What ever happened to the Anti Bin Tax Campaign

Dub13

The title says it all.Its been a long time since I heard anything from them,is the campaign even still going...?

billy the squid

trash canned tbh

what do you mean bin tax, will it like come out of everyones wages or does it mean that you will have to pay to get your rubbish collected like most other parts of the country?

pete

billy the squid wrote:

will it like come out of everyones wages

Only the first time you pay it.


ahhh not this one again.

pete

Dub13 wrote:

The title says it all.Its been a long time since I heard anything from them,is the campaign even still going...?

http://www.socialistparty.net/bintax/

Dub13

I still have not paid mine...I get the odd letter from DCC.I would say I am going to have to pay someday not to far away.

Kernel

Dub13 wrote:

The title says it all.Its been a long time since I heard anything from them,is the campaign even still going...?

A lot of the people who were elected into the local council elections on an anti-bin tax mandate have simply sold out, or realised that they knew very little about politics, and are in over their heads, so are going to keep their mouths shut, take the paycheck, and hope not to seem foolish and uneducated in their newly elected position.

Most of them were independents, since not many parties were going to put their necks on the line, and their TDs towed the line as always (come back McCreevy!).

There's no stopping the bin tax unfortunately - since we are on our own as working class PAYE dubs.

Country folk will not see the injustice in it, since they only have their own selfish begrudgery to persuade them that if they have had to pay it, we should suddenly pay it too - conveniently ignoring the question as to why we should pay a new tax which we never have had to pay before, and the issue of infrastructure and waste disposal costs outside the capital. Then there's the famous debate of Dublin being the economic powerhouse of the entire country, and us paying more taxes, as well as increased housing costs which have provided more stamp duty.

Maybe Dublin people can get more solidarity when they try to introduce water rates, since that will affect our country cousins too?

What people should do, is make sure to pressure the local council for every possible amenity, to take back something for your area, since they are now taking your money (or going to).

oscarBravo

Kernel wrote:

Country folk will not see the injustice in it...

Correct.

Kernel wrote:

...since they only have their own selfish begrudgery to persuade them that if they have had to pay it, we should suddenly pay it too...

Um, no. The principle is simple: the polluter pays.

Kernel wrote:

...conveniently ignoring the question as to why we should pay a new tax which we never have had to pay before...

It's not a tax. It's a service charge. The fact that you haven't had to pay it is the anomaly.

Kernel wrote:

...and the issue of infrastructure and waste disposal costs outside the capital.

I don't know what you mean by this.

Kernel wrote:

Then there's the famous debate of Dublin being the economic powerhouse of the entire country, and us paying more taxes, as well as increased housing costs which have provided more stamp duty.

I'm not aware of any suggestion that Dubliners should pay more taxes - simply that they should pay for the disposal of the waste that they generate.

Kernel wrote:

Maybe Dublin people can get more solidarity when they try to introduce water rates, since that will affect our country cousins too?

I pay for my water. Why shouldn't you?

seedot

Still defending non-payers in court, still holding meetings and reacting to any attempts at non-collection, strill raising money for what is expected in the next while.

I think the key thing is that bins are still being collected in the city where there is a campaign so there have been no big on street confrontations => the media is not covering the campaign at the moment (local group hold fundraiser and discuss dangers of non-collection is not much of a story)

On the polluter pays thing... this is one of the court victories won by the campaign in the last year i.e. two judges have found that it does not support the polluter pays principle therefore the collection of arrears is in limbo as it looks like all of 2001 and 2002 bills may be ruled out. This is being appealed bty the City Council to the Supreme Court.

Kernel - which councillors are you talking about?

Kernel

oscarBravo wrote:

I pay for my water. Why shouldn't you?

I've cut most of your post, because my last one was long enough, and I can sum it up by saying that you've proved my previous point of country people saying 'we pay it, why shouldn't the Dubs?' nonsense.

Well, you don't understand the whole concept of infrastructure versus costs, or you didn't understand what I was saying. If I run a waste disposal company, and I have to travel for 100 miles to collect the rubbish for only a few tax paying households (which is precisely what happens in the 'country'), then obviously, I have to charge the council more for providing that service to them. In Dublin, such a situation never existed, and still doesn't.

So, people like you fail to see a problem that a large proportion of your fellow countrymen have to suddenly pay a tax they previously didn't have to, and thus the government gets away with it, because they may just about have popular support. That leads to problems for many people in Ireland. You don't see a problem with other people suddenly and for no good reason, having to pay a tax, because you are a part of the Irish attitude of petty begrudgery.

That is one small reason why we all get screwed.

