Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 2] *Poll Reset*

Options
1…7374767879…332

Comments

  • Options
    #2252
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    One more time for luck. I'm not revisiting this again.

    House valued at 200k - that's 200k of wealth stored in the asset.

    House sold for 200k - that's 200k of wealth transferred from the asset to the owner.

    Owner is in a 300k hole. He utilises that 200k to reduce his 300k debt.

    The wealth is in the property.

    Eh no, no wealth transfers to the owner. The 300k mortgage is a lien on the house, used to actually buy it, not some unconnected gambling debt or something. Looks like negative equity still has you perplexed.

    You earlier said the owner is paying tax on the potential wealth from selling the house. So its the money left After selling, that you claim they are taxed for.

    So presumably its the same for negative equity owners. So they are paying tax on a potential loss then, according to you.

    You said they might make allowancs for this in the full property tax. If you suggest that, then its possibly unfair to tax negative equity homes. If its unfair, well we know your view on unfair taxes.


  • Options
    #2253
    BlackEdelweiss
    Registered Users Posts: 1,529 ✭✭✭BlackEdelweiss


    As this thread has got so big I dident read it to see if my point has already been made but I dont mind those who did pay the tax if they believed it was right and I support those who dident pay as I believe they are right, I'm just sick of the dickheads who waited till the last minute before paying it. What were they waiting for? Spineless ****&@s who wanted to look like they were not going to pay but dident have the balls in the end. It damaged the dont pay campaign by making it look very good up until the last minute. Spineless.


  • Options
    #2254
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    But a home owner has no access to any value in his home.
    A home owner enjoys the benefit of their home every day, by living in it - that is getting value from their home.


  • Options
    #2255
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    gerryo777 wrote: »
    So the thing to do would be sell up, take a €100,000 debt with you and get a council house.

    Genius, that's what you are, a genius. The kind of thinking that has us on our knees.

    And dont forget, he said home owners are taxed on the potential to sell and have the equity in your pocket. So this tax is based on the possible proceeds of selling, according to him.

    But he seems to have changed that outlook when its negative equity owners. They are taxed based not on the proceeds of the sale, but on the 200k got for the house. Laughable.


  • Options
    #2256
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    gerryo777 wrote: »
    So the thing to do would be sell up, take a €100,000 debt with you and get a council house.

    If you say so. Best of luck with the waiting list. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2257
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    dvpower wrote: »
    A home owner enjoys the benefit of their home every day, by living in it - that is getting value from their home.

    Yes, and they paid a high price for that. But thats not the wealth that alastair believes is why home owners are taxed now.

    When the negative equity ones were pointed out, he had varying answers. They are a minority. They wont be in negative equity long, are two examples he came out with.

    Now he says they are taxed on the 200k wealth in the 300k mortgage house. As if in some way the 300k debt has nothing to do with the house.


  • Options
    #2258
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Eh no, no wealth transfers to the owner. The 300k mortgage is a lien on the house, used to actually buy it, not some unconnected gambling debt or something. Looks like negative equity still has you perplexed.

    You earlier said the owner is paying tax on the potential wealth from selling the house. So its the money left After selling, that you claim they are taxed for.

    So presumably its the same for negative equity owners. So they are paying tax on a potential loss then, according to you.

    You said they might make allowancs for this in the full property tax. If you suggest that, then its possibly unfair to tax negative equity homes. If its unfair, well we know your view on unfair taxes.

    Wow - some twisted 'thinking' at play there. I'm not sure what part of 'the wealth is in the property' you're missing.


  • Options
    #2259
    gerryo777
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,216 ✭✭✭gerryo777


    alastair wrote: »
    If you say so. Best of luck with the waiting list. :rolleyes:

    Your not well son, not well at all! You twist everything you don't agree with.
    Is it any wonder you spend all your time on here.


  • Options
    #2260
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    But he seems to have changed that outlook when its negative equity owners. They are taxed based not on the proceeds of the sale, but on the 200k got for the house. Laughable.

    I've not changed my outlook whatsoever.:confused:


  • Options
    #2261
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    Wow - some twisted 'thinking' at play there. I'm not sure what part of 'the wealth is in the property' you're missing.

    You said owners have access to wealth. How? Answer that. You wont. Because you cant.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2262
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    mikom wrote: »
    Household charge 100 Euro.

    Backwards this country is going.

    FFS that's beyond a joke. A €1m yacht?:eek:


  • Options
    #2263
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Yes, and they paid a high price for that. But thats not the wealth that alastair believes is why home owners are taxed now.

    When the negative equity ones were pointed out, he had varying answers. They are a minority. They wont be in negative equity long, are two examples he came out with.

    Now he says they are taxed on the 200k wealth in the 300k mortgage house. As if in some way the 300k debt has nothing to do with the house.

    1. They are a minority - by quite a margin.
    2. Many won't be in negative equity for the long term.
    3. The mortgage has nothing to do with the value/wealth in the house. It'll be taxed on some model of market valuation.
    4. Again - the wealth is in the property - that's all that is liable for taxation.
    5. Whatever mechanisms for applying exemptions or discounts have nothing to do with the basic principles of levying tax on the wealth in the property.


  • Options
    #2264
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    You said owners have access to wealth. How? Answer that. You wont. Because you cant.

    I did. You choose to pretend otherwise. Knock yourself out with that.


  • Options
    #2265
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    gerryo777 wrote: »
    Did you not know that freddie?
    alastair didn't agree with the poll tax in the UK because it was an unfair tax and then didn't pay it.

    Maybe that's why he lives here now.

    FFS I didn't Gerry. And HE'S lecturing US? Alastair you have absolutely zero credibility after that one. Seriously.


  • Options
    #2266
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    FFS I didn't Gerry. And HE'S lecturing US? Alastair you have absolutely zero credibility after that one. Seriously.

    Thanks for your thoughts on credibility. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #2267
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    gerryo777 wrote: »
    So the thing to do would be sell up, take a €100,000 debt with you and get a council house.

    If you say so. Best of luck with the waiting list. :rolleyes:


    Well it was actually your own advice
    Solution - sell and rent. Is that not a choice?

    Looks like a change of mind, since you use the roll eyes.


  • Options
    #2268
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    mishkalucy wrote: »
    Friends of mine live outside of Liverpool and have a normal 3 bed bungalow. Their council tax is £1930 PA. Are we headed in that direction?
    More than likely. And it will make little or no difference to our growing debt. €2k per year from 1.5m households = €3Bn approx. But we're borrowing TWENTY BILLION to fund the deficit.

    As I've already said, it's only a matter of time...............tick tock.


  • Options
    #2269
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Well it was actually your own advice


    Looks like a change of mind, since you use the roll eyes.

    I didn't realise that the private rental sector had vanished! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #2270
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    alastair wrote: »
    Thanks for your thoughts on credibility. :rolleyes:

    You have zero credibility Alastair. You refuse to pay a tax in your home country because you deem it unfair, yet lecture us on doing precisely the same? Sweet Lord in Heaven.:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #2271
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    More than likely. And it will make little or no difference to our growing debt. €2k per year from 1.5m households = €3Bn approx. But we're borrowing TWENTY BILLION to fund the deficit.

    As I've already said, it's only a matter of time...............tick tock.

    That mere €3 billion per annum is of no use to Freddies distopian future!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2272
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    I didn't realise that the private rental sector had vanished! :rolleyes:

    Comical ali. Best nickname i seen on boards in terms of a users postings v username.


  • Options
    #2273
    Freddie59
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    alastair wrote: »
    I did. You choose to pretend otherwise. Knock yourself out with that.

    Refresh us. What is this "access to wealth" that you speak of?


  • Options
    #2274
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    You have zero credibility Alastair. You refuse to pay a tax in your home country because you deem it unfair, yet lecture us on doing precisely the same? Sweet Lord in Heaven.:rolleyes:

    My home country is this one - but thanks for ramping up the delusion quota a notch further.


  • Options
    #2275
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Comical ali. Best nickname i seen on boards in terms of a users postings v username.

    Oh sorry - did you forget about the private rental market? Bit fixated in certain areas, are we?


  • Options
    #2276
    gerryo777
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,216 ✭✭✭gerryo777


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    You have zero credibility Alastair. You refuse to pay a tax in your home country because you deem it unfair, yet lecture us on doing precisely the same? Sweet Lord in Heaven.:rolleyes:

    Don't tell me he's a brit?
    Mind you, that might explain a few things.


  • Options
    #2277
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    Refresh us. What is this "access to wealth" that you speak of?

    Yes, how does the home owner access this wealth that this new tax is based on alastair?

    @Freddie He knows he is caught by the balls, the answer he gave for that, can not be used for the negative equity owner. And he knows it. So you will just get the question avoiding answer.


  • Options
    #2278
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    gerryo777 wrote: »
    Don't tell me he's a brit?
    Mind you, that might explain a few things.

    He will be adding a new tax to potatoes next.


  • Options
    #2279
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Yes, how does the home owner access this wealth that this new tax is based on alastair?

    @Freddie He knows he is caught by the balls, the answer he gave for that, can not be used for the negative equity owner. And he knows it. So you will just get the question avoiding answer.

    You got my answer - feel free to revisit it as often as you like - I won't be reposting it. :p


  • Options
    #2280
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    Oh sorry - did you forget about the private rental market? Bit fixated in certain areas, are we?


    No specific post needed. We already seen your failed spell checking to try discredit a few posters blow up in your face, and asking posters to answer simple yes or no answers, while not able to yourself, to see why another poster came up with the comical ali name.

    And how you did not know that road tax is motor tax, and you say a home owner can sell his house to access the wealth in it, which a negative equity owner cant, but you still insist the owner has wealth to be taxed on. Either there is some problem with you, or your trolling.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2281
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    You got my answer - feel free to revisit it as often as you like - I won't be reposting it. :p

    Ok, how would the negative equity owner in the example, use his 200k wealth in the house, to buy a 200k boat for example. You say he has wealth to be taxed on, so answer that.

    As i said, you cant. Simply because the owner is paying tax on wealth he does not possess.

    Your slithery, i`l give you that.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement