time to plan
Registered User
- Messages
- 915
That's what it tells you.
That's what it tells you.It "really" tells us that one applicant regarded private offroad parking as more important to them than getting a home.
But what is the average income of somebody on the waiting list? Picking the threshold (i.e. highest possible income) and saying that the threshold does not represent poverty hardly helps move the discussion on.The income threshold to qualify for social housing in Dublin is €35,000 for a single person and up to €42,000 for a large family. €673 a week is hardly poor. It's certainly not enough to buy a house but it's far more than a family in Dublin, Cork or Galway earning €100,000 a year will be left with after they pay a mortgage on their first house.
It helps inadequate people feel better to have someone to look down on.As someone who grew up in social housing got grant to go to Ucd etc. and subsequently went on to be relatively well off through lots of study and hard work I would say the last bastion of allowed bias is anti “lower class people “ by accent / address / occupation .
This article feeds into this in my opinion.
I agree but the issue is that people on considerably higher incomes are just as excluded from the housing market. The whole 'squeezed middle' thing is really about housing costs and when something like this is published it is very disheartening for that cohort.But what is the average income of somebody on the waiting list? Picking the threshold (i.e. highest possible income) and saying that the threshold does not represent poverty hardly helps move the discussion on.
Members of the Traveller community would probably disagree with you.I would say the last bastion of allowed bias is anti “lower class people “ by accent / address / occupation .
Articles like this try to drive a wedge between the squeezed middle and people on lower incomes. Their interests are not opposed to each other's, but it suits some people to make it appear as if they are.I agree but the issue is that people on considerably higher incomes are just as excluded from the housing market. The whole 'squeezed middle' thing is really about housing costs and when something like this is published it is very disheartening for that cohort.
I keep saying that we need to stop treating income as if it is wealth. It isn't.
I don't think there's some conspiracy but this is simple and easy to understand so journalists can churn it out rather than trying to underhand the root causes of the problem and communicate them.Articles like this try to drive a wedge between the squeezed middle and people on lower incomes. Their interests are not opposed to each other's, but it suits some people to make it appear as if they are.
It isn't a conspiracy. Simply an expression of the interests of those who benefit from the situation.I don't think there's some conspiracy but this is simple and easy to understand so journalists can churn it out rather than trying to underhand the root causes of the problem and communicate them.
We usually ask the wrong questions in this country.
I find journalism in this country very left-wing populist. The agenda is driven by RTE and they are a pillar of the left-wing establishment so journalism certainly isn't in the pocket of those who benefit from the situation.It isn't a conspiracy. Simply an expression of the interests of those who benefit from the situation.
Left wing? Who are you kidding? It reads to me as economically right wing and socially progressive. But I doubt we’ll agree.I fin journalism in this country very left-wing populist. The agenda is driven by RTE and they are a pillar of the left-wing establishment so journalism certainly isn't in the pocket of those who benefit from the situation.
It's an interesting question though; who does benefit from it?
I'd say it's pension and investment funds (which are mainly funded with pension money), banks and a small cohort of developers.
Let's just call that racism. But still a fair enough point.Members of the Traveller community would probably disagree with you.
That reads as click-bait but in general terms the media is a bunch of left-wing pearl clutching populists.Left wing? Who are you kidding? It reads to me as economically right wing and socially progressive. But I doubt we’ll agree.
True, but many people who are aghast at what they consider racism and homophobia are perfectly fine with saying the same things about Travellers.Let's just call that racism.
This reads like those US Republicans who call anyone right of centre who believes that maybe poor people should get decent healthcare 'a socialist'.That reads as click-bait but in general terms the media is a bunch of left-wing pearl clutching populists.
They don't understand the full scope of what is racist. I imagine they are equally confused by buffalo wings,True, but many people who are aghast at what they consider racism and homophobia are perfectly fine with saying the same things about Travellers.
I think the right wing and left wing populists are two sides of the same coin. Both are looking for easy answers to complex issues and some nefarious ploy by some cabal who is to blame for the world's ills.This reads like those US Republicans who call anyone right of centre who believes that maybe poor people should get decent healthcare 'a socialist'.