We pay more tax, as a county, becuase we have more PAYE workers and we pay more for housing, therefore more Stamp duty. Nevermind VAT. Dublin keeps this republic running, whether you like to admit it or not.

Kernel

seedot wrote:

Kernel - which councillors are you talking about?

Many of them, from what I have heard from friends, but to name names, I'll say joan Collins (yeah, real name) for South Dublin C.C.

i know she got elected purely on an anti-bin tax mandate, with no previous experience in any political field, and has since done nothing for anti-bin tax (bar printing out and distributing a few piss-poor leaflets) or anything else! :mad:

billy the squid

Well, you don't understand the whole concept of infrastructure versus costs, or you didn't understand what I was saying. If I run a waste disposal company, and I have to travel for 100 miles to collect the rubbish for only a few tax paying households (which is precisely what happens in the 'country'), then obviously, I have to charge the council more for providing that service to them. In Dublin, such a situation never existed, and still doesn't.

Dublin is not the only urban centre in the country you know. I live in a city and the rubbish collectors don't have to travel 100 miles to fill a truck. We pay close to €400 a year for refuse collection. I cannot see what the problem is that people in dublin think paying for this service is beneath them.

Nuttzz

billy the squid wrote:

I cannot see what the problem is that people in dublin think paying for this service is beneath them.

"Because us Dubs prop up the boggers economy and if ya's dont like it just move to dublin like the rest of your relations"

Seriously, I was once told that....

seedot

Kernel wrote:

Many of them, from what I have heard from friends, but to name names, I'll say joan Collins (yeah, real name) for South Dublin C.C.

i know she got elected purely on an anti-bin tax mandate, with no previous experience in any political field, and has since done nothing for anti-bin tax (bar printing out and distributing a few piss-poor leaflets) or anything else! :mad:

See, this is one of the problems with our democracy - basing opinions on hearsay and gossip rather than any real knowledge.

1. Joan is in Dublin City Council - not South Dublin.

2. Joan was politically involved with both her union (CWU) and as a member of one of the minor left wing parties for about 15 years.

3. She briefed the barristers (and got the money to pay for it) which have defeated any attempts to collect arrears.

4. She has proposed and got passed a motion in the City Council to get all bins collected.

5. She is heavily involved in the campaign around the development of Crumlin Village, has been organising large public meetings and is establishing a committee with a number of community organisations to look at this.

So.. any other councillors? AFAIK she was the only one elected on an anti-bin tax ticket.

kc66

Its unbelievable the way some Dubs have a such a strong feeling of superiority.

Country folk will not see the injustice in it, since they only have their own selfish begrudgery to persuade them that if they have had to pay it, we should suddenly pay it too

Selfish? We pay the service charges. Begrudgery? We definitely wouldn't want end up as small minded as this imbecile.

I have to travel for 100 miles to collect the rubbish for only a few tax paying households

I lived in Galway city for 4 years while in college there. The costs since 2000 (and before that I assume) are around €360 per year. They dont have to send the bin lorries 100 miles. I now live about 10 miles from Blanchardstown and am paying a lot of money to dispose of waste.

These people that are oppsosing the "taxes" are just too tight to pay it and are holding out as long as they can.

HelterSkelter

These people that are oppsosing the "taxes" are just too tight to pay it and are holding out as long as they can

I cannot see what the problem is that people in dublin think paying for this service is beneath them.

I pay for my water. Why shouldn't you?

I cannot understand the way so many people in this country will accept ANY charge their elected politicians throw at them without questioning it.

segadreamcast

Kernel wrote:

We pay more tax, as a county, becuase we have more PAYE workers and we pay more for housing, therefore more Stamp duty. Nevermind VAT. Dublin keeps this republic running, whether you like to admit it or not.

So? We also have more schools to maintain, more hospitals to upkeep, more transportation links (hello Luas, Dublin Bus et al) then any other county. We might be charged slightly more per capita, but it should also be noticed that the average Dublin worker earns more on average per capita and, (I'd imagine, based on what I've said above) upkeeping Dublin costs the Government more per capita - thus, it's a fair trade off and a bit of a moot point.

As was said earlier, the polluter pays, I think it's more than fair and - a great net positive effect - it has driven nearly everybody in Dublin towards recycling.

HelterSkelter

NoelRock wrote:

As was said earlier, the polluter pays, I think it's more than fair and - a great net positive effect - it has driven nearly everybody in Dublin towards recycling.

What a load of bollix, if that's the case why do you still have to pay if you manage to recycle 100% of your waste?????

Culchie

Started at €5, 18 months ago, went up to €6 last year, and got letter in post to advise of €8 from 1st January 2006.

Some price hike, and shows the campaigners were right in saying such ludricous increases would happen.

63% in 18 months :mad:

Kernel

Kernel wrote:

Country folk will not see the injustice in it, since they only have their own selfish begrudgery to persuade them that if they have had to pay it, we should suddenly pay it too

Yet again we see why the left wing in Ireland gets it so wrong - they have nothing to say to most of the electorate, make gross generalisations about the majority of the population, and really only have a message that's relevant to a handful of the people living in Dublin.

Frankly, I presume the media just decided that, against serious issues like the collapse of the beet industry, this was just a complete red herring of a subject and left it alone...

oscarBravo

Kernel wrote:

I've cut most of your post, because my last one was long enough, and I can sum it up by saying that you've proved my previous point of country people saying 'we pay it, why shouldn't the Dubs?' nonsense.

Unfortunately, you've done nothing whatsoever to answer the question of why Dubliners shouldn't pay for a service they receive, when everyone else does.

Kernel wrote:

Well, you don't understand the whole concept of infrastructure versus costs, or you didn't understand what I was saying.

You seem to be saying that a service that costs less to provide in Dublin should be provided for free. It seems more logical to me that if the cost of providing the service is lower, then the service charge should be lower.

That said, I've yet to see anything concrete from you on the relative cost of providing a refuse collection service in Dublin versus any other city, town or rural area.

Kernel wrote:

If I run a waste disposal company, and I have to travel for 100 miles to collect the rubbish for only a few tax paying households (which is precisely what happens in the 'country'), then obviously, I have to charge the council more for providing that service to them. In Dublin, such a situation never existed, and still doesn't.

This is what I'm talking about above: nothing concrete, and an apparent assumption that it doesn't cost anything to collect waste in Dublin.

Kernel wrote:

So, people like you fail to see a problem that a large proportion of your fellow countrymen have to suddenly pay a tax they previously didn't have to...

Are you trying to claim that because you've gotten away without paying for something in the past, you have a right to have it for free in perpetuity?

Kernel wrote:

You don't see a problem with other people suddenly and for no good reason, having to pay a tax...

I don't see a problem with people having to pay for a service they receive.

Kernel wrote:

...because you are a part of the Irish attitude of petty begrudgery.

If you could step away from the ad hominem approach for a moment, you'll see that there's no begrudgery involved. I don't want Dubliners to pay for waste collection just because I have to; I think Dubliners should pay for their waste to be collected for the same reason I have to.

Kernel wrote:

We pay more tax, as a county, becuase we have more PAYE workers and we pay more for housing, therefore more Stamp duty. Nevermind VAT. Dublin keeps this republic running, whether you like to admit it or not.

You also generate the vast majority of the country's waste. Someone has to pay for it to be collected and disposed of, and we (the rest of the country) are already paying for our own.

Blackjack

There are parts of the "Country" where the local council simply do not offer a service. People have to bring the rubbish to the local tip, and pay for it to be taken. Any illegal dumping carries a pretty hefty fine, so you can't simply leave it where you like.
And people are moaning about having to pay for it being collected from outside their door?.

Kernel

seedot wrote:

See, this is one of the problems with our democracy - basing opinions on hearsay and gossip rather than any real knowledge.

1. Joan is in Dublin City Council - not South Dublin.

2. Joan was politically involved with both her union (CWU) and as a member of one of the minor left wing parties for about 15 years.

3. She briefed the barristers (and got the money to pay for it) which have defeated any attempts to collect arrears.

4. She has proposed and got passed a motion in the City Council to get all bins collected.

5. She is heavily involved in the campaign around the development of Crumlin Village, has been organising large public meetings and is establishing a committee with a number of community organisations to look at this.

So.. any other councillors? AFAIK she was the only one elected on an anti-bin tax ticket.

May I ask how you know all this? Are you related?

Kernel

HelterSkelter wrote:

I cannot understand the way so many people in this country will accept ANY charge their elected politicians throw at them without questioning it.

Amen brother, amen. It's the fault of the tractable masses and begrudgery of Ireland which has the high stealth taxes and high costs the way they are. 'Ahhh your man in the bank is getting 50 grand a year, I'm a plumber, but I'll put my prices up to get as much as him'.......

kc66 wrote:

Selfish? We pay the service charges. Begrudgery? We definitely wouldn't want end up as small minded as this imbecile.

Well, as soon as someone starts calling people names, like imbecile, it's clear that they have no argument worth listening to. You took it personally, allowing you to retort with an emotive response which missed the point entirely.

This is a Dublin issue, to do with Dublin councils, take up your own problems with your own councils.

Hotblack Desiato

Kernel, how are the Dublin councils going to fund themselves if there are no bin (or water) charges?

