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

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

There's the thing - Tayto's crowd are no better than the blueshirts, worse if anything, and yet the partisan nonsense gets in the way of recognition that we have no choice but to raise taxation levels to european norms if we're going to ever get a sustainable economy, and that property taxes are a clear, and progressive part of that equation.

Wrong again.
The Europeans actually get a service for their money, didn't pay a Stamp Duty as well, and have a health system that actually works. We have not and won't have with all the waste in our system.
P.S.
Show me any post where you actually criticised F.G. over the economy. I have plenty where I criticised F.F. I think I have you right on this.

mconigol

alastair wrote: »

because there's no VAT or duty liable on champagne or caviar?

Fine then spend it on any of the following:

0% (Zero) VAT rating includes all exports, tea, coffee, milk, bread, books, children’s clothes and shoes, oral medicine for humans and animals, vegetable seeds and fruit trees, fertilisers, large animal feed, disability aids such as wheelchairs, crutches and hearing aids.

If I spent all my savings on these items I would have equity based on your previous arguments. Yet exempt from an "equity tax"?

Edit:

You do not have to pay any VAT on financial, medical or educational services. You may also not pay VAT for live theatrical and musical performances

So likewise I could spend all my money on any of this stuff. Yet the guy who saves his money and spends it on a property is singled out.

alastair

tayto lover wrote: »

Wrong again.
The Europeans actually get a service for their money, didn't pay a Stamp Duty as well, and have a health system that actually works. We have not and won't have with all the waste in our system.
P.S.
Show me any post where you actually criticised F.G. over the economy. I have plenty where I criticised F.F. I think I have you right on this.

Stamp duty is indeed applicable in some european states, and we do have a health service - with outgoings (and hence overhead) on a par with other european states. Getting our public services in good working order isn't going to happen without the same sort of revenue overhead as our neighbours.

I've already told you I'm not a FG supporter. That didn't sink in, so I doubt there's much talking sense to you in that regard.

alastair

mconigol wrote: »

If I spent all my savings on these items I would have equity based on your previous arguments. Yet exempt from an "equity tax"?

I'm not sure that surrounding yourself with teabags is advisable in any circumstance, but teabags are rather easier to put outside the reach of the revenue, the equity in your home isn't.

mconigol

alastair wrote: »

I'm not sure that surrounding yourself with teabags is advisable in any circumstance, but teabags are rather easier to put outside the reach of the revenue, the equity in your home isn't.

Your argument is defeated.

There's as much equity in €250000 worth of teabags as there is in a home worth €250000. Simple stuff.

alastair

mconigol wrote: »

Your argument is defeated.

There's as much equity in €250000 worth of teabags as there is in a home worth €250000. Simple stuff.

Well done - you've identified another target for revenue generation - nutters with a lifetimes worth of teabags instead of a house. I'll get on to the revenue asap. :rolleyes:

I'll make it simple. Pointing out that a property tax operates on the basis of the equity in the asset, does not imply that the only possible source of taxable equity resides in property. All poodles are dogs, but not all dogs are poodles.

dvpower

mconigol wrote: »

Your argument is defeated.

There's as much equity in €250000 worth of teabags as there is in a home worth €250000. Simple stuff.

Good lord!!! Was that argument the killer blow:eek:

/end thread

mconigol

alastair wrote: »

Well done - you've identified another target for revenue generation - nutters with a lifetimes worth of teabags instead of a house. I'll get on to the revenue asap. :rolleyes:

Like any large retailer?

You've argument has been proved totally illogical. That fact is illustrated by your trying to sidestep the issue.

mconigol

dvpower wrote: »

Good lord!!! Was that argument the killer blow:eek:

/end thread

When they loose they (attempt) to turn to comedy. :rolleyes:

alastair

mconigol wrote: »

When they loose they (attempt) to turn to comedy. :rolleyes:

I guess you mean 'lose'?

No need for a comedy response - your surreal attempt to equate shedloads of teabags as a viable alternative to property tax is funny enough.

mconigol

alastair wrote: »

I guess you mean 'lose'?

No need for a comedy response - your surreal attempt to equate shedloads of teabags as a viable alternative to property tax is funny enough.

:rolleyes: a spelling mistake, oh no....:o

Attempting to sidestep the issue? Rather pathetic. Seems like you basically wasted your day arguing about equity before. Poorly understood what you were talking about, it's ok I don't judge though. Just helping you see the error of your ways. Your welcome.

dvpower

mconigol wrote: »

When they loose they (attempt) to turn to comedy. :rolleyes:

The whole teabag thing wasn't comedy?

alastair

mconigol wrote: »

:rolleyes: a spelling mistake, oh no....:o

Attempting to sidestep the issue? Rather pathetic. Seems like you basically wasted your day arguing about equity before.

I'm sidestepping nothing - I don't know how much more I can break it down tbh:

I'll make it simple. Pointing out that a property tax operates on the basis of the equity in the asset, does not imply that the only possible source of taxable equity resides in property. All poodles are dogs, but not all dogs are poodles.

