Dublin is gravely erroneous. The city already has a highly defined identity of historic streets and squares, rivers and canals, grand public buildings and churches, plus its rich literary and artistic associations.
Are an Taisce completely deluded? The centre of Dublin is mostly a chaotic mess filled with traffic jams, potholes, litter and scumbags. In actual fact the best thing to happen in centuries in there are all the nice new shiny buildings which they are so determined to stop from being built.
 

galteeman

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,397
The main enemies of new housing are big city councillors who pander to NIMBY home owners because of their high voting turnout and national governments who fail to curb councils' red tape that hobbles housing.
Yes I already mentioned the crazy and arbitrary restrictions in residential zoning around south Dublin. We have a potent combination of leftist resentment with middle class nimbyism. Same thing happening in cities around the world.
 

greencharade

Member
Joined
May 10, 2019
Messages
43
Yes I already mentioned the crazy and arbitrary restrictions in residential zoning around south Dublin. We have a potent combination of leftist resentment with middle class nimbyism. Same thing happening in cities around the world.
You need to build a wall around south Dublin so that your superiority cannot be disturbed.
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top