Collection costs may be less in Dublin, but disposal costs are probably higher - there is a big problem with a lack of landfill space.

The councils get hefty business rates in the capital, but it's not nearly enough.

If central government provides a bigger grant to local authorities, then VAT, income tax or something else will have to go up.

I'm a Dub and have no problem with paying a fair amount for local charges. The bin tax protestors don't represent me, or anyone I know. They've got their heads in the sand and are playing a populist ticket, well in the real world hard decisions have to be made and services have to be paid for.

This situation is all a consequence of FF buying the 1977 election and short-sightedly abolishing domestic rates. We still haven't figured out a good alternative method for funding local authorities properly - and it suits central government to keep the councils cash-strapped and almost powerless, while blaming councillors for unpopular decisions.

What I do find unfair is the issue of service charges in apartments, if we could have our own bin and use bin tags we'd pay a lot less than the flat annual rate we're charged for the communal bins. It doesn't matter how little waste we generate or how much we recycle, we still pay the same. On top of that the management company charges for street lighting, insurance etc., for non-apartment dwellers the council pays for these services and doesn't make any direct charge for them.

billy the squid

Nuttzz wrote:

"Because us Dubs prop up the boggers economy and if ya's dont like it just move to dublin like the rest of your relations"

Seriously, I was once told that....

what horse**** to be honest. Liemrick city has the highest business rates in the country, not to mention one of th highest refuse collection charges. The city council dont even offer the service, as it is privatised.

as for propping up other parts of the country, take a look at how limerick city benefited from transport 21`compared to other parts of the country. the person who "told you that" must have had their head up their arse.

as for who is propping up who, the EU is propping up Dublin, Dublin thinks it is propping up the rest of the country because it throws whats left of the EU money towards the rest of the country when it has taken its share.

democrates

Any tax should be just.
On the one hand the polluter pays, great, we should be composting/recycling anyway. I know a scangar who claims to flush most of his waste down the jacks.
On the other hand ability to pay should be taken into account, but the exemption available is a blunt instrument, either you're near the poverty line or you pay full whack.

I'm thinking of doing away with the black wheelie next year, I've only put it out three times this year since I started composting and shopping based on packaging. For the bit I have it would be cheaper to drop it up to Ballyogan dump myself at a tenner a pop plus a euro-odd for fuel.

seedot

May I ask how you know all this? Are you related?

Kernel - do we only know about our public representatives if we are related to them? I know Joan is in Dublin City Council because she is in my ward - but this is not really too difficult to find out. I included it in my response more to show the quality of your information than because I thought it would be news to anybody. The rest comes from leaflets through doors, reports in the media, attendance at local public meetings etc. You know - politics, the stuff that you (falsely) claimed Joan doesn't do.

seedot

Deleted User wrote:

Frankly, I presume the media just decided that, against serious issues like the collapse of the beet industry, this was just a complete red herring of a subject and left it alone...

This is an interesting point.

Anybody who has read the material and analysis produced by the bin tax campaign knows that
a) there is an acceptance the waste service has to be paid for - just disagreement with the method
b) the service charge has nothing to do with 'polluter pays' - a statement that is now supported by the High Court judgements
c) the development of the waste service charge in terms of increases, removal of waivers, privatisation has all been exactly as foretold by the campaign despite accusation of scaremongering 3 and 4 years ago
d) waste management and sugar beet are intrinsically linked.

(long boring analysis of wto round and Hong Kong meetings next month snipped since everybody has heard it all before)

The media stuff is because of the lack of direct action as the council has held off trying to implement their policy of leaving waste to pile up on our streets. Maybe now the frost has come we'll see some attempts here.

The Corinthian

oscarBravo wrote:

It's not a tax. It's a service charge. The fact that you haven't had to pay it is the anomaly.

Oh dear, you are missing the point, which is we have been paying it. The civil service, of which sanitary workers are part, are paid for via our taxes. The objection to many is that this stealth tax is on top of our existing income tax and a now rather bewildering list of other stealth taxes.

Of course you might suggest that it is a fairer method of charging for such a service, but were that so what’s happened to the pre-existing situation? Were we not actually paying for it? Well, we were funding the State with our taxes and the State was funding the sanitary workers, so that’s not it. Perhaps we received an income tax rebate in lew of the new tax? Nope, not it either.

So what remains is that we are being double charged - we’re not discussing a simple increase here, we’re essentially being charged twice for the same service. That’s the objection.

oscarBravo

Kernel wrote:

It's the fault of the tractable masses and begrudgery of Ireland which has the high stealth taxes and high costs the way they are. 'Ahhh your man in the bank is getting 50 grand a year, I'm a plumber, but I'll put my prices up to get as much as him'.......

Or maybe - just maybe - there's a high demand for plumbers at the moment, and market forces are at work. After all, if your usual plumber has decided to put up his prices just because of what a bank employee gets (and I somehow doubt you've ever had a plumber rationalise his fees to you in that way), you can always employ a cheaper plumber, right? There's no shortage of cheap plumbers out there, right?

Kernel wrote:

Well, as soon as someone starts calling people names... it's clear that they have no argument worth listening to.

Kernel wrote:

...you are a part of the Irish attitude of petty begrudgery.

Okie dokie so.

kc66

This is a Dublin issue, to do with Dublin councils, take up your own problems with your own councils.

I dont have a problem with paying the charges. I have a problem with the your point of view towards the charges so I direct them towards you not the council. And you are the one that brought the "country folk" into the argument

oscarBravo

The Corinthian wrote:

So what remains is that we are being double charged - we’re not discussing a simple increase here, we’re essentially being charged twice for the same service. That’s the objection.

No matter how many times I hear this argument, it never makes any sense to me.

It's a simple exercise in logic: if Dubliners haven't been paying directly for waste collection, but the government was collecting the waste anyway, then obviously someone was paying for the waste to be collected. In the absence of refuse charges, it must have been central exchequer funds. You are therefore correct: you have been paying for your refuse collection with your taxes.

The problem is, so have I. As have all the other householders throughout the country, who also pay directly to have their own refuse collected. So there is an issue of double-charging here, but not the way it's normally portrayed.

If waste charges are introduced in Dublin, the exchequer funds that had been paying for that service can be used for purposes for which they would have been required anyway, and would otherwise have had to be raised elsewhere.

HelterSkelter

oscarBravo wrote:

No matter how many times I hear this argument, it never makes any sense to me.

It's a simple exercise in logic: if Dubliners haven't been paying directly for waste collection, but the government was collecting the waste anyway, then obviously someone was paying for the waste to be collected. In the absence of refuse charges, it must have been central exchequer funds. You are therefore correct: you have been paying for your refuse collection with your taxes.

The problem is, so have I. As have all the other householders throughout the country, who also pay directly to have their own refuse collected. So there is an issue of double-charging here, but not the way it's normally portrayed.

True, there is double charging, the difference is Dubliners (at least some of us) are refusing to pay twice for the same service. If people from the country have so much money that they don't mind paying twice that's their business. But why critise the Dubs for standing up against this rip-off???

oscarBravo

HelterSkelter wrote:

True, there is double charging, the difference is Dubliners (at least some of us) are refusing to pay twice for the same service. If people from the country have so much money that they don't mind paying twice that's their business. But why critise the Dubs for standing up against this rip-off???

OK, I'll spell it out for you.

I pay directly to have my refuse collected. The people who collect my refuse do not get paid from central exchequer funding to do so, ergo any tax I pay does not contribute to the cost of collecting my refuse. With me so far? Good.

Some Dubliners do not pay directly to have their refuse collected. The people who collect their refuse get paid from central exchequer funding to do so, ergo some of the tax I pay contributes to the cost of collecting their refuse.

That's the double-charging issue. I'm paying for the collection of both my refuse, and that of a number of Dubliners.

Just so we're completely clear: if everyone paid directly for the collection of their waste, then no exchequer funds would be used to pay for waste collection. This means that your taxes as well as mine become available for other things, like schools and hospitals - and no-one gets double-charged for refuse collection. Everyone wins.

Zaph0d

The government provides some services out of central taxation and charges directly for others.

Some are only free if they deem you poor enough.
Which should be free:
education?
primary healthcare?
all healthcare?
basic food?
some water? unlimited water?
public transport?
basic housing?
street cleaning?
waste disposal?

I'd go for free transport over free waste disposal.

If everything is means tested there's little incentive to work.

With many of these services, it might be fairer to provide a basic service out of taxes and charge for the rest.

seedot

Zaphod, I think you have outlined the most sensible way to look at the bin tax / waste charges etc.

Ideologically there has been a huge shift in how we define and deliver 'public goods'

Wikipedia on Public Goods

While getting my waste collected may be of direct benefit to me - getting all the waste collected on my street is of benefit to everybody on the street. Waste collection was introduced to deal with public health issues which are clearly part of governments role. For this reason I would choose a centrally funded universal waste system over public transport - since I don't suffer if my neighbour doesn't get the bus - but I do if their rubbish is all over my street.

2 things from this
1. Dublin / urban areas are different under this argument since the externalities are more pronounced in higher density housing
2. It doesn't deal with motivations to reduce waste - which is a weakness of the bin tax campaign. However, a packaging levy (similar to the plastic bag tax) would have a more direct impact on this.

