Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 3] *Poll Reset*

bgrizzley

dxhound2005 wrote: »

People pay for water in other countries and I haven't heard of any great problems with the system anywhere. In England and Wales (water charges are separate from Council Tax) you don't get cut off for not paying but there is a process which happens, described here.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_energy_and_water_supply_e/consumer_water_supply_e/consumer_problems_with_paying_your_water_bill_e/if_you_dont_pay_your_water_bill.htm

If there was a similar system here I suppose mobs could be summoned up but like property tax I predict people will get used to the setup when it becomes established. Central taxation having to cover all spending has not worked out as proved by the privitisation of refuse collection.

you forget we do pay for water here through our taxes. If people pay this water charge will there be a commensurate reduction in their income tax?

And no offence DX but whats with all the linking to UK services information? This is Ireland... UK is thata way

---

>

Le_Dieux

Open the following link, then check the comments, click to 'oldest first', and then read the ANGER at the clowns we have running our country:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/appeasing-merkel-has-cost-us-the-bank-deal-3266330.html

For AC, looks like we WILL be marching soon. Love this comment and if the author is reading this apologies for knicking it:

Worse again, with the world in financial meltdown they sent a primary teacher who has spent 37 years sucking off the PS teat.

bgrizzley

Le_Dieux wrote: »

And now it just keeps spinning... So Pat, tell me, who should the public believe more? Yourselves or Frau Merkel?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1021/eamon-gilmore-europe.html#article

I listened to an interpretation of Her speech,. and do NOT recall the word Spanien being mentioned.

Why can't You people wake up and realise before the country sinks that we are stuffed. AT LEAST have the balls to accept the facts, and lets move forward to.........................................?????

Heavens Help Our beautiful Nation, because all we have here are minister's so far removed from REALITY it is scary!

i think rabbitte is trying to suggest she is lying to her electorate to get back in, (labour would know all about that,( ie not another red cent, labours way or frankfurts way, ad infinitum) )

Ghandee

dxhound2005 wrote: »

People pay for water in other countries and I haven't heard of any great problems with the system anywhere. In England and Wales (water charges are separate from Council Tax) you don't get cut off for not paying but there is a process which happens, described here.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_energy_and_water_supply_e/consumer_water_supply_e/consumer_problems_with_paying_your_water_bill_e/if_you_dont_pay_your_water_bill.htm

If there was a similar system here I suppose mobs could be summoned up but like property tax I predict people will get used to the setup when it becomes established. Central taxation having to cover all spending has not worked out as proved by the privitisation of refuse collection.

Serious question here.

How many people on this thread would be prepared to nail their colours to the mast and declare themselves public servants, with guaranteed increments, jobs for life, and pensions?


Forgive me for the cynicism, but I fear a few of the people advocating payment of all these extra charges and taxes are only interested in what's best for themselves, and not for the country.


The failure to get a bank deal will further jeopardise any govts (this one or the next) ability to continue to pay some of these vastly over inflated salaries, and pension schemes may become pretty much worthless if things continue down the path their headed.


Why should the rest of us pay through the nose to ensure the lifestyle and retirement packages of others remain untouched?

Le_Dieux

Should have mentioned, the comment above is in repsonse to another:

They sent a boy to do a man's job.

Le_Dieux

Ghandee wrote: »

Serious question here.

How many people on this thread would be prepared to nail their colours to the mast and declare themselves public servants, with guaranteed increments, jobs for life, and pensions?


Forgive me for the cynicism, but I fear a few of the people advocating payment of all these extra charges and taxes are only interested in what's best for themselves, and not for the country.


The failure to get a bank deal will further jeopardise any govts (this one or the next) ability to continue to pay some of these vastly over inflated salaries, and pension schemes may become pretty much worthless if things continue down the path their headed.


Why should the rest of us pay through the nose to ensure the lifestyle and retirement packages of others remain untouched?

Hey Gh, hope Your little Lilly White is giving You some sleep?:-)

On a serious note, I heard something on Friday which I think every man woman and child should really hope it doesn't come true - That if something doesn't give SOON, there will be NO money to pay the SW.

I am trying to find the link, but no success so far.

tayto lover

bgrizzley wrote: »

i think rabbitte is trying to suggest she is lying to her electorate to get back in, (labour would know all about that,( ie not another red cent, labours way or frankfurts way, ad infinitum) )

Well we know who has the history of lying.
Remember all the broken election promises.

emo72

dxhound2005 wrote: »

People pay for water in other countries and I haven't heard of any great problems with the system anywhere. In England and Wales (water charges are separate from Council Tax) you don't get cut off for not paying but there is a process which happens, described here.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_energy_and_water_supply_e/consumer_water_supply_e/consumer_problems_with_paying_your_water_bill_e/if_you_dont_pay_your_water_bill.htm

If there was a similar system here I suppose mobs could be summoned up but like property tax I predict people will get used to the setup when it becomes established. Central taxation having to cover all spending has not worked out as proved by the privitisation of refuse collection.

We already pay for water. Is that not obvious?

Ghandee

emo72 wrote: »

We already pay for water. Is that not obvious?

Ask him (he seems to have stopped replying to me now) how the people in the UK and the north are getting on with paying their health care, education, emergency service charges etc etc separately from their domestic rates?

Oh that's right, all them services are included there too.

This guy is very persistent at pointing out various charges over there, but never points out what they get for their buck!

dxhound2005

Le_Dieux wrote: »

Hey Gh, hope Your little Lilly White is giving You some sleep?:-)

On a serious note, I heard something on Friday which I think every man woman and child should really hope it doesn't come true - That if something doesn't give SOON, there will be NO money to pay the SW.

I am trying to find the link, but no success so far.

Be careful. You might get accused of scare tactics.

Ghandee

Le_Dieux wrote: »

Hey Gh, hope Your little Lilly White is giving You some sleep?:-)

She is indeed Le_Dieux!
4 hrs between feeds, so cant complain too much lol!

Le_Dieux wrote: »

On a serious note, I heard something on Friday which I think every man woman and child should really hope it doesn't come true - That if something doesn't give SOON, there will be NO money to pay the SW.

I am trying to find the link, but no success so far.

Well, our lads were complete idiots in recommending the public to vote in favour of the fiscal treaty, we were warned by experienced business people beforehand (Declan Ganley etc) about the consequences on asking for deals to be done after we had ratified the treaty.

As was predicted, EK strolled into Brussells with a revolver to put to Merkels head, only problem was the chambers were empty.

We have got to be the laughing stock of Europe right now.

Le_Dieux

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Be careful. You might get accused of scare tactics.

and what are YOU doing DX?

I am only speaking what I heard. I think I heard it on the Joe Duffy show on Friday afternoon ( which was totally dedicated to what Merkel said) but it isn't uploaded yet - seems Thursday's show is the last one I can find.

Pat Kenny tomorrow morning should be a lively affair, and then tomorrow night...VB, that will be interesting to say the least.

Slick50

dvpower wrote: »

Yeah - afraid so. Sorry for looking for some evidence for 'facts' you put forward.
Can I take it that you don't have any?

I have stated all along that this gives "an opening" for the government to seek a lien. That is a fact, you don't need a link for that.

You developed an aversion to providing links to your own ramblings for a while earlier in this thread.

dvpower wrote: »

:eek: Break out the tinfoil hats.

Maybe if you left the tinfoil hat off for a while, you wouldn't be so impervious to other points of view.

dvpower wrote: »

Since you don't trust any politician, you should really study the legislation. It's your friend.

NO legislation that permits the government to demand money from me, simply because I have worked hard all my life, and provided a home for my family, is my friend.

dvpower wrote: »

It hasn't - not once.
Care to give your take on the question? - it seems that, so far, it can be all things to all men.

Yes it has.

I don't care to to state it again, no.

Imagine! other people having their own opinions?

darkhorse

dvpower wrote: »

An any case, I think Varadkar was foolish to make promises that he didn't have the power to keep. If that eases your anger somewhat then all to the good.

I suppose you'll probably tell me that Enda Kenny did'nt know anything about this piece being inserted into the 2011 FG election manifesto:-

Funding Local Government:

[FONT=Myriad Pro,Myriad Pro][FONT=Myriad Pro,Myriad Pro]Fianna Fail’s proposal, now endorsed by the Labour Party, to introduce by 2014 an annual, recurring residential property tax on the family home is unfair. [/FONT][/FONT]

(Maybe he was a bit foolish, too, or coulda be just telling porkies. Actually, Ted, I might have made it all up)
[FONT=Myriad Pro,Myriad Pro][FONT=Myriad Pro,Myriad Pro][/FONT][/FONT]

dvpower

darkhorse wrote: »

I suppose you'll probably tell me that Enda Kenny did'nt know anything about this piece being inserted into the 2011 FG election manifesto:-

Funding Local Government:

[FONT=Myriad Pro,Myriad Pro][FONT=Myriad Pro,Myriad Pro]Fianna Fail’s proposal, now endorsed by the Labour Party, to introduce by 2014 an annual, recurring residential property tax on the family home is unfair. [/FONT][/FONT]

(Maybe he was a bit foolish, too, or coulda be just telling porkies. Actually, Ted, I might have made it all up)

Catch up.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81336890&postcount=143

Ghandee

dvpower wrote: »

Catch up.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81336890&postcount=143

A 'site valuation tax' is very different to a property tax though.

Like i stated earlier, plenty of speculators and developers sitting on multi million euro land banks (which could be considered assets, they are not family homes after all) get away Scott free.

Anyone would think someone was looking out for them.


Btw, labour didn't envisage introducing said tax until at least 2014.

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

A 'site valuation tax' is very different to a property tax though.

Like i stated earlier, plenty of speculators and developers sitting on multi million euro land banks (which could be considered assets, they are not family homes after all) get away Scott free.

Anyone would think someone was looking out for them.


Btw, labour didn't envisage introducing said tax until at least 2014.

A SVT is a property tax and the flavour of property tax we get is still to be decided (or at least the decision isn't public). I favour a SVT btw (although it would personally cost me more).

Anyway, that's an aside from darkhorse's ridiculous suggestion.

emo72

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1021/eamon-gilmore-europe.html

a surprise statement by merkel? it seems like a bit of rowing back. its official lads, we're a "special case".....duhhh

Ghandee

dvpower wrote: »

A SVT is a property tax and the flavour of property tax we get is still to be decided (or at least the decision isn't public). I favour a SVT btw (although it would personally cost me more).

Anyway, that's an aside from darkhorse's ridiculous suggestion.

I'm not disagreeing with you in fairness.

I'm just pointing out (although I disagree with both) that a site valuation based tax would take in many millions more than just a 'property' tax system (as in, you have to own property to be eligible for the latter)

A site valuation would have put many more, (with a real ability to pay) firmly in the tax net.

As it stands (if property tax sees the light of day)

A single man, 35k a year salary, 150k house (due to negative equity) with 280k mortgage will pay a tax. (on their asset)

Wealthy developer, very cash rich with land banks that are worth millions (a true asset) don't pay a Tax (on their asset.)

I get they'll probably be subject to any property tax, but why not taxed on the site?

dvpower

emo72 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1021/eamon-gilmore-europe.html

a surprise statement by merkel? it seems like a bit of rowing back. its official lads, we're a "special case".....duhhh

Looks like hopeful news.
Thankfully Enda Kenny didn't take the advise of many on this thread.

Ghandee

emo72 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1021/eamon-gilmore-europe.html

a surprise statement by merkel? it seems like a bit of rowing back. its official lads, we're a "special case".....duhhh

Hopefully it's good news.

Not to petty to say that some good news on the banking debt can only be good news for the country as a whole. If they have indeed secured a deal, hats off to them.

Fingers crossed though.

tayto lover

dvpower wrote: »

Looks like hopeful news.
Thankfully Enda Kenny didn't take the advise of many on this thread.

Thank God that's cleared up now. Bad press releases made him look rather foolish and made her look to be a dictator.

emo72

so good news then. when ghandee and dv both agree, well its definitely good news!

Ghandee

emo72 wrote: »

so good news then. when ghandee and dv both agree, well its definitely good news!

dv and I are both sculling pints together at the min lol:pac:

Hijpo

Ghandee wrote: »

dv and I are both sculling pints together at the min lol:pac:

becareful he doesnt get you drunk and treat you like he treats merkel :eek:

bleh!

darkhorse

dvpower wrote: »

Catch up.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81336890&postcount=143

17-10-2012, 19:56 #9721darkhorse
Registered User


Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Donegal, formerly Dublin
Posts: 578
Adverts | Friends


Quote:
Originally Posted by dvpower
The Wordpress document where you found the leaflet is from June 5, 2012.

http://irishelectionliterature.wordp...-dublin-south/

The actual leaflet is from the mid 90s..

This thread is hard work.

It don't really matter what anyone comes up with as far as you guys are concerned.

What about:-

Funding Local Government:

Fianna Fail’s proposal, now endorsed by the Labour Party, to introduce by 2014 an annual, recurring residential property tax on the family home is unfair.

This is just an extract from F.G.s manifesto 2011, which I'm sure that you are familiar with.

THIS DO YA DOPE?

(2) thanks from:

K-9

You actually prove my point.

Pre-election promises mean nothing. Yet here we are, you quoting a pre-election promise as if it means something.

The only thing that matters is what the party you voted for gets in the coalition deal.

Seriously, do you believe advertising beal?

Am Chile wrote: »

Only one problem with this analysis was one promise by one Eamon Gilmore on property taxes pre election-so who exactly is comprising the other when both parties pledged opposition to property taxes pre election last year ?

http://www.herald.ie/opinion/eamon-gilmore-the-man-behind-the-mask-2374050.html


(THE man favoured to be the next Taoiseach has promised not to cut social
welfare or raise tax rates.

Instead Eamon Gilmore wants to tax the "high fliers" of the Celtic Tiger
economy in order to rebuild our shattered economy.


But at the same time he has promised:

Not to introduce a property tax on residential homes)

squod

K-9 wrote: »

You actually prove my point.

Pre-election promises mean nothing. Yet here we are, you quoting a pre-election promise as if it means something.

The only thing that matters is what the party you voted for gets in the coalition deal.

Seriously, do you believe advertising beal?

So the current lot are in trouble for their misleading advertising?
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1988/en/si/0134.html

K-9

squod wrote: »

So the current lot are in trouble for their misleading advertising?
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1988/en/si/0134.html

Huh?

You think one party gets everything it wants in a coalition?

Its called negotiations. Toddlers throwing tantrums do get loads of attention for throwing a strop,, but ignored for being stroppy toddlers. Nobody likes tantrums.

Hijpo

K-9 wrote: »

Huh?

You think one party gets everything it wants in a coalition?

Its called negotiations. Toddlers throwing tantrums do get loads of attention for throwing a strop,, but ignored for being stroppy toddlers. Nobody likes tantrums.

Can you clarify what people should base there votes on if pre election campaigns mean nothing?

maybe we should avoid elections and just pick some names from a hat?