Putting VAT on your teabag, or issuing a teabag charge for those inclined to hoard 250 grand's worth of the things around them won't really offer the same revenue stream as a property tax - where the asset is pretty tricky to hide from the revenue.

mconigol

alastair wrote: »

I'm sidestepping nothing - I don't know how much more I can break it down tbh:

So why target one specific type of equity?

Wild Bill

alastair wrote: »

Our state is not a democracy

We employ a democratic electoral system. (in a non-democracy :rolleyes:)

We do not restrict or veto who may run in that system. No-one limits the policy platform of any candidate.

(But we have no means of changing policy on even existential matters because our votes can be ignored )

If you need any more pointers, might I suggest the politics forum?

Nah. Don't need any pointers - got this nailed :cool: - as you admited (after a struggle) that this isn't a democracy.

If it isn't a democracy the regime is illegitimate.

No need to go to any other forum - we have established that the Regime here has no legitimacy, is beyond recall by the people (you can change the operatives but still get the same policies) and thus has no mandate or moral right to impose any "laws" backed by threat of violence.

QED.

So let's fight their attacks on the peoples' households and work to bring them to justice.

It was hard working on a slow learner but I think I've cleared that up for you.

alastair

mconigol wrote: »

So why target one specific type of equity?

It's bolted down, high value, open to a progressive tiered or scaled system, easy to administrate, and rather more likely to offer a secure revenue source than teabag mountains.

misterdeeds

bleg wrote: »

The owner pays.

PTSB own my house so I dont have to pay it so (technically speaking )
Would this stand up in court if it came to it ?
It will be 27 years before the house is legally mine :-)

alastair

Wild Bill wrote: »

Nah. Don't need any pointers - got this nailed :cool: - as you admited (after a struggle) that this isn't a democracy.

If it isn't a democracy the regime is illegitimate.

No need to go to any other forum - we have established that the Regime here has no legitimacy, is beyond recall by the people (you can change the operatives but still get the same policies) and thus has no mandate or moral right to impose any "laws" backed by threat of violence.

QED.

So let's fight their attacks on the peoples' households and work to bring them to justice.

It was hard working on a slow learner but I think I've cleared that up for you.

Go read a political systems primer. You really have no idea what you're talking about. Not surprising you bought into the freeman guff.

mconigol

alastair wrote: »

It's bolted down, high value, open to a progressive tiered or scaled system, easy to administrate, and rather more likely to offer a secure revenue source than teabag mountains.

So is the money in your bank account?

alastair

mconigol wrote: »

So is the money in your bank account?

I wish!

It's kinda tricky to transfer your gaff to the Caymans.

mconigol

alastair wrote: »

I wish!

Well the new savings tax will only be based on what's in your account. I'm sure you will afford it.

mikom

Originally Posted by mconigol View Post
So is the money in your bank account?

alastair wrote: »

I wish!

FG headquarters don't deposit into your account until the end of the month?

Wild Bill

alastair wrote: »

They don't fine you at will because you've not broken a law - break a law and risk the penalty.

Same right across the non-democratic world in most illegitimate Regimes, innit?

But only in democracies have we any moral obligation to heed the law. In places like Ireland bad laws should be ignored or opposed.

alastair

Wild Bill wrote: »

Same right across the non-democratic world in most illegitimate Regimes, innit?

But only in democracies have we any moral obligation to heed the law. In places like Ireland bad laws should be ignored or opposed.

You should be ignored.

tayto lover

The fight against this unjust tax seems to be getting into overdrive at the moment. The anger is rising and many people who you wouldn't expect to withold payment are standing firm judging by all the phone-ins, letters and blogs. All age-groups protesting and determined. All walks of life.
Keep up the good fight folks.
#Don't register, don't pay.

alastair

tayto lover wrote: »

The fight against this unjust tax seems to be getting into overdrive at the moment. The anger is rising and many people who you wouldn't expect to withold payment are standing firm judging by all the phone-ins, letters and blogs. All age-groups protesting and determined. All walks of life.
Keep up the good fight folks.
#Don't register, don't pay.

Everyone keep their eyes peeled at the National Stadium protest. Unfortunately Olivia O'Leary will not be attending, but they still hope to make the full 2,000.

Don't register, pay later.

Wild Bill

alastair wrote: »

Go read a political systems primer. You really have no idea what you're talking about. Not surprising you bought into the freeman guff.

Yet again......that's not an argument! - you're fond of the old adhominals when your logic tank is running on empty.

However, I shall try and match your relentless error with equally determined attempts to enlighten you (albeit with some breaks - you appear to have infinite free time to post here :rolleyes:)

No - don't thank me - I'm all about helping people.

Not sure what the "freeman guff" is so I can't really comment on whether I'd buy into it or not. What are you selling (apart from Government snake-oil)?

Wild Bill

alastair wrote: »

You should be ignored.

That's up to you buddy

alastair

Wild Bill just got himself put on the old ignore list. Feel free to bug others with your freeman ramblings.

mikom

alastair wrote: »

Wild Bill just got himself put on the old ignore list. Feel free to bug others with your freeman ramblings.

I hope nobody quotes Wild Bill........