Water Charge Quotas

zenno · 23-04-2014 8:34pm

Phoebas wrote: »

What more accurate way would you propose they charge people who don't have water meters?

A more accurate way would be to not charge them until the government have their act together, and until water meters are installed in all places, this would be a gesture of fairness. The way they are doing it now is akin to letting 6 year old children to manage it.

darkpagandeath · 23-04-2014 8:36pm

zenno wrote: »

A more accurate way would be to not charge them until they have their act together, and until water meters are installed in all places, this would be a gesture of fairness. The way they are doing it now is akin to letting 6 year old children to manage it.

I will never have a meter same with a lot of people I live in an Apartment. That's what gets me. Estimated for life.

emo72 · 23-04-2014 8:39pm

what do utility companies like electric ireland or bord gais do if you have no metre? do they charge? do they ****.

water is already paid well paid for with an extra few percent on vat and motor tax. we already pay. they want us to pay again because the general taxation goes to pay our very dodgy euro debts. and when its up and running they will sell it off and watch the bills shoot up.

Phoebas · 23-04-2014 8:41pm

zenno wrote: »

A more accurate way would be to not charge them until they have their act together, and until water meters are installed in all places, this would be a gesture of fairness. The way they are doing it now is akin to letting 6 year old children to manage it.

I can't imagine how you figured out that charging nil is more accurate than making an estimated charge based on actual usage from a large user base.

Nor would it be more fair, because if these water consumers aren't paying anything, then the rest of the population, who will already be paying their water bills, will have to pay more to subsidise them.

darkpagandeath · 23-04-2014 8:44pm

Phoebas wrote: »

I can't imagine how you figured out that charging nil is more accurate than making an estimated charge based on actual usage from a large user base.

Nor would it be more fair, because if these water consumers aren't paying anything, then the rest of the population, who will already be paying their water bills, will have to pay more to subsidise them.

You could argue that about commercial water. They have always had to pay. So there should be no issue billing the people unlucky enough to have a meter and wait for the others to be installed.

Phoebas · 23-04-2014 8:46pm

emo72 wrote: »

what do utility companies like electric ireland or bord gais do if you have no metre? do they charge? do they ****.

If you don't have a gas meter, you wont be supplied with gas.
Electric Ireland will provide you with an electricity supply, but if you live somewhere where its expensive for them to get the supply to you, you'll pay the full cost of that infrastructure.

Phoebas · 23-04-2014 8:48pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

You could argue that about commercial water. They have always had to pay. So there should be no issue billing the people unlucky enough to have a meter and wait for the others to be installed.

I suppose they could continue the current unfairness for longer.

zenno · 23-04-2014 8:57pm

Phoebas wrote: »

I can't imagine how you figured out that charging nil is more accurate than making an estimated charge based on actual usage from a large user base.

Nor would it be more fair, because if these water consumers aren't paying anything, then the rest of the population, who will already be paying their water bills, will have to pay more to subsidise them.

You are missing the point Phoebas The folk with no meters shouldn't be charged until they are installed. Why should you be charged for something when it cannot be monitored as to the usage you are using. Estimation is unfair and worthless.

They need to have the meters installed to make an accurate account of how much you use. You asked me a question and I have answered it fairly. No-one without a meter should be charged until they have a monitoring meter installed. Even then they shouldn't be charged, because every-one has, and is already paying for water out of their taxes. Why pay twice, it makes no sense.

Phoebas · 23-04-2014 9:00pm

zenno wrote: »

You are missing the point Phoebas The folk with no meters shouldn't be charged until they are installed. Why should you be charged for something when it cannot be monitored as to the usage you are using. Estimation is unfair and worthless.

I understood the point; I just disagree with it.

That_Girl_ Is_ A_Cowboy · 23-04-2014 9:06pm

My biggest gripe about water charges is that it's going to increase sickness and illness. Remember swine flu some years ago? The best way to contain that was with regular handwashing. There will be people who won't be able to afford this new bill and they'll have to watch every time they turn on the tap. Not to mention those who are suffering from cystic fibrosis and their families. The common cold can kill them.

Another problem I have is the free daily water allowance. I believe the water allowance is much more in the uk. When you first turn on the shower tap it can take a little bit for the water to run warm/hot. What are you expected to do? Stand in the cold shower? That would have been ok last summer during our heatwave but we don't get heat like that very often.

Another problem I have is that so many people were hit badly with unemployment, underemployment, wage cuts, higher taxes. Basically less income. And we have more bills. The government implementing these policies have shielded themselves from the effects of the recession and they haven't a ****ing clue what it's like for us beneath them.

zenno · 23-04-2014 9:06pm

Phoebas wrote: »

I understood the point; I just disagree with it.

No problem at all, I don't expect every-one to agree with it, as we all have our own ideas regarding it. I just think the way it is at the moment is really very badly integrated to the consumer and should have been done more professionally. It's a big mess at the moment that's for sure Imo.

Busted Flat. · 23-04-2014 10:08pm

emo72 wrote: »

hi phoebas, do you work for the water company, or perhaps employed by the government?

Up to post 192 no answer to your question.

cloudatlas · 23-04-2014 10:17pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainwater_tank

Busted Flat. · 23-04-2014 11:51pm

Just seen this on google.

What have the supporters of water meters have to say about this.

A smart meter produces microwave non-ionizing radiation that penetrates the walls of your home and into your home 24/7, 365 days. The utility companies argue that because the radiation being emitted is non-ionizing that it’s safe.

It’s not safe. Numerous studies point to the adverse biological effects associated with the non-ionizing radiation used by smart meters.

- See more at: http://www.electricsense.com/2431/smart-meter-shielding-tips/#sthash.qu620gH1.dpuf

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CFAQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.electricsense.com%2F2431%2Fsmart-meter-shielding-tips%2F&ei=xkBYU4HOFaWv7Abj74GgBA&usg=AFQjCNGcto_8GONkounkgrSAr3vHfn2IOg&bvm=bv.65177938,d.ZGU

Phoebas · 24-04-2014 12:02am

^^^ Oh. Good. God.

Hotblack Desiato · 24-04-2014 12:06am

emo72 wrote: »

hi phoebas, do you work for the water company, or perhaps employed by the government?

I really don't like the implication of this question, especially the second part, do you think that public servants should be silenced, or forced to out themselves on boards or anywhere else? or are mindless government shills, or something?

Hotale.com · 24-04-2014 12:09am

turnikett1 wrote: »

Isn't that the point of it? I do agree though. I have no problem paying for this on principle but only if it will improve the quality of water. I'm sick of having this murky bad tasting water from my taps here. Water shouldnt have a taste! I remember being at a mates in the country once and the tap water they had was phenomenal - crystal clear, as cold as ice and a pleasure to drink and touch. I'm ok with paying Irish Water if they can deliver that level of quality.

However, this being Ireland and all, I'm ready to expect far less

Water should have a taste - if you live in a limestone area there'll be lime in it, giving it taste. You can't expect them to get pure water for everyone, that would be so expensive and, to be honest, utterly pointless.

Also, I have a friend who lives in the countryside who needs a water desalinator (I think that's what it is anyway) because their water destroys their kettles etc. You seem to be expecting a perfect system which is absolutely impossible to realise no matter what happens.

Busted Flat. · 24-04-2014 12:11am

ninja900 wrote: »

I really don't like the implication of this question, especially the second part, do you think that public servants should be silenced, or forced to out themselves on boards or anywhere else? or are mindless government shills, or something?

I agree they should not be silenced, but if they are putting out government propaganda, then they should declare their hand. At least posters would know who were dealing with.

Hotale.com · 24-04-2014 12:15am

13505 wrote: »

I find water charges a repulsive thought. Tax anything you want, you meddling Michaels and I'll probably pay it, for the good of society. But stay the f*ck away from water! You sick, abhorent Angelas!

Anything but the one substance that keeps us and everything that's ever been alive. You disgusting Declans! Free water for all beings. Tax everything else if you want, but not water you sick simmering slugheads!!!

Ignore the fact that it may be a tax, and take it at face value - imagine it is a "water charge".

You wouldn't be paying for water, you'd be paying for the treatment of water, which costs hundreds of millions each year. Go down to the stream if you want water, go to your tap if you want the expensive treated water.

Of course ideally we wouldn't want to be paying for anything, but someone has to pay for it, and the fact is that our government (no matter how much of a mess they've made through bailouts etc.) can't afford it (which they really can't unless they start charging us or another boom happens).

Hotale.com · 24-04-2014 12:22am

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Just seen this on google.

What have the supporters of water meters have to say about this.

A smart meter produces microwave non-ionizing radiation that penetrates the walls of your home and into your home 24/7, 365 days. The utility companies argue that because the radiation being emitted is non-ionizing that it’s safe.

It’s not safe. Numerous studies point to the adverse biological effects associated with the non-ionizing radiation used by smart meters.

There's radiation from everything, gamma radiation is the only kind that could penetrate your walls, and this is exceedingly rare in the home and, no matter how bad you think the government are, would never be allowed to be attached to every house in the country.

Also, d'you know those smoke alarms you should have in every room in your house? They work due to the presence of a radioactive substance, americium-241, and guess what? It's completely safe. So is your microwave, it won't give you cancer, and your laptop won't make you infertile.

The tiniest bit of knowledge would be enough to dismiss any of these claims regarding radiation dangers.

Busted Flat. · 24-04-2014 12:23am

Hotale.com wrote: »

Ignore the fact that it may be a tax, and take it at face value - imagine it is a "water charge".

You wouldn't be paying for water, you'd be paying for the treatment of water, which costs hundreds of millions each year. Go down to the stream if you want water, go to your tap if you want the expensive treated water.

Of course ideally we wouldn't want to be paying for anything, but someone has to pay for it, and the fact is that our government (no matter how much of a mess they've made through bailouts etc.) can't afford it (which they really can't unless they start charging us or another boom happens).

Go for it lad some posters need support. Honesty and transparency is the motto.
OH, accuracy, I nearly forgot that one.

Busted Flat. · 24-04-2014 12:34am

Hotale.com wrote: »

There's radiation from everything, gamma radiation is the only kind that could penetrate your walls, and this is exceedingly rare in the home and, no matter how bad you think the government are, would never be allowed to be attached to every house in the country.

Also, d'you know those smoke alarms you should have in every room in your house? They work due to the presence of a radioactive substance, americium-241, and guess what? It's completely safe. So is your microwave, it won't give you cancer, and your laptop won't make you infertile.

The tiniest bit of knowledge would be enough to dismiss any of these claims regarding radiation dangers.

I do not know the problems regarding radiation, I seen a protester with a sign on the net in Cork about radiation so I Goolged it. If it is a problem bring it up and inform people about it, or there will be few paying the quango pensions.
The trouble is we were promised honesty and transparency by this government but we got secrecy. Do not blame the posters for the questions.

Hotale.com · 24-04-2014 12:41am

Busted Flat. wrote: »

I do not know the problems regarding radiation, I seen a protester with a sign on the net in Cork about radiation so I Goolged it. If it is a problem bring it up and inform people about it, or there will be few paying the quango pensions.
The trouble is we were promised honesty and transparency by this government but we got secrecy. Do not blame the posters for the questions.

I agree, we are getting no transparency or honesty and due to this I think it has to be up to us to try to separate the true from the false. Which is completely unfair but well, people aren't going to vote out FG, FF or Labour anytime soon, are they? As a nation we really need to quit moaning about making change and actually take action where it matters; the polling stations.

Amirani · 24-04-2014 12:49am

Busted Flat. wrote: »

I do not know the problems regarding radiation, I seen a protester with a sign on the net in Cork about radiation so I Goolged it. If it is a problem bring it up and inform people about it, or there will be few paying the quango pensions.
The trouble is we were promised honesty and transparency by this government but we got secrecy. Do not blame the posters for the questions.

Okay, the Government should inform us about this non-dangerous radiation. Maybe next they can inform us that the hydrogen molecules in there water that we're drinking won't actually explode like hydrogen bombs? Just for the sake of transparency like.

In all honesty, people ask stupid questions, particularly those carrying signs around the place. They're not all going to be answered, anyone with a bit of common sense can find the answers themselves, Wikipedia would be a start.

Hotale.com · 24-04-2014 12:53am

Diego Simeone wrote: »

Okay, the Government should inform us about this non-dangerous radiation. Maybe next they can inform us that the hydrogen molecules in there water that we're drinking won't actually explode like hydrogen bombs? Just for the sake of transparency like.

In all honesty, people ask stupid questions, particularly those carrying signs around the place. They're not all going to be answered, anyone with a bit of common sense can find the answers themselves, Wikipedia would be a start.

The only bad thing about the water charge is the money. There is nothing else to worry about and people attacking a poor worker in a housing estate in Cork isn't going to solve anything - he/she is only doing their job.

zenno · 24-04-2014 12:56am

Hotale.com wrote: »

Ignore the fact that it may be a tax, and take it at face value - imagine it is a "water charge".

You wouldn't be paying for water, you'd be paying for the treatment of water, which costs hundreds of millions each year. Go down to the stream if you want water, go to your tap if you want the expensive treated water.

Of course ideally we wouldn't want to be paying for anything, but someone has to pay for it, and the fact is that our government (no matter how much of a mess they've made through bailouts etc.) can't afford it (which they really can't unless they start charging us or another boom happens).

How many times does this have to be re-textured on this thread for people to clearly see that we have already been paying for the treatment and pipe transport of water to our mains system for decades for Gods sake.

You are by-passing the most basic acknowledgement of this truth, yet you fail to see it.

zenno · 24-04-2014 12:59am

Hotale.com wrote: »

The only bad thing about the water charge is the money. There is nothing else to worry about and people attacking a poor worker in a housing estate in Cork isn't going to solve anything - he/she is only doing their job.

No-one was attacked so leave that out and stop making assumptions as to a worker being attacked, which is incorrect.

Amirani · 24-04-2014 1:02am

zenno wrote: »

No-one was physically attacked so leave that out and stop making assumptions as to a worker being attacked, which is incorrect.

They never said it was a physical attack. You're the one making assumptions it seems.

Cantona's Collars · 24-04-2014 1:03am

I posted this before so maybe one of the tax supporters can answer it: Why have a new water company that is costing a fortune when the Local Authority will still have to maintain the supply network and affect any repairs?

Here in Wexford the Co.Council are responsible for the water supply for the next 12 years yet we are going to pay Irish Water instead - for what?

zenno · 24-04-2014 1:04am

Diego Simeone wrote: »

They never said it was a physical attack. You're the one making assumptions it seems.

Well how were they attacked ? I ask you.

Fixed.

Water Charge Quotas

Comments