Immigration is one of those areas where stats that don’t validate the opinion you already have are “a joke”.
17% according to CSO, and this doesn’t account for the undocumented, study visa overstayers etc. But thanks for ignoring my substantive point: that extremely high and rapid immigration has had effects on the labour and housing markets. That’s hardly controversial. Look at the figures for the housing lists in Dublin - over half on the Fingal list non-national and one-third from outside the EU according to questions at a council meeting in 2011.
In 2008, 39% of people in receipt of rent allowance were non-nationals (I don’t have up to date figures but here’s a link)
How do you think that might affect the housing prospects of the low income Irish workers who weren’t competing with these people 15 years ago? I know the usual deflections that come when this issue is raised (a) whaddabout the bankers, (b) Godwin’s Law, ©, the Irish were immigrants too and (d) quoting that unfunny South Park sketch about dey took er jerbs. I’m not sure what your “opinion” is but the facts are easily accessible if you’d like to engage with them at any point.
I presume this is targeted at me because I questioned your 1/5 figure.
My opinion is that the vast majority of non-nationals on the housing lists have worked in Ireland or are still working in Ireland in low paid jobs. My opinion is that the vast majority of them arrived when there were labour shortages and jobs were going unfilled. My opinion is that people who contribute to society have claims on society, irrespective of where they were born. My opinion is that one cannot recruit migrant workers during a boom and then expect them to simply disappear when jobs become scarce. My opinion is that Ireland has a duty towards the EU and the UN with respect to dealing with humanitarian crises. My opinion is that a lot of people were sleepwalking through decades of European integration and all of a sudden they’re surprised that Ireland might have some obligations with respect to free movement of labour.
What do you propose? Mass deportations for the unemployed non-nationals? Exit the EU to regain control of immigration policy? I’m sure you’ll find some support if you stand for election, but probably not enough to get a seat.
Who are these “certain groups” that you blame? The blacks? The Jews? The Arabs? The asylum seekers? The Freemasons?
and I forgot the Travellers and/or Roma?
The names of the estates? The streets? You’re talking in riddles.
Check what? I don’t get it.
I think that what is being identified here is Lazy Native Irish Pricks, skangers and the like.
Man of them who do work, work for the government in cosy positions. Sinecures etc.
Supported in the democratic politic system by more of the same.
I’m still working on:
I hope place X doesn’t become place Y, where ethnic group A is blamed for everything. Whereas ethnic groups B and C are the real exploiters, taking everything and giving nothing.
Good job my irony meter goes to eleven.
I’m moving into a new city centre office (Dublin 2, grade B) over the next few weeks (one year contract, fully serviced + parking).
It’s very cheap, central and has an excellent address. But why?
- no State to prop up commercial rents
- contracts can be enforced
- The city council simply will not re-zone your commercial town house to residential. If they do this, they will lose all their rates income.
Far too much commercial (especialy retail and grade B/C) in Dublin. We need a massive cull. But this will never happen because those who make the decisions are gombeen corned beef/YR sauce types.
The Indo tries to outdo Kitty Holland (Ok lifts it from the Mirror)
not much sympathy in the comments
guy who died wasn’t homeless
I think she should live within her means, which is provided by other taxpayers, so move to a smaller house, or outside the city.
BUT the major issues here is that a landlord can increase rents so rapidly in Ireland. There is a huge case for annual rent increases being linked to rate of inflation as a limit.
As some commenters also noted, few could afford these kind of rapid increases.
So again, no problem with landlords adjusting to market demand, but annual increases of this magnitude, something is not right. This is a problem for all tenants.
A landlord can only increase the rent once a year.
And an increase from 975 to 1400 is not 50%.
But who can argue with emotions?
It’s almost 44% increase. I’ve rounded up a little must.
Perhaps the press round up a little more but it does not take away from a 44% increase in cost of housing from one or two lease terms to the next being nothing other than savage. Over a decade it’s still too much. Rental sector is in a very unusual phase that can be sustained for very long.
A lot of clickbait on the Indo website. Can be paraphrased into:
- Greedy landlords, etc, etc
- I work to pay rent, she should move to Cavan, etc, etc