HelterSkelter

oscarBravo, was there a time that the council collected your waste and you were not billed seperatly, i.e. your income tax paid for it? Or has it always been collected by a private company, paid for directly by you?

BTW, there is no need to be so condescending in your replies.

oscarBravo

HelterSkelter wrote:

oscarBravo, was there a time that the council collected your waste and you were not billed seperatly, i.e. your income tax paid for it? Or has it always been collected by a private company, paid for directly by you?

When I lived in Mullingar and in Dublin, I didn't pay directly for it; i.e. everyone's income tax paid for it. Now that I live in rural Mayo, I pay for my own.

HelterSkelter wrote:

BTW, there is no need to be so condescending in your replies.

You're right, I apologise. I find the lack of logic in this debate frustrating.

HelterSkelter

oscarBravo wrote:

When I lived in Mullingar and in Dublin, I didn't pay directly for it; i.e. everyone's income tax paid for it. Now that I live in rural Mayo, I pay for my own.

Ok, well this my understanding (I may be wrong, correct me if I am) is that at one time the council collected everybody's rubbish and it was paid for by our income tax. In one of the budgets the government raised the income taxes to pay for this (so my dad says, it was in his time!). Then they started to charge seperately for waste charges outside Dublin, so effictively people in the country were paying twice to have their waste collected, firstly through their income tax, secondly through the waste charges. Now they are trying to do the same thing in Dublin.

So if Dubliners pay the waste charges then we along with country people are paying twice for the same service. Do you think this is right? We (by we I mean everybody in Ireland) are already paying income tax so why should we have to pay seperatly for waste, water and whatever else charges? Next they will be trying to charge us maintenance fees for street lighting, cutting the grass, etc etc. Where will it stop?

oscarBravo

HelterSkelter wrote:

Then they started to charge seperately for waste charges outside Dublin, so effictively people in the country were paying twice to have their waste collected, firstly through their income tax, secondly through the waste charges.

...and this is where the logic breaks down. Revenue collected as income tax, that used to be spent on waste collection, doesn't simply evaporate. It also doesn't get spent on waste collection, if that's being paid for directly. Therefore, it gets spent somewhere else.

HelterSkelter wrote:

So if Dubliners pay the waste charges then we along with country people are paying twice for the same service.

Nope. As I've already pointed out, the anomoly arises only because of the current disparity where some people pay for waste collection directly, whereas others are subsidised by everyone's tax. To make things fair, either nobody should pay directly or everyone should. To be truly fair, people should pay based on the amount of waste they produce. That can't be done through central taxation.

HelterSkelter wrote:

We (by we I mean everybody in Ireland) are already paying income tax so why should we have to pay seperatly for waste, water and whatever else charges?

Because we are direct consumers of those services.

Zaph0d

seedot wrote:

Ideologically there has been a huge shift in how we define and deliver 'public goods'

Wikipedia on Public Goods

From this definition of public goods it doesn't look like waste collection is a public good. It's neither non-rivalrous nor non-excludable.

Residential waste collection is 'in the public good' if the alternative is a huge public health problem. However, I don't see how this is true. In my area, you pay a small standing charge and then a fee for each collection and another fee for each kg of waste removed. This has not led to litter all over the streets.

Litter builds up during a waste disposal strike as people leave out rubbish, unaware of the problem, or hoping that leaving it out will force the issue.

While getting my waste collected may be of direct benefit to me - getting all the waste collected on my street is of benefit to everybody on the street. Waste collection was introduced to deal with public health issues which are clearly part of governments role. For this reason I would choose a centrally funded universal waste system over public transport - since I don't suffer if my neighbour doesn't get the bus - but I do if their rubbish is all over my street.

I was looking at it more from a welfare point of view. Free public transport may be of more use to a poor person than unlimited free waste disposal. Also they are very roughly equivalent in cost.

1. Dublin / urban areas are different under this argument since the externalities are more pronounced in higher density housing

like virtually all other services, waste dispoal is cheaper to provide in a city.

Kernel

ninja900 wrote:

Kernel, how are the Dublin councils going to fund themselves if there are no bin (or water) charges?

Same way they always have done, and largely continue to, with funds from the exchequer.

democrates wrote:

I'm thinking of doing away with the black wheelie next year, I've only put it out three times this year since I started composting and shopping based on packaging.

