Plastic plug to avoid metering

Tigger · 27-07-2014 5:34pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Does that include the 40% that goes directly back into the ground after being treated ? Who pays for that ?

cost of production

darkpagandeath · 27-07-2014 5:36pm

Tigger wrote: »

cost of production

But the water charge is to help save water .... that's what the government keep saying. So it's fine to loose 40% of the treated water as long as you can charge it all to the end user ? Who is trying to save water ?

hatrickpatrick · 27-07-2014 5:38pm

IW should be a not for profit organisation. The whole "putting prices up to combat conservation" business has destroyed any credibility this organisation ever had - it has been exposed as simply another gravy train for the likes of Tierney.

Tigger · 27-07-2014 5:39pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

But the water charge is to help save water .... that's what the government keep saying. So it's fine to loose 40% of the treated water as long as you can charge it all to the end user ? Who is trying to save water ?

honestly interested but do you pay income tax?
if so would you prefer a 400 per year increase or a 400 per year charge to covdr ongoing water costs

if not then you are basically saying "can't someone else do it?".

darkpagandeath · 27-07-2014 5:47pm

Tigger wrote: »

honestly interested but do you pay income tax?
if so would you prefer a 400 per year increase or a 400 per year charge to covdr ongoing water costs

if not then you are basically saying "can't someone else do it?".

Is that a thinly veiled attempt to find out if I'm a dole scrounger ? "It's not can't someone else do it" as we are already doing it. It's already covered in Direct taxation. Yes I would take the €400 a year over the €1200 it's probably going to go up to after the first 2 years. And it will just keep going up and up.

Tigger · 27-07-2014 5:50pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Is that a thinly veiled attempt to find out if I'm a dole scrounger ? "It's not can't someone else do it" as we are already doing it. It's already covered in Direct taxation. Yes I would take the €400 a year over the €1200 it's probably going to go up to after the first 2 years. And it will just keep going up and up.

no
are you paying income tax?

Tigger · 27-07-2014 5:51pm

i know loads of people that don't pay income tax but aren't on the dole btw

if you were my mate i'd know your situation and unders stand your bias but i'm trying to understand why you are so against water metering

i will drill a well if it goes to 1200 a year

dxhound2005 · 27-07-2014 5:56pm

Tigger wrote: »

i know loads of people that don't pay income tax but aren't on the dole btw

if you were my mate i'd know your situation and unders stand your bias but i'm trying to understand why you are so against water metering

i will drill a well if it goes to 1200 a year

Somebody might come along a put a plug in your well.

darkpagandeath · 27-07-2014 6:00pm

Tigger wrote: »

i know loads of people that don't pay income tax but aren't on the dole btw

if you were my mate i'd know your situation and unders stand your bias but i'm trying to understand why you are so against water metering

i will drill a well if it goes to 1200 a year

I'm not against water charges, I'm against how it's being done. We are going to pay twice for a service that is falling apart. We will be paying to a semi state that will not reinvest back into the infrastructure. That will then be sold and used to cream loads of money out of people on the backs of water conservation. While not investing back into upgrading the system only keeping it barely ticking over. That's what I’m against. I will be paying a fixed fee if you are interested So it does not effect me really. I could continue to fill 50 gallon barrels if I like.

Oh and on the well end of it, I bet coming down the line is a treatment fee for waste water if your hooked into the sewer system.

Tigger · 27-07-2014 6:00pm

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Somebody might come along a put a plug in your well.

sorry what do you mean

UCDVet · 27-07-2014 6:04pm

RayM wrote: »

That's all well and good, but is there any way of getting free electricity, gas, Sky TV, phone and broadband too? Why limit it to water charges? Gas is natural. I want free gas.

How did we pay for water before? Taxes.

Someone can do the maths to work out the value - but if they give me a reduction equal to my share of taxes that in 2013 went towards water, well, I wouldn't mind the charge being moved to individuals.

This would be like keeping the TV License, but then making RTE subscription based. So I'm still paying for it, but now they have a new way to pay too, and unless I pay my monthly subscription, I don't get access. I'd love a monthly fee, so long as they ditch the TV license.

I'd happily pay for the water, if my taxes didn't already pay for the water.

Tigger · 27-07-2014 6:05pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I'm not against water charges, I'm against how it's being done. We are going to pay twice for a service that is falling apart. We will be paying to a semi state that will not reinvest back into the infrastructure. That will then be sold and used to cream loads of money out of people on the backs of water conservation. While not investing back into upgrading the system only keeping it barely ticking over. That's what I’m against. I will be paying a fixed fee if you are interested no it does not effect me really. I could continue to fill 50 gallon barrels if I like.

i agree that while i approve of metering the way its been done is typical of the jobs for the boys slime that we put up with

fixed charge or estimated charge is bollix considering the yearly charge includes the rent of the meter so why don't yu get a discount ? answer is because its really a tax on living

if i don't pay they say they will drastically reduce my pressure if those on estimated bill don't pay that won't work
so don't pay

Iwasfrozen · 27-07-2014 6:05pm

Tigger wrote: »

sorry what do you mean

I think he's implying that you're a homosexual.

Iwasfrozen · 27-07-2014 6:07pm

UCDVet wrote: »

How did we pay for water before? Taxes.

Someone can do the maths to work out the value - but if they give me a reduction equal to my share of taxes that in 2013 went towards water, well, I wouldn't mind the charge being moved to individuals.

This would be like keeping the TV License, but then making RTE subscription based. So I'm still paying for it, but now they have a new way to pay too, and unless I pay my monthly subscription, I don't get access. I'd love a monthly fee, so long as they ditch the TV license.

