Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Irish water truth

Options
1235»

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Reformed Character
    Closed Accounts Posts: 710 ✭✭✭Reformed Character


    sligoface wrote: »
    No. I can't afford a new bill for something that I already pay for.

    You don't already pay for it.
    Next thing the "freeloader society" will be demanding is free electricity, free gas, and free shopping from Tesco!


  • Options
    #123
    KindOfIrish
    Registered Users Posts: 454 ✭✭KindOfIrish


    Coat22 wrote: »
    I’d be fairly sure, now that they have a meter at the point where the water turns into every home, that there will be some way of doing this.

    Just pay for your bloody water like the rest of the civilised world.

    The rest of civilised world has a normal water pressure at list. Water supply in Ireland is a joke. My piss pressure is higher :)
    And I can guaranty that water charge will be the same as in England in no time. £600 - 1200 a year.


  • Options
    #124
    WilyCoyote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,059 ✭✭✭WilyCoyote


    Free water for anyone that can piss. Give Dennis O B and the rest of these leeches the finger toe up the arse.

    http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/waterday.jpg


  • Options
    #125
    sligoface
    Closed Accounts Posts: 556 ✭✭✭sligoface


    Reformed Character wrote: »
    You don't already pay for it.
    Next thing the "freeloader society" will be demanding is free electricity, free gas, and free shopping from Tesco!

    I'm no freeloader. You can't even get a job flippin burgers in my county right now, so no matter how much I want to work and be able to pay for the cost of living, I can't. I also don't like being lied to and stolen from.

    If I had come out and said 'Next thing they'll be taxing the air we breathe!', no doubt you'd have mocked me. But your statement is just as ridiculous. Did you read the link satriale posted which states that the childrens free allowance is to be cut because metered homes with children have used less water than they estimated. This just proves it's all about profits, not fairness or conservation.

    People rabbiting on about a freeloader society, why do they never look at our vastly overpaid, middle age retiring, spectacularly failing government officials as freeloaders? Or the overpaid consultants and CEO's? Or the bondholders who we are being taxed to repay? Why do you assume these people in government have your best interests at heart and know better than you and are happy to accept every tax they dream up? Do you consider OAP's freeloaders? Are you aware that they are the largest expenditure by the dept of social welfare? Does the business you are in refuse to accept money from those on the dole because they are freeloaders? If the dole was abolished, do you think your businesses profits would increase or decrease? And if it was decreased, do you think the gov would lower taxes by such an amount that would make up the difference or would they just waste it on something else or keep it for themselves nd their cronies?

    I got laid off last year. I am a college grad. I send out CV's as much as possible and cannot get hired. There aren't even jobs to apply for most weeks, especially since (no exaggeration) half of them are internships, ofwhich I've already done one. So how am I a freeloader?

    I currently pay my rent, electricity, heating, and food (from Aldi or Lidl only, never Tesco) from 188 a week. No rent allowance or fuel allowance due to unrealistic rent limits for RA and not being unemployed long enough for FA. I don't have money left over to pay the water charge. If I did, I certainly wouldn't be paying the water charge with it. I'd be squirrelling it away so I could get out of this country which has no opportunities for the likes of me, is ruled by a corrupt government and full of numptys who do whatever they say and pay every charge they come up with, and class those of us who can't or won't as freeloaders.

    If you post a response, please include answers to the questions I posed in mine. Otherwise I'm not really interested and it will just confirm my current view that you are a small minded person who gets immense satisfaction of classing the struggling people around you as freeloaders. Being judgemental of others who you've never met works both ways.


  • Options
    #126
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Reformed Character wrote: »
    You don't already pay for it.
    Next thing the "freeloader society" will be demanding is free electricity, free gas, and free shopping from Tesco!

    Not a freeloader society just a society that would like to see a return for the high taxes they are already paying.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    The Dagda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,345 ✭✭✭The Dagda


    Reformed Character wrote: »
    You don't already pay for it.

    Who pays for it so?


  • Options
    #128
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,574 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    How many agree with the reported plan of Irish Water to ask householders for their Bank Account details, along with the PPS numbers of ALL the people living in the house?

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/irish-water-seeks-pps-numbers-of-householders-and-children-1.1865234


  • Options
    #129
    Caliden
    Registered Users Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭Caliden


    In that article it mentions the free allowance but shows it as a yearly figure but last week we were told it's going to be a daily allowance that can't be carried over. Why bother listing it as a yearly figure in the first place then??


    I'm also extremely apprehensive of sending both my bank details and PPS number via post.

    I can't recall the last time I've written down both of those on the same form.


  • Options
    #130
    sonya7
    Registered Users Posts: 44 ✭sonya7


    folan wrote: »
    water has always been a free resource?

    what about the pipes to get it around? irrigation? so on and so on.

    the truth of the matter is, water charges are another tax on irish people because the government cant balance its book and irish people neither want to lose services or pay for them. Water charge or another rise in VAT or USC or anything else, it doesnt matter. its a tax.

    at least this tax will have something do with consumption of these "free" resources.

    The government can't balance the books yet it can give higher earners a tax cut? It can choose not to means test everything? And on and on. Odd that isn't it?

    Water has never been free, it has always been paid for. For decades it has been paid for through general taxation. Water charges are regressive not progressive. All flat taxes are regressive. Water is not a commodity, it is not a luxury - it is a basic human right. Access to which should be based on need not bank balance.

    The simple fact is many will not register and many even if they do register
    will not pay. And others simply will be unable to pay. That will be the reality of this neoliberal experiment which seeks to pave the way for water privatisation.


  • Options
    #131
    sonya7
    Registered Users Posts: 44 ✭sonya7


    Reformed Character wrote: »
    You don't already pay for it.
    Next thing the "freeloader society" will be demanding is free electricity, free gas, and free shopping from Tesco!

    So since the '70's how have we had water services if we didn't pay for it through taxation? Was it the tooth fairy who gave it for free? Fact is: we do pay for water. It has never been free. Another fact: we will not pay twice.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    sonya7 wrote: »
    So since the '70's how have we had water services if we didn't pay for it through taxation? Was it the tooth fairy who gave it for free? Fact is: we do pay for water. It has never been free. Another fact: we will not pay twice.

    we're paying for it, but we're not paying enough.


  • Options
    #133
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    I predict the imminent bumping of many dead water related threads.........


  • Options
    #134
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    we're paying for it, but we're not paying enough.

    how is it, that its 'water' we're not paying enough for?

    Any source that it's water (specially) the deficit isn't covering?


  • Options
    #135
    Pappacharlie
    Registered Users Posts: 197 ✭✭Pappacharlie


    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    Yeah, the citizens of no other country would accept water charges. Why should we?

    PLEASE LIST THE COUNTRIES WHERE THERE ARE NO WATER CHARGES???


  • Options
    #136
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Banjo String wrote: »
    how is it, that its 'water' we're not paying enough for?

    Any source that it's water (specially) the deficit isn't covering?

    not sure what the question is...


  • Options
    #137
    sonya7
    Registered Users Posts: 44 ✭sonya7


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    we're paying for it, but we're not paying enough.

    Is that why we are able to reduce tax for higher earners because we don't pay enough for water? We do pay enough. Our water services are provided from general taxation: income tax, motor tax, LPT, VAT.

    Many of those who support direct water charges and speak of conserving a precious resource (and fluffy terms like that) ignore the fact that IW will increase the price it charges for water if we do conserve water and use less than we would normally. This is because it has to turn a profit, it has to pay salaries, bonuses, car allowances and other perks and whatever else to its overstaffed organisation.

    It will also have to ensure the system functions and it will also have to repair leaking pipes etc. So there less water people use, the higher the bills will be. And from the money it would collect, it wouldn't be leaking pipes (from where up to something like 40% or even 50% of water is lost) which would be addressed first - it would their own salaries and perks and then it's profit margin to ultimately attract a private buyer. No thanks. We won't be registering and we won't be paying - and there are many, many others who will do likewise.


  • Options
    #138
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    not sure what the question is...

    I think you actually do.

    You said were not paying enough. Well, water is paid (currently til now) from a central pot.


    Any source that it's specifically water that we're not paying enough for?


  • Options
    #139
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Pappacharlie wrote: »
    PLEASE LIST THE COUNTRIES WHERE THERE ARE NO WATER CHARGES???

    Burkino Faso
    East Timor
    North Korea
    Haiti
    Rwanda etc.


    and other such prosperous nations spring to mind.

    Vatican doesn't pay but they have cash


  • Options
    #140
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

    Vatican doesn't pay but they have cash

    I hear molten gold comes from the taps in Vatican city


  • Options
    #141
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Banjo String wrote: »
    I think you actually do.

    You said were not paying enough. Well, water is paid (currently til now) from a central pot.


    Any source that it's specifically water that we're not paying enough for?

    still not sure, but I'll hazard a guess.
    Currently paying 1.2billion for provision of water services.
    with up to 40% of the water produced leaking back into the aquifers, its estimated ~0.5b/year/annually is required just for for mains maintenance. add to that the % of the national supply contaminated with Pb, E.Coli and crytpo.
    on top of that add the 42 wwtps that still dont meet the UWWD 13 years after the regs.

    So yes, we're not paying enough to comply with what we're supposed to be complying with.
    And our tax base is too narrow.
    but thats another days work.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    still not sure, but I'll hazard a guess.
    Currently paying 1.2billion for provision of water services.
    with up to 40% of the water produced leaking back into the aquifers, its estimated ~0.5b/year/annually is required just for for mains maintenance. add to that the % of the national supply contaminated with Pb, E.Coli and crytpo.
    on top of that add the 42 wwtps that still dont meet the UWWD 13 years after the regs.

    So yes, we're not paying enough to comply with what we're supposed to be complying with.
    And our tax base is too narrow.
    but thats another days work.

    Sooo when the leaks are all fixed our bills come down ya!
    .. and the company goes back to the state..eh
    And the corporate structure that was set up wiil be wound down, ya!


  • Options
    #143
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Armelodie wrote: »
    Sooo when the leaks are all fixed our bills come down ya!
    .. and the company goes back to the state..eh
    And the corporate structure that was set up wiil be wound down, ya!

    What do you think?


  • Options
    #144
    sonya7
    Registered Users Posts: 44 ✭sonya7


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    still not sure, but I'll hazard a guess.
    Currently paying 1.2billion for provision of water services.
    with up to 40% of the water produced leaking back into the aquifers, its estimated ~0.5b/year/annually is required just for for mains maintenance. add to that the % of the national supply contaminated with Pb, E.Coli and crytpo.
    on top of that add the 42 wwtps that still dont meet the UWWD 13 years after the regs.

    So yes, we're not paying enough to comply with what we're supposed to be complying with.
    And our tax base is too narrow.
    but thats another days work.

    If there is such a problem and there is, then why doesn't this government invest in fixing the problem rather than investing tens, if not hundreds, of millions in Irish Water? Do tax cuts for higher earners, and moola for horses and greyhounds, take precedence over ensuring a functioning water system? Fact is: you don't need a company such as Irish Water to fix the problems in the water infrastructure system. You just need the political will to use existing revenue responsibly.

    Irish Water has been a pet project of FG's under their "New Era" project since 2009, before it was even elected to office. Being the Thatcherite party it is, FG favours the ultimate privatisation of Irish Water. Many would disagree, as FG and Labour will, and have, come to see.


Advertisement