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

alastair

jluv wrote: »

I'm against paying at the moment.While not posting I have been following this thread. Was only getting more confused so went off to do a little reading on the charge. I now can state why I am not paying.
Revenues from this charge will support local services-
Fire services,nearest one from me is about 10 miles away. Unless it's a slow fire I'm screwed anyway(no disrespect to the fireservice,not your fault)
Maintainance of streets-Already provided by scheme related to unemployed.Already contributing to that through taxes.
Street lighting-None where I live
Planning and developmental services-Got such grief from these when trying to build my own home,3 year battle to get planning,and paid €10600 in fees towards local services.
Public parks-None in our area
Open spaces-Maintained by above scheme
Leisure facilities-Pay yearly now for any locally.Will these now be free to use?
After reading all I could it seems this MAY be introduced as a stepping stone to property taxes.Having lived in another country where I paid property tax I would not be opposed to it if I recieve the same level of service that I recieved then.Police service excellent,fire service close and top notch,rubbish and recycling pickup 3 times a week,excellent schools and a decent hospital service.The amount you paid was reflected in the services you had.
Unfortunatly here a blanket 1 payment is easier for the government to apply. If more planning and thought were put into these charges and taxes then I don't think we would have the same unsettled response to the payments.

I take it you'll not be utilising any public amenities anywhere in the country then? It all comes out of the same pot, so you can't really limit your stance to what's in your locality.

alastair

robbie7730 wrote: »

Ask alastair there, he says the payment is not for services, but is a tax on the wealth in your home.

A pointless tax, not to be applied to anything? Did I say that?

Oh wait, no. It's just you putting words in my mouth. What a novelty!

Here's a clue. Local authority services are utilised by all residents - whether they own their homes or not. What differentiates the owners from the non-owners with regard to property tax?

jluv

alastair wrote: »

I take it you'll not be utilising any public amenities anywhere in the country then? It all comes out of the same pot, so you can't really limit your stance to what's in your locality.

Think you missed my point or perhaps I didn't make it clear enough.We just came through a period where the government and local authorities had ample money to provide these services to me and all the others that they took fees from.Not €100. Thousands..Think of all the building that went on and they got thousands from each and every one.What did they supply with the money(tax,charge,whatever you call it).Nothing in my area and on one road alone the got at least €100,000.
So they've already got my €10,000,no return.
Do you really believe that they are going to use or make any impact with my €100 as they couldn't do it before.
This is/will not be used to improve services.It's another quick tax.
I for one will be happy to spend €10/€20/€30 to make a stand.Even if I end up paying the €100 they will eventually realise that people don't give money for nothing or even worse to cover up other peoples mistakes.

Ghandee

It looks like the anti tax campaign has gathered huge momentum, and gone international with the New York Times giving it coverage.


Taken from The New York Times

The government has been increasing the pressure in recent weeks, promising that any “tax dodgers” will be tracked down through the use of utility bills. The government spokesman acknowledged that there “is no Plan B,” and it remains unclear what the government will do if the boycott succeeds.

The antitax movement seems to be gaining strength by the day, if the number of protest meetings around the country is any indication.

Boycott organizers say attendance at rallies now transcends class, the urban-rural divide and political party affiliation.

Daniel Doorhy, 36, a warehouse worker, said he had never been a member of a political party but had helped to organize meetings against the tax.

“Like a lot of people, I would have voted for whoever would do me a favor at the time. I don’t agree with this way of doing things, but I’m as guilty of it as the next man,” he said. “I am fearful of what is coming down the line in terms of a bigger property tax that I just won’t be able to pay and I will lose my house over it.”

Like many other Irish, he is well versed in the economic jargon that has become a part of everyday conversation here.

“I had never heard of bondholders or speculators or billions of euros in debts, but I know all about them now,” he said. “I also believe the government is lying to me when it says it will be used for local services, and that’s one thing everyone I’ve met agrees on, whether they’ve paid this or not.”

Full story here....

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/world/europe/growing-antitax-movement-shows-irish-stoicism-wearing-thin.html?src=tp&smid=fb-share

Frank Black

tayto lover wrote: »

I would love if they eventually call to the doors looking to collect the 100e tax.

Collector -- i am looking for the 100e Household Tax.
Tayto Lover -- Come on in and i'll give you a hand to look for it. Ha ha great craic.

Collector: how come you have a SkySports subscription?
Tayto: but, but, but where's my stamp duty?
Collector: tell it to the judge, baby.

alastair

jluv wrote: »

Think you missed my point or perhaps I didn't make it clear enough.We just came through a period where the government and local authorities had ample money to provide these services to me and all the others that they took fees from.Not €100. Thousands..Think of all the building that went on and they got thousands from each and every one.What did they supply with the money(tax,charge,whatever you call it).Nothing in my area and on one road alone the got at least €100,000.
So they've already got my €10,000,no return.
Do you really believe that they are going to use or make any impact with my €100 as they couldn't do it before.
This is/will not be used to improve services.It's another quick tax.
I for one will be happy to spend €10/€20/€30 to make a stand.Even if I end up paying the €100 they will eventually realise that people don't give money for nothing or even worse to cover up other peoples mistakes.

You'll simply end up subventing them further with the inevitable late payment fines. Seems counter-productive to me. The stamp duty bonanza is long-spent - and last I heard you need revenues to offer any chance of decent local services. Paying a late fine isn't going to impact on the quality of governance one iota - that's what elections are for.

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

It looks like the anti tax campaign has gathered huge momentum, and gone international with the New York Times giving it coverage.

Its gone all the way to the White House.

Henry Healy wrote:

"We told him about the household charge and he said he couldn't believe that people in Ireland don't pay for water already. He said all those things were paid for in the US with the rates collected locally to fund services."

Wild Bill

alastair wrote: »

I take it you'll not be utilising any public amenities anywhere in the country then? It all comes out of the same pot, so you can't really limit your stance to what's in your locality.

You certainly can!

The "same pot" includes the payment of German banks' gambling debts.

Force them to promise specific projects or don't pay. There is absolutely no moral obligation to do so, even if you avail of all the services.

dvpower

^^^
Paging mikom. We need you here to quote a post:pac:

alastair

dvpower wrote: »

Its gone all the way to the White House.

Obama is just a FG shill.

Wild Bill

Ghandee wrote: »

It looks like the anti tax campaign has gathered huge momentum, and gone international with the New York Times giving it coverage.


Taken from The New York Times

Yep - people realize that what is at stake here is democracy itself.

As we see on this thread the tax is only supported by those who detest democracy and regard the people as stupid.

Bruthal

alastair wrote: »

What differentiates the owners from the non-owners with regard to property tax?

Wealth, according to yourself.

Ghandee

Originally Posted by Henry Healy
"We told him about the household charge and he said he couldn't believe that people in Ireland don't pay for water already. He said all those things were paid for in the US with the rates collected locally to fund services

Oh, great.... this one again?

Thought this had been covered before?

Rates = paying for local services.........

I pay seperately for my local services, are the Govt going to resume waste collection etc? Or am I to continue paying these charges on top of a property tax?

alastair

robbie7730 wrote: »

Wealth, according to yourself.

yep - the wealth in the asset. Property taxation is wealth taxation in the final analysis.

Wild Bill

alastair wrote: »

. Paying a late fine isn't going to impact on the quality of governance one iota - that's what elections are for.

D'oh! Have we not established that elections in Ireland don''t have any impact on governance? :rolleyes:

ffs!

Wild Bill

dvpower wrote: »

Its gone all the way to the White House.

Took time off from slaughtering children in Afghanistan to say that, did he?

Bruthal

alastair wrote: »

yep - the wealth in the asset. Property taxation is wealth taxation in the final analysis.

Well i think thats a crock of shite.

Home owners are targeted because they are easier to identify. Nothing more.

dvpower

Wild Bill wrote: »

Took time off from slaughtering children in Afghanistan to say that, did he?

He multitasks.

mikom

Originally Posted by alastair
I take it you'll not be utilising any public amenities anywhere in the country then? It all comes out of the same pot, so you can't really limit your stance to what's in your locality.

Wild Bill wrote: »

You certainly can!

The "same pot" includes the payment of German banks' gambling debts.

Force them to promise specific projects or don't pay. There is absolutely no moral obligation to do so, even if you avail of all the services.

Fair point.

alastair

Ghandee wrote: »

Oh, great.... this one again?

Thought this had been covered before?

Rates = paying for local services.........

I pay seperately for my local services, are the Govt going to resume waste collection etc? Or am I to continue paying these charges on top of a property tax?

US state property charges can also exclude additional service charges which need to go on top as well (water, sewage, etc).

CajunOnTour

this thread is really running and running, in circles!

Good point by Wild Bill about the tax pot containing some unacceptable stuff as well as tax for services etc. I imagine tha is deliberate policy so they can claim the charges are going to provide services, when we all know it's actually going to the bankers.

jluv

alastair wrote: »

You'll simply end up subventing them further with the inevitable late payment fines. Seems counter-productive to me. The stamp duty bonanza is long-spent - and last I heard you need revenues to offer any chance of decent local services. Paying a late fine isn't going to impact on the quality of governance one iota - that's what elections are for.

Yes you are completely correct in stating that you need revenues to offer decent local services. They've been getting it in spades and not supplying the services.This is my point. We're on the same page in some ways.I am just totally convinced that there will be no return for this money.It will be used to plug another hole..Then they will intoduce property tax. We will be debating again then. Because if they don't offer a concrete plan then either I will stand against it. In any other business/organization you would be required to present a concrete plan before asking for investment. Not,give us money and shur take our word for it,we'll do something good with it. And moreso if you had failed already..

Wild Bill

robbie7730 wrote: »

Well i think thats a crock of shite.

Home owners are targeted because they are easier to identify. Nothing more.

Not the only crock of ****e from that quarter!

alastair

jluv wrote: »

Yes you are completely correct in stating that you need revenues to offer decent local services. They've been getting it in spades and not supplying the services.This is my point. We're on the same page in some ways.I am just totally convinced that there will be no return for this money.It will be used to plug another hole..Then they will intoduce property tax. We will be debating again then. Because if they don't offer a concrete plan then either I will stand against it. In any other business/organization you would be required to present a concrete plan before asking for investment. Not,give us money and shur take our word for it,we'll do something good with it. And moreso if you had failed already..

They have always had concrete plans - they're just not very good at seeing them through to fruition (with exceptions), and some of them have been very misguided and yet popular with constituents. The point is that the quality of governance (local and national) is not going to get better by witholding the revenues needed to pull us out of our current difficulties - what will help is voting in the most competent public representatives possible. Great, poor, and mediocre governance / public service provision all requires more revenue than we are currently providing - those foreign loans/bail-outs aren't exactly an affordable alternative.

Bruthal

Wild Bill wrote: »

Not the only crock of ****e from that quarter!

Thats for sure. Astonishing this wealth tax thing.

Wild Bill

I was thinking of putting Alastair on my own ignore list - but I'm a sucker for fish in barrels :cool:

jluv

alastair wrote: »

They have always had concrete plans - they're just not very good at seeing them through to fruition (with exceptions), and some of them have been very misguided and yet popular with constituents. The point is that the quality of governance (local and national) is not going to get better by witholding the revenues needed to pull us out of our current difficulties - what will help is voting in the most competent public representatives possible. Great, poor, and mediocre governance / public service provision all requires more revenue than we are currently providing - those foreign loans/bail-outs aren't exactly an affordable alternative.

However the problem is we keep giving and giving and I for one will not give freely anymore.Not as a grand stance but because of all the bumblings of government officials I honestly can't afford to and cannot continue to support their failures. My mortgage payment has gone up nearly €200 over the last 2 years. I'vehad no pay rise at work because of "the economic climate" I do a good job every day or else I would not keep my job.I have to bring in the financial numbers. But these guys are not. They are looking for quick fixes and this is one of them. I want them to start putting strong plans in place to deliver the figures and SHARE them with me so I can help deliver them and perhaps invest in them.But I do feel you are being optimistic at best if you think this money will be used for local services. Show me how where and when and you have my money..

tayto lover

black francis wrote: »

Collector: how come you have a SkySports subscription?
Tayto: but, but, but where's my stamp duty?
Collector: tell it to the judge, baby.

Tell what to the judge baby ?
By the time it got to court the judge would probably be dead anyway. Then they can add any fine to the Household Tax cos i wouldn't be paying it. The courthouse would be packed with protesters and the noise outside would make it impossible for the judge to hear. Tee hee.

Frank Black

tayto lover wrote: »

Tell what to the judge baby ?
By the time it got to court the judge would probably be dead anyway. Then they can add any fine to the Household Tax cos i wouldn't be paying it. The courthouse would be packed with protesters and the noise outside would make it impossible for the judge to hear. Tee hee.

Judge: are you going to pay your fine?
Tayto: Absolutely not.
Judge: off to prison until you purge your contempt.

20 years later..............
Mrs Tayto: Tayto, come on this has become a joke, you need to back down over this property charge, after all, everyone has agreed that it was an important step in stabilising our tax base and allowing us to return to a more sustainable budgetary system.
Tayto: no way, there's loads of guys on an Internet forum I promised. And that's a sacred promise you never go back on.
Besides, I'm beginning to enjoy the male rape.


The End.

galwayrush

black francis wrote: »

Judge: are you going to pay your fine?
Tayto: Absolutely not.
Judge: off to prison until you purge your contempt.

20 years later..............
Mrs Tayto: Tayto, come on this has become a joke, you need to back down over this property charge, after all, everyone has agreed that it was an important step in stabilising our tax base and allowing us to return to a more sustainable budgetary system.
Tayto: no way, there's loads of guys on an Internet forum I promised. And that's a sacred promise you never go back on.
Besides, I'm beginning to enjoy the male rape.


The End.

20 years per person, haha that will kick start the building sector with all the prisons that will be needed...We need to be careful though, don't want a Prison Building Bubble to occur...