New Household Tax - Boycott

Biggins wrote: »

You ask a good question.

My own opinion?
Of course you are right.
A party should be able to look at the present and future and create an honest policy not based on emotion and out-of-date principles.

I problem I have (and I cannot state enough - I could be TOTALLY wrong for thinking this and I admit to that) is that FG (and now Labour) are so very willing to jump into this newer home tax for the simple reason of trying (I surmise) to fill a financial shortfall partly created by the shoving of money towards the banks and bondholders - and for that reason only, that is what has caused a position-reversal.

Their position-reversal not being about party policy towards whats good for the the people but simple for them to later facilitate the ability to do the above (banks and bondholders) in the long run, one way or another.
Its unsettling (to me) that they are willing to adopt a home tax for the sake of pure financial reasons and although that might make sense - it begs the question:

"Should all positions be allowed be reversed/compromised due to finance reasons alone?"

I hope I'm making sense what I'm trying to say.
(Even if I am wrong in saying it)

No you are right. But this is nature of coalitions is it not? Neither party got the mandate to party alone and implement all their policies.

So whilst it is easier to point the finger at FG or LAB, they merely reflect the majority of society, that's who the blame should be put on.

If EVERYONE knew just how much was been wasted, I am sure it would ease the burden on all of us, including the 'ones' who 'run and ruin' our country.
Let me put a few examples;
1 the laundry allowance 3.5k pa each TD ..when and if the suits had to be cleaned, (some don't even wear suits). A leading laundry company acknowledged they could do it every day they sat , ...for a third of that and still make it pay.
2 ..our local council, moved out of their offices, had the ESB disconnected and are renting a nice bungalow ( in a rural town) as alternative offices for 1100 a WEEK :eek:.
Nearby (within a 1/2 mile) sits a vocational school, property of the same council that is no longer used and before it closed was in good order. My point is it could have been utilised as offices for a saving.
Meanwhile the local lads on the ground (council workers) discovered they had nowhere to brew their tea since the power had been disconnected at the place they vacated, so instead of having it switched on again they went and bought a big generator 8k and all it does is boil a kettle!!650
3 how many of us know of roads having repairs done and some of these roads are not the one that actually need the work. This is particularly visible , coming up to Xmas as the council engineers get a bonus linked and as apercentage of how much they spend
4 In a major city to the south while remedial work was been carried out to the courthouse and motor tax offices, alternative sites/buildings where rented.
The works to both were completed in approx 4-5 years, so they moved back to the original establishments. ( God only knows what these costs were !:()
BOTH of the alternative sites continues to be rented at over 300k EACH, despite the fact they have been vacated.
The reason given ,the rent was agreed for a 10 year lease:eek:
5 A paramedic working for our glorious Health board, regularly uses an emergency vehicle to transport items between his properties, even firewood.
You would feel pretty sick if a vehicle was not available, because he was collecting firewood.
Now if that is a sample of what is going on ( and MORE) in my little area of this island how many other people know of such 'facts'.
The waste is phenomenal. Instead of picking on us let them get their own set ups in order first.
I would be a very conservative estimate to say that 650k a year is being wasted here alone.
How much more do any of you KNOW about.
This is not gossip/hearsay.
Imagine if throughout our 26 counties we could find out just how much is being wasted :rolleyes:
We bitch /moan/etc but we should be on the streets:cool:

I wouldn't put low numbers of people paying this tax down to recalcitrance just yet. I'd say it's more a case of putting it off and the last week before the deadline could see a huge rise in payments. I'm reminded of that simpsons episode where Homer tries to pay his taxes on the last day possible. We'll see though.

Am Chile wrote: »

33.00 paying so far is nothing out of more then 1.6 millions houses to register and pay the tax, lack of support? you obviously know nothing about the large crowds that have being coming to anti household tax meetings around the country,or nothing about work on the ground with activitsts have done with stalls and members of the public signing up to the campaign to oppose and boycott the household tax.

Just take wexford alone,only 100 people have paid the Household Tax in Co.Wexford so far. The 2011 census revealed that there are 68,500 houses in the county.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/permalink.php?story_fbid=309627239081255&id=244762212234425

It's hard to debate whether or not people agree with paying the household charge. The only data we have is the RedC poll that was carried out which indicated that only 15% would refuse to pay it . . In any case it is a moot point . . Biggins asked whether or not the government had majority support in bringing in this charge. I would contend that in this case, majority support is irrelevant. . It is important that the government take the actions necessary and not the actions that will make them popular.

Am Chile wrote: »

Correct me if Im wrong, but wasn,it just a 1000 took part in this poll?

Yes, a standard sample size for this kind of poll which produces a scientifically validated result.

Biggins wrote: »

The question should be raised in the Dail as to what percentage currently of the total applicable people, has actually paid so far!

I suspect that those that have not paid yet is far higher than the government would be it to be known!
...Thus they might be staying quiet of releasing such more up to date figures nationally with reason?

Why would you raise the question now ? I think the government would expect the vast majority of these payments to come in March (i.e. when payment falls due). I'm not sure why people would pay now when they don't have to pay until March . . I'm not opposed to this tax but I will certainly leave the money in my bank account for as long as I can.

Am Chile wrote: »

Or some people def won,t pay, and some other people won,t pay just as of yet cuz they re seeing what way the wind is blowing.

The people who definitely won't pay are the people who probably never had the pay in the first place and are exempt from this charge, but hey, they make the most noise as usual and have SWP and SP screaming bloody murder over it.

The people who have to pay, will pay in the majority of cases because that's what we do, we pay our way.

zumi wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXIIieaQf-w

Can you summarise just how we pay for services if we don't collect this money?