So you've turned your back garden into your own landfill? I've posted before about the problem composting causes with rat infestations, never mind the aesthetics.

seedot wrote:

do we only know about our public representatives if we are related to them? I know Joan is in Dublin City Council because she is in my ward - but this is not really too difficult to find out. I included it in my response more to show the quality of your information than because I thought it would be news to anybody. The rest comes from leaflets through doors, reports in the media, attendance at local public meetings etc. You know - politics, the stuff that you (falsely) claimed Joan doesn't do.

Earlier you said people like me were the problem with democracy, but I put it to you that it is the duty of the elected representative of the people to inform the people as to what they have been doing. I live in the constituency, and I and many others I speak to, are frustrated that Collins seems to have done nothing to deliver on her promises. If I am misinformed, so be it, but if everyone I speak to in that constituency believes the same thing, then it is a failing of Collins... not of me, or of democracy.

The reason why I ask are you related (which you still haven't answered) is because you have so vehemently defended her, and her lack of policies - as well as knowing more about what she has been doing than her own constituents. If you are not related, then I would guess that you are at least acquaintances? Or maybe you are involved in the campaign? Either so, those we elect are there to serve the people, and information as to what you are doing for your electorate is part of the responsibility.

OscarBravo wrote:

Or maybe - just maybe - there's a high demand for plumbers at the moment, and market forces are at work. After all, if your usual plumber has decided to put up his prices just because of what a bank employee gets (and I somehow doubt you've ever had a plumber rationalise his fees to you in that way), you can always employ a cheaper plumber, right? There's no shortage of cheap plumbers out there, right?

No, there is a greed which has contributed greatly to inflation in Ireland, and if you delve into the reason for this greed, one of the factors is our culture of begrudgery for those who have more than us. There is a shortage of cheap plumbers, or any other tradesmen, but not solely due to supply and demand influencing the market, there is also the 'going-rate' factor, whereby the basic price or going-rate has increased so much, that a plumber will not work for less. Anyway, it's a seperate issue to this one.

And, what you have quoted me as saying is not calling someone names. Look over the post, and you'll see there is a big difference to me saying that " ...you are a part of the Irish attitude of petty begrudgery." and someone calling me an "imbecile" because they don't agree with me. I'm sure you realise that?

Definition of an imbecile:

A person of moderate to severe mental retardation having a mental age of from three to seven years and generally being capable of some degree of communication and performance of simple tasks under supervision. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.

See, it's now considered offensive. I've reported the post, but it seems to have been let slide.

Corinthian is spot on once more btw, and I also agree with HelterSkelter.

oscarBravo

Kernel wrote:

...what you have quoted me as saying is not calling someone names.

It takes an incredible leap of logic to conclude that telling someone they are part of the Irish attitude of petty begrudgery is not the same thing as calling them a petty begrudger. Not that I reported your post; it didn't so much bother me as illustrate your own point that calling someone names is an indication that you have nothing to contribute to the debate. Speaking of which:

Kernel wrote:

Corinthian is spot on once more btw, and I also agree with HelterSkelter.

It's obviously escaped your attention that I've debated the points made by both. If you think they're correct, feel free to refute my arguments.

HelterSkelter

Kernel wrote:

I live in the constituency, and I and many others I speak to, are frustrated that Collins seems to have done nothing to deliver on her promises. If I am misinformed, so be it, but if everyone I speak to in that constituency believes the same thing, then it is a failing of Collins... not of me, or of democracy.

I also live in the constituency. I think you are being too hard on Joan Collins. You have to realise it is very difficult to get anything done if you are not the party in power or if they don't depend on you for votes (as FF depended on Tony Gregory in Haughey's time). The only way you can have an impact when the main parties jump on your bandwagon as you have taken a seat from them in the election. They will do whatever they can to get that seat back in the next election.

HelterSkelter

oscarBravo wrote:

Nope. As I've already pointed out, the anomoly arises only because of the current disparity where some people pay for waste collection directly, whereas others are subsidised by everyone's tax. To make things fair, either nobody should pay directly or everyone should.

I agree 100%. I believe no household should pay directly for waste charges, it should be paid for through income tax. What do you think, should everybody pay or should it be paid for from income tax revenue?

oscarBravo wrote:

To be truly fair, people should pay based on the amount of waste they produce. That can't be done through central taxation.

Good point, but the current setup does not work, if someone manages to recycle 100% of their waste they still get charged for the green bin. That should be free, afterall the company lifting the bin are making money from recycling the contents. It is just not a fair system and as far as I can see is designed to generate as much money for the council as possible, all this recycle crap is pure propaganda.

oscarBravo

HelterSkelter wrote:

I agree 100%. I believe no household should pay directly for waste charges, it should be paid for through income tax. What do you think, should everybody pay or should it be paid for from income tax revenue?

I thought I'd made it clear that I believe everyone should pay. More to the point, I believe everyone should pay in proportion to the amount of waste they generate.

