protest water charges but not property charges??

So, why the big protest against water charges but not property tax??
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to pay water charges, so long as they are metered, I don't mind paying a set amount, comparable to people who pay a private water charge.

I know loads of people in the country who pay for private group water schemes, it never costs more than 90/100 euro a year. So, grand, I'll pay that. I don't need to pay more because I use more litres than nxt door, the same amount of water will be treated!!

But property tax????!!
No way, the government take money from you because you earned and saved enough to buy your own home? They think they should take more???!

So the question is, why so many protesting water charges ( a service) but didn't do the same for property tax ( just a tax!)

Sir Arthur Daley

I will protest for a water forum, in the mean time im leaving the outside tap run.

Pedro K

Can only speak for my own family home, nobody else's, but for us it's the straw that broke the camel's back.

We've had enough, and we've given enough (including the LPT/household charge) and there's not much left to take.

The main source of income in my house is my mother, who is on a widows pension. I'm in college and working part time on weekends to fund my education and to throw some money towards the house, and my little brother is in 6th year in school.

We can't afford it. Simple as. Enough is enough.

Kermit.de.frog

That's right. We should elect a range of independent crack pots at the next election. Maybe that will be better.


Or maybe not.

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

So, why the big protest against water charges but not property tax??

But property tax????!!
No way, the government take money from you because you earned and saved enough to buy your own home? They think they should take more???!

So the question is, why so many protesting water charges ( a service) but didn't do the same for property tax ( just a tax!)

It's been many many years since I lived in Ireland so please excuse my ignorance on this, but genuine question here:
Is this property tax levelled against home owners or is it all "households"? I mean are they only charging the people who own the property, or are they charging people in rented accommodation as well? What happens to people who own houses that nobody lives in? Or what if you own two houses and one is just for holidays and the like?

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's been many many years since I lived in Ireland so please excuse my ignorance on this, but genuine question here:
Is this property tax levelled against home owners or is it all "households"? I mean are they only charging the people who own the property, or are they charging people in rented accommodation as well? What happens to people who own houses that nobody lives in? Or what if you own two houses and one is just for holidays and the like?

Its a house owners tax, whoever owns the house, pays the tax, there are more taxes for people who own second houses/ holiday homes.

Del2005

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's been many many years since I lived in Ireland so please excuse my ignorance on this, but genuine question here:
Is this property tax levelled against home owners or is it all "households"? I mean are they only charging the people who own the property, or are they charging people in rented accommodation as well? What happens to people who own houses that nobody lives in? Or what if you own two houses and one is just for holidays and the like?

The property tax is on the owners not renters, the landlord's just add the cost of the tax to the rent.

Del2005

bubblypop wrote: »

So, why the big protest against water charges but not property tax??
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to pay water charges, so long as they are metered, I don't mind paying a set amount, comparable to people who pay a private water charge.

I know loads of people in the country who pay for private group water schemes, it never costs more than 90/100 euro a year. So, grand, I'll pay that. I don't need to pay more because I use more litres than nxt door, the same amount of water will be treated!!

But property tax????!!
No way, the government take money from you because you earned and saved enough to buy your own home? They think they should take more???!

So the question is, why so many protesting water charges ( a service) but didn't do the same for property tax ( just a tax!)

Because people are stupid and don't realise that there is way more money being taken out their pockets in other taxes and charges than water, but the crowd don't like water charges so that's what they protest over.

doc11

Many don't own there own home,those in social housing, getting rent supplement or renting privately wouldn't have had to pay the property tax.But with the water tax many of the poorer in society will pay hence the resentment

renegademaster

bubblypop wrote: »

So, why the big protest against water charges but not property tax??
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to pay water charges, so long as they are metered, I don't mind paying a set amount, comparable to people who pay a private water charge.

I know loads of people in the country who pay for private group water schemes, it never costs more than 90/100 euro a year. So, grand, I'll pay that. I don't need to pay more because I use more litres than nxt door, the same amount of water will be treated!!

But property tax????!!
No way, the government take money from you because you earned and saved enough to buy your own home? They think they should take more???!

So the question is, why so many protesting water charges ( a service) but didn't do the same for property tax ( just a tax!)

because what is happening now is over everything, it may well be under the IW banner but it's got everything else boiling under it, speak to anyone on Sat and they talked of all the little things adding up and this is it now!! no going back

Pedro K wrote: »

Can only speak for my own family home, nobody else's, but for us it's the straw that broke the camel's back.

We've had enough, and we've given enough (including the LPT/household charge) and there's not much left to take.

The main source of income in my house is my mother, who is on a widows pension. I'm in college and working part time on weekends to fund my education and to throw some money towards the house, and my little brother is in 6th year in school.

We can't afford it. Simple as. Enough is enough.

they see us now

Del2005 wrote: »

Because people are stupid and don't realise that there is way more money being taken out their pockets in other taxes and charges than water, but the crowd don't like water charges so that's what they protest over.

you think the people are going to stop at disolving IW? lol :pac:

the_syco

bubblypop wrote: »

So, why the big protest against water charges but not property tax??

Do the unemployed have to pay the same amount for the property tax? AFAIK, if they're below a certain threshold, they don't have to pay anything.

doc11

the_syco wrote: »

Do the unemployed have to pay the same amount for the property tax? AFAIK, if they're below a certain threshold, they don't have to pay anything.

