Plenty of mass killings in history had no obvious political motives. Michael Ryan the Hungerford killer or Malcolm Bryant in Port Arthur,Tasmania for e.g . Sometimes it’s just mad people in possession of things they shouldn’t be in possession of.
Sorry tayto that reply was for nappertandy.
I would say that’s a very narrow view of what constitutes terrorism. Do you not accept ideological and religious motivation in your definition ?
I wouldn’t agree, I’m sure you could carry out an act of terrorism on religious grounds without being premeditated.
I agree with you, a mass killing does not require a political motive.
I think we’re really talking about the same thing and its just semantics
I would agree
I accept that there are a lot of honest genuine landlords, I was thinking more of this kind of operator
Also rents in Dublin are now on average €4k higher than they were back at the height of the celtic monkey. If house prices are just returning to those levels, then the excess in rent costs can only be down to opportunism by a cohort of unscrupulous landlords who are ruining things for everyone.
i’m sure that type of operator is the exception rather than the rule.
Taxation on rental income has changed since the celtic tiger days also - so its a factor on why rents are higher.
Govt are happy to take this income in - same way as they creamed int he stamp duty back int he day also.
Hopefully i will sell my house next year and take my loss on it and don’t have to worry about paying the bills for it no more.
Whether religious or ideological, for an attack to be terrorism by definition, do they not have to be part of an overall movement? To me, one-off attacks, such as the Vegas shooter - are different, although it is possible they have been radicalised by unknown fringe groups.
Don’t forget about the unregistered landlords too ! Nice tidy earner for them .
you’d be a brave person to be at that in this day and age - Fines are colossal
I know of at least two personally.
unregistered with PRTB or not declaring income to revenue?
One where rent is less than that of the rental price in the same area to avoid paying tax .
To keep the tenants on board . They can’t claim rent tax credits because of it .
The first & the second I’d imagine .
If its someone living with them in the same house, thats ok
Not in these two cases .
In that case, they’re taking a chance but the tenants are also gaining out of it. Rent tax credits are gone altogether and were worth sweet fa the last few years, assuming they had lived there since at least 2010 I think it is