Value based property tax?

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

And to the person who was born in the house they now live in? (not bought it)

Are you seriously trying to make a case against the property tax by enlisting people who inherited their homes and never had to pay for what, for most people, is their single biggest expense?

You gotta love these psudo socialists.

RoundyMooney

Biggins wrote: »

If you spent less time just posting raving inaccuracies* and bother to do your own homework instead of expecting everyone to do it for you (a typical government attitude by the way in some cases), you might find my often suggestions - its not too hard, there is even one or two in this thread.
Wants to borrow my glasses?

No, I don't wants to, thanks. I can see quite goodly.

Biggins wrote: »

Meanwhile rather than this become a bitch-fest and involving person attacks as you it appears wish to start, I'm moving on.

No "person" attacks here. But if you're going to throw shit about indiscriminately, some of it will invariably come back in your direction. One thing I've noticed about you, you are a prolific reader, and something of a news addict. Which is good. It's what you do with those accumulated nuggets is the thing. Most people, unlike you or me, will parse over articles and topical occurrences. If you're going to put so much effort into creating blogs, an online presence, and all that-would it not make more sense to be constructive, rather than a hundred percent critical? When put on the spot, you lapse into vague soundbites rather than more definitive answers, which you should be well capable of, given how much you immerse yourself in current affairs.

Biggins wrote: »

* NOTE:

Aaa... actually no - I've been a member of two parties - that all.
One I left after I became aware how corrupt it was - and one I am still presently in.
...But feel free to post more inaccuracies if you feel it helps your attacking. Carry on!

Ah (not Aaa, btw-you're not Daniel Defoe), I thought you had only been a member of FF. Anyway, that's not what I said Biggins. You might want those glasses back, because I said "supported" and "associated with" too. For my part, I supported FG in the last election, as the best of a bad lot, and have never voted FF-I was formerly a Labour supporter, inasmuch as they got my vote when the time came around-just posting that in the interest of fairness.

Biggins wrote: »

Now on that we will differ little.

And that, for me anyway-is the most disappointing facet of this government. After the last crowd, they're light years ahead, and are doing good things. But then you have idiots like Reilly, and Hogan. (Actually Reilly is pretty far from an idiot, he's feathered a fine few nests for himself, he's just too cossetted to care).

lugha

Bullseye1 wrote: »

For people who obviously know we are in a recession/depression and ate pushing for more taxes including this proposed property tax there is plenty of people on here (always the same) who feel they need to defend wasteful spending and the gravy train the politicians are still on. Every time it's mentioned the same people are on saying its fluff and not worth worrying about. "just give us your money...I need it for my undocumented expenses".

Who is defending wasteful spending? To say that there are more important issues that pontificating about which hotel the government are meeting in is not to endorse waste. Cutting back on this kind of thing is really just about image and impression and leading by example and so on. Find and dandy if you are impressed by that kind of thing but it makes close to zero difference to the REAL problems that we have and how we might address them. And it is the latter than I am interested it in.

ilovesleep

RoundyMooney wrote: »

And for the record, Phil Hogan is an utter cretin-unfit for his role, incapable as someone who needs to lead in terms of a broadening of the tax base, and ultimately, only where he is because he stood with Enda when the horses were getting frightened. And he's making an utter bags of planning enquiries, local government efficiencies, water metering and property based taxation.

Just in case people think I'm some kind of FG plant, or anything.

I read the first line as unfit for his hole

jimmycrackcorm

I think it's very ironic how some people consider the household charge unjust. Nobody complained about it being unjust that someone who could afford to buy a new BMW 530D pays a lot less motor tax on it than someone who could only afford a 2007 model.

And that's before we even talk about the greenhouse emissions effect of cattle...

RoundyMooney

ilovesleep wrote: »

I read the first line as unfit for his hole

The whole Big Phil thing was an attempt to alleviate that...

Biggins

RoundyMooney, deep down I suspect you and I will actually differ little - very little on the day about many, many things.

As you say FG are the best of a bad lot - but even then, they must be kept in check, as all should.
We have seen too many errors of the past, not to be more watchful and point out where all might be further slipping.
Thus me sometimes being a right pain in the arse to political parties - all of them.

RoundyMooney

Biggins wrote: »

RoundyMooney, deep down I suspect you and I will actually differ little - very little on the day about many, many things.

As you say FG are the best of a bad lot - but even then, they must be kept in check, as all should.
We have seen too many errors of the past, not to be more watchful and point out where all might be further slipping.
Thus me sometimes being a right pain in the arse to political parties - all of them.

Well, I'd imagine we'd both hope for better things.

Look, it's as simple as this; you have obviously decided to spend far more time analysing the news than I, or many others. Just use that time wisely. Come up with answers.

I'm assuming, given your online proliferations, that you probably spend a fair chunk of your time on facebook as well, and I know you have done on TheJournal, 'cos I've spoken to you on there at least a couple of times. Hence my posting.

Whatever about boards, which employs a fairly good (accidental, mostly) idiot filter, in that one has to actually register specifically to post here, and illiterate trdspk is discouraged, as well as good moderation-both TJ.ie and FB are chock full of morons and cranks. People who can just click through and comment, usually badly, about the issues of the day. They, like many, are full of the woes of the world, full of tales about what "de gubbmint isnt doin 4 me", full of frank inaccuracies about what goes on in the corridors of power.

And they, invariably, have fuck all constructive responses or ideas.

Don't be one of those people, because to be quite honest, while they think they are doing a Michael Collins on top of a soap box, they are invariably ignored.

darkhorse

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I think it's very ironic how some people consider the household charge unjust. Nobody complained about it being unjust that someone who could afford to buy a new BMW 530D pays a lot less motor tax on it than someone who could only afford a 2007 model.

And that's before we even talk about the greenhouse emissions effect of cattle...

That was covered on another thread.

Biggins

RoundyMooney wrote: »

Well, I'd imagine we'd both hope for better things...

Long story short, you make many a good point.
Suffice to say, one would find other aspects and parts to what I protest, out there in protests and other meetings where I'm just one of many and/or also speaking through a microphone.

One should just not lay down, take it and go gently into the night!

"I aim to misbehave!" - Go Browncoats! :cool: