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

Are you going to pay the household charge? [Part 1]

1155156158160161334

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Jimmy Bottlehead


    Anyone else hear one of Ray D'Arcy's listeners suggestions this morning?

    Instead of paying the Household Charge, pay it to Crumlin Childrens Hospital instead, then send the receipt to the Government.

    Much as I love the idea, I can't see it being accepted, no matter how many people do it. Would be excellent though.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    donalg1 wrote: »
    Where did I say they have lots of money, I said some people in Social Housing have more disposable income than those paying mortgages.

    Where did I say they live the high life?

    You are the one saying everyone in Social Housing is poor.

    You have a disgraceful view of social housing and a disgraceful view of people in general

    Ignoring your last sentence of a slur, you said:

    "A lot of them do have it good", nice generalisation. My view is a view from the ground not from some ivory tower. They are exempt for a reason, they cannot afford it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    gurramok wrote: »
    Ignoring your last sentence of a slur, you said:

    "A lot of them do have it good", nice generalisation. My view is a view from the ground not from some ivory tower. They are exempt for a reason, they cannot afford it.

    If you want to speak of generalisations I direct you to the part in bold above. There are some in Social Housing that can afford €100, however, you seem to think that this is not the case and everyone in Social Housing is poor which by the way is an extremely silly and shameful generalisation.

    You talk about Ivory Towers and you then claim everyone in Social Housing is poor and a junkie, well seems to me the only one with a view that could be gained from an Ivory Tower is you.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    donalg1 wrote: »
    If you want to speak of generalisations I direct you to the part in bold above. There are some in Social Housing that can afford €100, however, you seem to think that this is not the case and everyone in Social Housing is poor which by the way is an extremely silly and shameful generalisation.

    You talk about Ivory Towers and you then claim everyone in Social Housing is poor and a junkie, well seems to me the only one with a view that could be gained from an Ivory Tower is you.

    So you think people who live in deprived areas are wealthy?:rolleyes:

    I never said everyone in social housing is a junkie, point that out?

    I said they have to live amongst junkies who ruin it for everyone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 197 ✭✭daithi84


    No i will not pay it as i pay €2200 a year in management fees and the council doesnt provide me with anything!!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    gurramok wrote: »
    donalg1 wrote: »
    If you want to speak of generalisations I direct you to the part in bold above. There are some in Social Housing that can afford €100, however, you seem to think that this is not the case and everyone in Social Housing is poor which by the way is an extremely silly and shameful generalisation.

    You talk about Ivory Towers and you then claim everyone in Social Housing is poor and a junkie, well seems to me the only one with a view that could be gained from an Ivory Tower is you.

    So you think people who live in deprived areas are wealthy?:rolleyes:

    I never said everyone in social housing is a junkie, point that out?

    I said they have to live amongst junkies who ruin it for everyone.

    So social housing is only located in deprived areas? Ever heard of Part V?

    Everyone lives amongst people with addictions it is not solely a problem of social housing estates.

    Way off topic now though.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Who pays the tax for people on the affordable housing scheme? The government own half the property...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    donalg1 wrote: »
    So social housing is only located in deprived areas? Ever heard of Part V?

    Everyone lives amongst people with addictions it is not solely a problem of social housing estates.

    Way off topic now though.

    Most are located in deprived areas. Its only in the last 10years or so where the policy shifted to move social housing into mixed communities. It hasn't achieved a widespread mix yet, it will takes years.

    Anyway, we just have to agree to disagree on why council tenants are excluded from the charge.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Surely, your first paragraph demonstrates you understood the point I made - so why do you try to deliberatly mis-understand the point in the second paragraph :confused:
    Originally Posted by black francis
    Originally Posted by robbie7730
    Income earners are making a profit. Generally having an income is an advantage. The income tax paid is ralated to the income level. The home owners tax is not. Its simply a poll tax, but targeted at a certain sector. .

    It will be soon.

    That seems to suggest you think the property tax will be linked to income.
    if not, perhaps you can explain what soon will be then? You highlighted the section of the quote yourself to reply to it.
    Not a contradiction - you seem to be just getting confused by the difference between a steady income for the state vs a steady income for a homeowner.
    If you claim the property tax is linked to the owners income, then also claiming the property tax will be a steady income is a contradiction.

    I know its not linked. But you seem to have posted that it "soon will be". That is a contradictory statement, to a steady property tax income.

    Yep, so it's undrivable for all practical purposes - unless you're proposing driving it around your back garden?
    unless you effectivly make the car 'un-drivable' but that would be a bit silly now woundn't it?
    That suggests you meant do something to it so it wont drive. My one is in the garden, not taxed since dec, i did not have to make it undrivable. Whats silly about that. You compared it to property tax, not me.

    If i own a home but dont use it, do i pay? if so, the comparrison is gone.

    But the car thing is another item. We all need somewhere to live.

    Well that was actually the point I was making - you were the one who suggested that owning a home and therfore being liable for this tax was 'not a choice'.

    You're quite simple wrong to suggest this.

    No, i asked is a home optional now, as in a place to live.
    Here is the quote again, maybe careful reading will tell you that.
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Most people need a home. Is a home optional now? A dog licence is €20. Hardly much of a comparison.

    See where it says "is a home an option now", that means somewhere to live, its not saying people must own their own homes.


    You seem very confused on the points you are trying to make - are you trying to say it's unfair because you can't avoid paying it, or it's unfair because you can avoid paying it?

    I was taking up the point about discrimination in this mini debate. Read the post it started with, and carefully this time.
    You really can't argue both sides of the same point in the same post without looking silly.
    Similar to linking dog licences and VAT, with home owners tax, in a discrimination comparison i suppose.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    smash wrote: »
    Who pays the tax for people on the affordable housing scheme? The government own half the property...

    No they dont, affordable housing is the same as a Mortgage from a bank, the shared ownership scheme is different however and probably what you are thinking of and those that bought houses through the Shared Ownership Scheme are exempt.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    gurramok wrote: »
    Most are located in deprived areas. Its only in the last 10years or so where the policy shifted to move social housing into mixed communities. It hasn't achieved a widespread mix yet, it will takes years.

    Anyway, we just have to agree to disagree on why council tenants are excluded from the charge.

    I think thats for the best, I do agree with you on some points in so far as a lot of social tenants are marginalised by society but not all are living in poverty, and there are some benefits to living in Social Housing compared to private rented accommodation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 51,113 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    dvpower wrote: »
    Is this the suggestion that because it can't be paid at the post office, its more difficult for old people?

    Yes. This is certainly the lowest point that any government in the history of the state has ever sunk to.:rolleyes:

    Just stand back and watch this shower sink even lower.
    Angela and Nicky will be well pleased.


  • Registered Users Posts: 51,113 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Income tax discriminates against income earners.
    Motor tax discriminates against car owners.
    TV license fee discriminates against tv owners
    Dog license fee discriminates against dog owners
    VAT discriminates against consumers.

    Enjoyed reading through the last few pages this morning - seems like the anti-tax crowd are becoming increasing hysterical as the deadline approaches.

    I think the Pro Tax crowd are absolutely hysterical. Did you not see the baldy lad on the news the other night threatening all sorts of things he has NO power to carry out. I had a great laugh at him.


  • Registered Users Posts: 51,113 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    gurramok wrote: »
    Thats so far and yes some have been scaremongered into not paying. It ain't March 31st yet.

    Beware the Ides of March Gurramok.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,296 ✭✭✭Frank Black


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    That seems to suggest you think the property tax will be linked to income.
    if not, perhaps you can explain what soon will be then? You highlighted the section of the quote yourself to reply to it.


    If you claim the property tax is linked to the owners income, then also claiming the property tax will be a steady income is a contradiction.

    I know its not linked. But you seem to have posted that it "soon will be". That is a contradictory statement, to a steady property tax income..

    I never claimed property tax would be linked to someone's income, but it will be linked with either site value or property value. This was in response to the point you had made that the charge was the same for everyone - therefore unfair.
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    That suggests you meant do something to it so it wont drive. My one is in the garden, not taxed since dec, i did not have to make it undrivable. Whats silly about that. You compared it to property tax, not me.


    If i own a home but dont use it, do i pay? if so, the comparrison is gone.

    But the car thing is another item. We all need somewhere to live. ..


    I'm really bored of this argument - talk about getting bogged down in semantics
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    No, i asked is a home optional now, as in a place to live.
    Here is the quote again, maybe careful reading will tell you that.



    See where it says "is a home an option now", that means somewhere to live, its not saying people must own their own homes. ..

    No - you said "is a home an option now" in the context that while a motor tax/dog liscense is avoidable, the property tax wasn't.

    The property tax is avoidable - because while we "all need a home" we don't all need to own one.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    donalg1 wrote: »

    Way off topic now though.

    Its amazing for such a long thread, it has stayed generally in line.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal




    No - you said "is a home an option now" in the context that while a motor tax/dog liscense is avoidable, the property tax wasn't.

    The property tax is avoidable - because while we "all need a home" we don't all need to own one.