In my case, I pay a private waste collection company. Do you believe that I should not be paying them, and that the government should pay them instead?

HelterSkelter wrote:

Good point, but the current setup does not work, if someone manages to recycle 100% of their waste they still get charged for the green bin. That should be free, afterall the company lifting the bin are making money from recycling the contents. It is just not a fair system and as far as I can see is designed to generate as much money for the council as possible, all this recycle crap is pure propaganda.

I agree that the current system is flawed. I think the answer is to address those flaws, so that recycling and waste reduction are rewarded with reduced charges. I fail to see how funding waste collection from central funds can possibly achieve those goals.

democrates

Kernel wrote:

So you've turned your back garden into your own landfill? I've posted before about the problem composting causes with rat infestations, never mind the aesthetics.

Yes I have, I'm not a nimby. But it's not landfill as you know it, read on and relish the good tidings.

I got a good composter from the council for 35 euro, and I've put mesh around the base so tunneling vermin are thwarted. Rats would be attracted by putrifying flesh for sure, but you don't use it for fauna carcasses so that's not a problem, zero rats.

As for aesthetics it looks like a dalek which I like, but even if only ugly ones were available I'd still use one because it's the responsible thing to do (a bit like getting married Ted), and that's a higher priority to me than appearance. I don't feel entitled to engage in an orgy of pollution excreting hyper-consumption then snipe when I'm asked to pay for the consequences of my actions. Instead I go for sustainable thrift and am happier and wealthier, a better person than I was.

What had me concerned was the possibility of a smell even though I was assured by dlrcoco this would not happen. Even on hot summer days I got no niffs in the garden whilst sipping cheeky bordeaux, and when I lift the lid and sniff it just smells like fresh earth, not unlike the smell in the air when you go hillwalking after light rainfall on a golden autumnal evening. All the summers grass clippings, tea bags, vegetable peelings, shredded bills etc. interspersed correctly are breaking down beautifully as forecast in the council leaflet. I thought I'd need two composters but the volume naturally decreases at an amazing rate. Isn't mother nature great!

It gets better. Next year I'll get the benefits of the first batch of natural compost worked into the soil in my organic vegetable plot. Lower waste bills, healthy home-grown food, saving our environment. I commend the ecological approach without reservation.

Kernel

oscarBravo wrote:

It takes an incredible leap of logic to conclude that telling someone they are part of the Irish attitude of petty begrudgery is not the same thing as calling them a petty begrudger. Not that I reported your post; it didn't so much bother me as illustrate your own point that calling someone names is an indication that you have nothing to contribute to the debate.

Yeah, but I didn't call anyone names. I said: "...you are a part of the Irish attitude of petty begrudgery" - within the context of someone stating that if people in the country have had to pay waste disposal charges, then Dublin people should too. That's not a personal insult or name calling, now is it? You speak of logic, but your logic was flawed, even though you attempted to appear clever by selectively quoting me out of context.

oscarBravo wrote:

Speaking of which: It's obviously escaped your attention that I've debated the points made by both. If you think they're correct, feel free to refute my arguments.

No, I just happen to think nothing of your debate. Your debate proves nothing, adds nothing, and is not conclusive in any way. You have not refuted The Corinthian's or HelterSkelter's points, but you will, no doubt, attempt to wear them down - until they can't be bothered to reply any more. :v: :v: :v:

Kernel

democrates wrote:

Yes I have, I'm not a nimby. But it's not landfill as you know it, read on and relish the good tidings.

I got a good composter from the council for 35 euro, and I've put mesh around the base so tunneling vermin are thwarted. Rats would be attracted by putrifying flesh for sure, but you don't use it for fauna carcasses so that's not a problem, zero rats.

It sounds better than I expected tbh, but where do you dispose of your carcasses and plastics and other things? There would be a lot of things you couldn't compost, and unfortunately, even if you only use your bin 3-4 times in a year, you'll still have to pay hundreds in the fixed charge.

oscarBravo

Kernel wrote:

...even if you only use your bin 3-4 times in a year, you'll still have to pay hundreds in the fixed charge.

Seems to me the logical conclusion is to introduce a system where people pay based on the amount of waste they generate.

But I'm sure that observation proves nothing, adds nothing, and is not conclusive in any way.

Kernel

oscarBravo wrote:

Seems to me the logical conclusion is to introduce a system where people pay based on the amount of waste they generate.

But I'm sure that observation proves nothing, adds nothing, and is not conclusive in any way.

Indeed. Unfortunately, we have already ascertained that the current bin tax system does not implement a fair system of 'polluter pays' and that we have already been paying for these services in Dublin.