I'd happily pay for the water, if my taxes didn't already pay for the water.

The money that was previously going towards water will go towards helping to pay off our national debt. That's pretty much what debt means. More taxes and less spending until it's payed off.

Tigger · 27-07-2014 6:09pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I think he's implying that you're a homosexual.

i'm not
is that still an insult ? i thought we'd moved on

darkpagandeath · 27-07-2014 6:10pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The money that was previously going towards water will go towards helping to pay off our national debt. That's pretty much what debt means. More taxes and less spending until it's payed off.

So that will be never then. Every country has national debt.

Tigger · 27-07-2014 6:12pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So that will be never then. Every country has national debt.

the are 5 Countries with No Debt – Brunei, Liechtenstein, Palau, Nieu, And Macau Of China

EazyD · 27-07-2014 6:16pm

Tigger wrote: »

the are 5 Countries with No Debt – Brunei, Liechtenstein, Palau, Nieu, And Macau Of China

Fine examples there

darkpagandeath · 27-07-2014 6:18pm

EazyD wrote: »

Fine examples there

Yup largest has what 600k people.

Iwasfrozen · 27-07-2014 6:20pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So that will be never then.

Yep, that's exactly what it means. Less spending and more taxes forever... :rolleyes:

Tigger · 27-07-2014 6:20pm

EazyD wrote: »

Fine examples there

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Yup largest has what 600k people.

i was stating facts

i thought that loads of countries would have no debt

UCDVet · 27-07-2014 6:21pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The money that was previously going towards water will go towards helping to pay off our national debt. That's pretty much what debt means. More taxes and less spending until it's payed off.

Exactly.

Money is money. This is fundamentally no different than introducing a new 'national debt' charge. The government moved the 'water money' into a new account called 'debt'. Now they are looking at me saying, "WELL WATER IS NOT FREE!"

And I'm the freeloader with unrealistic expectations who doesn't understand that it costs money to provide water.

darkpagandeath · 27-07-2014 6:24pm

Tigger wrote: »

i was stating facts

i thought that loads of countries would have no debt

Nope world economy works on creating debt, Someone always has to pay it off eventually but due to interest rates and all that is never paid. If for example all debt was called in now by all banks every economy would collapse and all the banks.

darkpagandeath · 27-07-2014 6:26pm

UCDVet wrote: »

Exactly.

Money is money. This is fundamentally no different than introducing a new 'national debt' charge. The government moved the 'water money' into a new account called 'debt'. Now they are looking at me saying, "WELL WATER IS NOT FREE!"

And I'm the freeloader with unrealistic expectations who doesn't understand that it costs money to provide water.

Yup why don't they just call it a debt tax or something a little more honest. There is no proof it will be ring fenced to be used to upgrade the network.

The One Who Knocks · 27-07-2014 6:28pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/campaign-groups-urge-public-to-use-2-plastic-plug-in-water-charges-protests-637534.html

I don't condone this but, If large enough amounts of people do this surely IW wont be able to take them all to court

They won't, too stingy, the plug costs €2.

Tigger · 27-07-2014 6:29pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Nope world economy works on creating debt, Someone always has to pay it off eventually but due to interest rates and all that is never paid. If for example all debt was called in now by all banks every economy would collapse and all the banks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Er69b4HMl8

Guy:Incognito · 27-07-2014 6:47pm

renegademaster wrote: »

people should definately do this and IF, it's a big if, IF IW come knocking all ya hve to do is say "I never touched the water meter, dont know what you're talking about, have you any proof of who done it?????"

Why pay for anything so? Why not by pass your electricity and gas meters too?

darkpagandeath · 27-07-2014 6:52pm

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Why pay for anything so? Why not by pass your electricity and gas meters too?

Because they only get revenue from that source, Water is already paid for via taxation simple really. We are not being asked to pay twice for electric or gas.

Guy:Incognito · 27-07-2014 6:56pm

UCDVet wrote: »

How did we pay for water before? Taxes.

Someone can do the maths to work out the value - but if they give me a reduction equal to my share of taxes that in 2013 went towards water, well, I wouldn't mind the charge being moved to individuals.

This would be like keeping the TV License, but then making RTE subscription based. So I'm still paying for it, but now they have a new way to pay too, and unless I pay my monthly subscription, I don't get access. I'd love a monthly fee, so long as they ditch the TV license.

I'd happily pay for the water, if my taxes didn't already pay for the water.

So reduce tax and bring in charges to replace it. So we go from having to borrow 10-15B a year to keep the country running on a day to day basis to borrowing 10-15B a year to keep the country running on a day to day basis?

Collecting the same amount of money but calling it a different name isn't going to be plugging any holes in the exchequer.

Borrowing the money and paying interest on it costs more than paying it through taxes with no interest.

Maybe we could just shoot people instead of spending money giving dole to every person with no job or educating every single child or trying to treat every sick person, thatd get the costs down.

Iwasfrozen · 27-07-2014 6:57pm

UCDVet wrote: »

Exactly.

Money is money. This is fundamentally no different than introducing a new 'national debt' charge. The government moved the 'water money' into a new account called 'debt'. Now they are looking at me saying, "WELL WATER IS NOT FREE!"

And I'm the freeloader with unrealistic expectations who doesn't understand that it costs money to provide water.

I agree, but that's how it is because we're spending more than we take in.

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Because they only get revenue from that source, Water is already paid for via taxation simple really. We are not being asked to pay twice for electric or gas.

You're not paying twice for water, the revenue that would have gone to water is now being used to help close the gap in national spending.

Plastic plug to avoid metering

Comments