    So, it is discriminating against home owners v renters, who use the same services then? Glad we have that sorted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭Am Chile


    dvpower wrote: »
    Is this the suggestion that because it can't be paid at the post office, its more difficult for old people?

    Yes. This is certainly the lowest point that any government in the history of the state has ever sunk to.:rolleyes:

    Todays story reads many pensioners are afraid if they refuse to pay the household tax they will be evicted from their homes and placed into state care, so Il repeat what I said in my last post the goverment have sunk a new low Intimidating eldery people like this.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,250 ✭✭✭lividduck


    Am Chile wrote: »
    Todays story reads many pensioners are afraid if they refuse to pay the household tax they will be evicted from their homes and placed into state care, so Il repeat what I said in my last post the goverment have sunk a new low Intimidating eldery people like this.
    If the eldery are afraid of being evicted it is NOT the governments fault, rather it is the fault of certain sections of the Anti-charge campaign who purposely are creating a false fear.
    Place the blame where it belongs with the scaremongerers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 51,113 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    lividduck wrote: »
    If the eldery are afraid of being evicted it is NOT the governments fault, rather it is the fault of certain sections of the Anti-charge campaign who purposely are creating a false fear.
    Place the blame where it belongs with the scaremongerers.

    What about that baldy lad on the 6.01 news threatening all sorts of things he has no power to do, like using the E.S.B. to get details of people's accounts ?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭Am Chile


    lividduck wrote: »
    If the eldery are afraid of being evicted it is NOT the governments fault, rather it is the fault of certain sections of the Anti-charge campaign who purposely are creating a false fear.
    Place the blame where it belongs with the scaremongerers.

    At no public meeting was there ever any such talk telling eldery people about evictions for non payment, it came from the pro household tax side not the other way around.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Am Chile wrote: »
    Todays story reads many pensioners are afraid if they refuse to pay the household tax they will be evicted from their homes and placed into state care, so Il repeat what I said in my last post the goverment have sunk a new low Intimidating eldery people like this.
    Where exactly have the government said or insinuated that elderly people "will be evicted from their homes and placed into state care"?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    What about that baldy lad on the 6.01 news threatening all sorts of things he has no power to do, like using the E.S.B. to get details of people's accounts ?
    He never said anything about forcing pensioners into state care nor anything like it.

    He did say that he would be getting details from ESB bills - they are in talks with the ESB and the Data Protection Commissioner to do just that. That's not scaremongering - its just laying out the facts.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭Am Chile


    dvpower wrote: »
    Where exactly have the government said or insinuated that elderly people "will be evicted from their homes and placed into state care"?

    Ask that to some eldery people who feel Intimidated about being evicted for non payment.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Am Chile wrote: »
    At no public meeting was there ever any such talk telling eldery people about evictions for non payment, it came from the pro household tax side not the other way around.
    Can you show us where the government have said that people are going to be evicted from their homes if they don't pay.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Am Chile wrote: »
    Ask that to some eldery people who feel Intimidated about being evicted for non payment.
    I'm asking you. You made the claim.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,202 ✭✭✭Rabidlamb


    lividduck wrote: »
    If the eldery are afraid of being evicted it is NOT the governments fault, rather it is the fault of certain sections of the Anti-charge campaign who purposely are creating a false fear.
    Place the blame where it belongs with the scaremongerers.

    Most of the elderly aren't as dothery as they let on, if the tag buys them another few weeks of government indecision they'll gladly wear it while Skyping their grandkids from Lanzorotte.
    I'm speaking about my mother-in-law here, buy you & sell you she would.


  • Registered Users Posts: 51,113 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Rabidlamb wrote: »
    Most of the elderly aren't as dothery as they let on, if the tag buys them another few weeks of government indecision they'll gladly wear it while Skyping their grandkids from Lanzorotte.
    I'm speaking about my mother-in-law here, buy you & sell you she would.

    Good woman. I hope she's around to vote in the next General Election so we can send this shower into obscurity just like the shower before them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,327 ✭✭✭bladespin


    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/govt-holding-firm-on-household-charge-543659.html


    "The Government has refused to scrap the household charge despite a High Court ruling that legislation bringing in the tax was unconstitutional."

    From another thread, thought you might be interested.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 51,113 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    dvpower wrote: »
    He never said anything about forcing pensioners into state care nor anything like it.

    He did say that he would be getting details from ESB bills - they are in talks with the ESB and the Data Protection Commissioner to do just that. That's not scaremongering - its just laying out the facts.

    Ruari Quinn now threatening to take people to court.
    Now that is a threat. Where did the bit where it would be attached to your house when you try to sell it go ?
    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/govt-holding-firm-on-household-charge-543659.html


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement