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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Water Charge Quotas

Options
12467…10

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    Except you have to ignore the fact it was agreed years earlier with a different government. It is a charge by use so not a tax but you seem happy ranting things that aren't true so who am I to ruin your fun?:P

    If enough people refuse to pay, maybe they'll get Revenue to collect, a la the household charge.


  • Options
    #93
    MonkieSocks
    Registered Users Posts: 8,259 ✭✭✭MonkieSocks


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    Except you have to ignore the fact it was agreed years earlier with a different government.

    Thats why we have Elections and Change to a new Government.

    Too change what the previous Government messed up

    =(:-) Me? I know who I am. I'm a dude playing a dude disguised as another dude (-:)=



  • Options
    #94
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,352 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Smidge wrote: »
    All due respect Ray, it cannot be a charge by use when 3/4 of people won't have a meter to measure use. So therefore, like it or not, its a tax
    That is just logistic of a role out nothing more. It isn't a tax.


  • Options
    #95
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,352 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    MonkieSocks wrote: »
    Thats why we have Elections and Change to a new Government.

    Too change what the previous Government messed up
    It doesn't work that way and if you don't know that you should start to learn how agreements work.

    When a country agrees something a change of government can't just renege on agreements. It was always coming and only the ignorant would think it wasn't


  • Options
    #96
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,352 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Banjo String wrote: »
    If enough people refuse to pay, maybe they'll get Revenue to collect, a la the household charge.

    Still won't make it a tax


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Amirani
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,521 Mod ✭✭✭✭Amirani


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    Citation needed.

    It doesn't matter the argument stills stands on its own merits. There is more of them and economy of scale exists. That is even ignoring the fact the other sources of income the British Empire still makes for them.

    I agree with your point. Urbanised societies require less far less taxation as services are much cheaper to provide. The UK is one of the most urbanised countries on Earth, which makes a big difference (even if Manchester's population is smaller than Ireland's ;)).


  • Options
    #98
    YFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 9,717 ✭✭✭YFlyer


    Imagine calling friends over for drinks to watch a match or movie. You'll have one ear cocked towards the bathroom to hear if their flushing the toilet or not :pac:


  • Options
    #99
    Cantona's Collars
    Registered Users Posts: 33,709 ✭✭✭✭Cantona's Collars


    Can anyone answer why a new company was set up yet down my way the Council will be still doing maintenance of the mains supply & any repairs for the next 12 years??

    All that money spent setting up Irish Water yet the old company (Wexford Co.Co.) are doing all the work:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #100
    Blured
    Registered Users Posts: 394 ✭✭Blured


    Banjo String wrote: »
    How much does a person in the UK get charged for:
    • health
    • school book/education fees
    • refuse collections
    • road tax (compared to irelands motor tax)
    • the UK vat rate

    How's the USC going down there too? :cool:

    Well, the income tax burden on the average worker in the UK is higher than that in Ireland. Using €32k/£32k as an example, in Ireland you would pay 18.5% in various taxes (PAYE, PRSI, USC), in the UK that would be 23%.

    Refuse charges referenced above would be covered by council tax which a previous poster alluded to. To give an example, I'm living in a 1 bed flat in London, my council tax is £700 a year (discounted because I'm living by myself) and water charges are £330.


  • Options
    #101
    Smidge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,541 ✭✭✭Smidge


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    That is just logistic of a role out nothing more. It isn't a tax.

    Of course its a tax if the reasons given initially for introducing the water charges ie environmental/conservation cannot be implemented as in the measuring of the consumption of each households USE of water by which the householders can see how much they are using and become aware of water use/waste and thereby economise and conserve and REDUCE their water.

    No meters-No conservation-No conservation-No reduction in wasting water-No reduction in wastage = The water usage we currently use and therefore no change in ecological terms so therefore we will be paying for the EXACT same thing we have at the moment.

    No change in the situation = A TAX


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    bear1
    Registered Users Posts: 12,811 ✭✭✭✭bear1


    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-water-will-pay-customers-10-for-mistakes-30194984.html


  • Options
    #103
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    I am for the water chargers and think the price is too low.

    Water doesnt just fall from the sky ! !


  • Options
    #104
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Why should I pay taxes and use a small bit of water, while some rich pensioner who spends all day long watering their enormous garden pays nothing? Water charges are an excellent idea. FFS there's a house I pass every day with a great big waterspout in their garden pumping day and night.

    There should be no exceptions or discounts. Pay for what you use, the same as the bins.


  • Options
    #105
    Busted Flat.
    Registered Users Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭Busted Flat.


    hmmm wrote: »
    Why should I pay taxes and use a small bit of water, while some rich pensioner who spends all day long watering their enormous garden pays nothing? Water charges are an excellent idea. FFS there's a house I pass every day with a great big waterspout in their garden pumping day and night.

    There should be no exceptions or discounts. Pay for what you use, the same as the bins.

    A fountain pumps from its own reservoir, and needs the occasional top up from an external source.


  • Options
    #106
    5live
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,438 ✭✭✭5live


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    Yes but the incinerator are not stopped by the locals in order to allow this to happen. The public here are not exactly willing for such schemes. Our electricity generation could do the same instead of wasting this heated water as is. When it was proposed to use it there was massive resistance politically and publically.
    It doesn't have to be power by incineration.

    In Germany, probably the leading country in terms of CHP, the power would generally be generated by combustion of methane from fermenting biomass rather than burning it and the location of the CHP plantswould normally be within a short distance of towns/villages/office blocks that would use the waste heat from the fermentation of the biomass.

    Incidentally, i am fully behind water charges. My house has been metered for the last 14 years for private consumption and i welcome the rest of the country into my reality with open arms.


  • Options
    #107
    y0ssar1an22
    Registered Users Posts: 16,026 ✭✭✭✭y0ssar1an22


    Would it not be better to just have a flat charge of e10 per annum, or something like that. No need for Irish Water to be set up, with all its associated costs (installation, wages, whatever else). Just a couple of admin people set up somewhere to run the thing.
    On the costs, how much are the top dogs getting paid? And who decided those wages and who is paying them? I would not like if our water charges are being used to pay the CEO of Irish Water a couple 100k a year.


  • Options
    #108
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,352 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    Smidge wrote: »
    Of course its a tax if the reasons given initially for introducing the water charges ie environmental/conservation cannot be implemented as in the measuring of the consumption of each households USE of water by which the householders can see how much they are using and become aware of water use/waste and thereby economise and conserve and REDUCE their water.

    No meters-No conservation-No conservation-No reduction in wasting water-No reduction in wastage = The water usage we currently use and therefore no change in ecological terms so therefore we will be paying for the EXACT same thing we have at the moment.

    No change in the situation = A TAX
    No not a tax what ever way you want to spin it. Just because all meters are not in place doesn't change that it will be based on usage and that is the plan. Implementation takes time that is all.

    Would it be fairer that only the people with meters get charged?


  • Options
    #109
    Smidge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,541 ✭✭✭Smidge


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    No not a tax what ever way you want to spin it. Just because all meters are not in place doesn't change that it will be based on usage and that is the plan. Implementation takes time that is all.

    Would it be fairer that only the people with meters get charged?

    Well now that's just silly.
    It CANNOT be based on usage if the meters are not in place.
    End of.

    And no, I dont think its fairer to charge the people who have meters already in place.
    I think, rather than a half baked rush to pick pockets under the guise of "being ecological" they should wait until the ENTIRE system is in place before they attempt to do another thing.

    If implementation takes time, well I guess they'll just have to wait till they do the job first before charging people.


  • Options
    #110
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    Well, folk are living in a dictatorship now and not a democracy any-more. When the government forcibly take money from your account or pension then you know. They will do this just the same as the household charge.

    Every-one should fight this to the best of their ability, who wants to live in a dictatorship ?.


  • Options
    #111
    Muise...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,512 ✭✭✭Muise...


    zenno wrote: »
    Well, folk are living in a dictatorship now and not a democracy any-more. When the government forcibly take money from your account or pension then you know. They will do this just the same as the household charge.

    Every-one should fight this to the best of their ability, who wants to live in a dictatorship ?.

    I wish they'd come up with a way to tax exaggeration.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    Muise... wrote: »
    I wish they'd come up with a way to tax exaggeration.

    You mean tax the truth.


  • Options
    #113
    on the river
    Registered Users Posts: 1,527 ✭✭✭on the river


    The government should be paying the consumer for putting up with piss poor water.


  • Options
    #114
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    It's astonishing to hear that folk will still have to pay water charges when their water has E.coli in it. These folk will be charged for drinking and washing in animal faeces. What an insane country we live in.

    There should be war on this, but as usual, the indoctrinated public slaves of corrupt government want you to pay for it regardless.


  • Options
    #115
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    zenno wrote: »
    It's astonishing to hear that folk will still have to pay water charges when their water has E.coli in it. These folk will be charged for drinking and washing in animal faeces. What an insane country we live in.

    There should be war on this, but as usual, the indoctrinated public slaves of corrupt government want you to pay for it regardless.

    Give FG their answer in the local elections.

    I think they will lose control over a lot of constituencies.


  • Options
    #116
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    Banjo String wrote: »
    Give FG their answer in the local elections.

    I think they will lose control over a lot of constituencies.

    You can be absolutely sure of that. The whole family and relations won't be voting for these lying scumbags. I've lost count on the amount of lies they verbally ejected before they got in.


  • Options
    #117
    on the river
    Registered Users Posts: 1,527 ✭✭✭on the river


    zenno wrote: »
    You can be absolutely sure of that. The whole family and relations won't be voting for these lying scumbags. I've lost count on the amount of lies they verbally ejected before they got in.

    we should go to these election stations and pour this water into the ballad boxes.

    This will give all politicans the view we are on the river in this issue.


  • Options
    #118
    Muise...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,512 ✭✭✭Muise...


    zenno wrote: »
    You mean tax the truth.

    No, I mean tax exaggeration. You are as far from the "truth" as a screech monkey reading a tabloid.


  • Options
    #119
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    on the river wrote: »
    we should go to these election stations and pour this water into the ballad boxes.

    This will give all politicans the view we are on the river in this issue.

    We don't want to spoil any votes now do we :).

    What shocks me after reading some comments about this water charge, is that a lot of folk say they don't mind paying for this water charge, but they do not take into account the very basic scenario that exists... water contamination of animal faeces, year in, year out, and poor substandard drinking water in general.

    What is the problem with some of these peoples brains ?. They continue to lay back and just keep taking it constantly, as if they were hypnotised in some way to agree with a corrupt and unjust government. If they keep this up, God knows what will be coming next.


  • Options
    #120
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    Muise... wrote: »
    No, I mean tax exaggeration. You are as far from the "truth" as a screech monkey reading a tabloid.

    In "your" opinion. But your opinion is wrong, so just deal with it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    on the river
    Registered Users Posts: 1,527 ✭✭✭on the river


    zenno wrote: »
    We don't want to spoil any votes now do we :).

    What shocks me after reading some comments about this water charge, is that a lot of folk say they don't mind paying for this water charge, but they do not take into account the very basic scenario that exists... water contamination of animal faeces, year in, year out, and poor substandard drinking water in general.

    What is the problem with some of these peoples brains ?. They continue to lay back and just keep taking it constantly, as if they were hypnotised in some way to agree with a corrupt and unjust government. If they keep this up, God knows what will be coming next.

    I agree the government will tax the air that we breath next.

    I think its time we joined nasa


Advertisement