Not true, there's no reliefs

doc11

doc11 wrote: »

Not true, there's no reliefs

No, that is true actually now that its mentioned.
A friend of mine is unemployed and hadn't paid her mortgage for years, on social welfare so I assume that's why she is exempt from property tax.

That makes sense I guess, workers out working can't spend all day protesting, people not working now have to pay water charges, they didn't have to worry about property tax!

Makes sense now..

doc11

bubblypop wrote: »

No, that is true actually now that its mentioned.
A friend of mine is unemployed and hadn't paid her mortgage for years, on social welfare so I assume that's why she is exempt from property tax.

That makes sense I guess, workers out working can't spend all day protesting, people not working now have to pay water charges, they didn't have to worry about property tax!

Makes sense now..

Not paying doesn't equal exempt

Bannasidhe

the_syco wrote: »

Do the unemployed have to pay the same amount for the property tax? AFAIK, if they're below a certain threshold, they don't have to pay anything.

If you own a house you are liable for property tax regardless of source of income, there are some exceptions - e.g. living in an estate deemed 'unfinished' - but no exemption for being unemployed.
Nor is amount of income taken into account, property tax is determined by value of house.

kneemos

doc11 wrote: »

Not true, there's no reliefs

There may well be in tomorrow's budget.The sooner the water tax can be eased into place and forgotten about before the next election the better.

renegademaster

kneemos wrote: »

There may well be in tomorrow's budget.The sooner the water tax can be eased into place and forgotten about before the next election the better.

I lie awake at night wondering how corrupt governments get away with it all and then i read this :rolleyes:

Tail Docker

Because protesting against "de watur charges" is popular and people jumped onto it. Protesting against anything else is for "dirty lefty hippies". Which is kinda funny, because people are protesting about being charged for showering..so maybe it has a sort of twisted logic to it. I think it's like someone being kicked up the hole every day without so much as a peep and then protesting because the kicker is wearing the wrong brand of trainers.

RobertKK

The tax base needed to be broadened so we are not dependent on one off taxes which led to the large budget deficit when one off property related taxes collapsed leading to a large budget deficit of around €20 billion a year.

Protesters would rather we went back to such a case if they cannot see the need for broadening the tax base.

The far left solution is tax the rich, which shows how stupid they are to think the rich would hang around to pay excessive taxes.

Lapin

Noonan is gonna set a tax on the use of question marks and exclamation marks starting at midnight.

The OP got in just in time.

!!!

ArtyC

I think it's a case of the straw that broke the camels back..... My wages are under €300 a week at the moment and I'm struggling. My rent is €100, €65 loan repayment, UPC, elec and yes Joan a phone. I m just keeping body and soul together til my hours of work go back up again. I can't afford anymore. Not many can . I pay my taxes every week.... Nearly €3,000 ytd ( I was working more hours up to a few weeks ago) now more tax. I'm beginning to hate my country

seamus

ArtyC wrote: »

I think it's a case of the straw that broke the camels back..... My wages are under €300 a week at the moment and I'm struggling. My rent is €100, €65 loan repayment, UPC, elec and yes Joan a phone. I m just keeping body and soul together til my hours of work go back up again. I can't afford anymore. Not many can . I pay my taxes every week.... Nearly €3,000 ytd ( I was working more hours up to a few weeks ago) now more tax. I'm beginning to hate my country

Your tax is being calculated wrong.

There is no way you can have a net tax liability of €4,500 a year and only come home with €300 in your hand.

Granted, you're getting less hours now, but if that's the kind of work you have, you should be budgeting accordingly for drops in income. If you've paid €3k in tax already this year, that means you earned on average €550/week up to now (assuming you're PAYE).

Look, water charges are simple: You either pay for your water directly and get a better standard of water, or you have your income tax raised to pay for the same sh1te standard of water we've had for the last 40 years.

Your choice.

ArtyC

The drop in my hours were not expected.. That is the tax I've paid- it's on my payslip.
I was being paid 380-400 a week.

I find it tough to stomach I'm told to budget better- I do budget thank you.

Our government are the ones who should f- Ing budget better.

seamus

ArtyC wrote: »

The drop in my hours were not expected.. That is the tax I've paid- it's on my payslip.
I was being paid 380-400 a week.

Then you've been screwed by someone, and it's not the government:

http://taxcalc.ie/budget-2014/

Work it out.
If you're only coming out with €380 a week after tax, then your tax liability so far this year shouldn't be more than €900.

Wibbs

Tail Docker wrote: »

Because protesting against "de watur charges" is popular and people jumped onto it. Protesting against anything else is for "dirty lefty hippies".

And as has been pointed out people in social housing aren't hit by the property tax.

The water tax is an extra expense and a pain in the arse I could do without, however the property tax galls me. Why? Because it's a tax a homeowner has little control over. The value of my house and the subsequent tax I pay on it is set by the market. It's largely out of my control. I control how much water I use and can cut back if wasteful. I control how much car tax I pay. However house prices go up, I pay more tax. My income may go up or fall against that. Income tax I have control over. If I earn more I pay more, if I earn less or become unemployed I pay less. It's tied directly to my ability to pay. The property tax isn't. Oh sure I could "downsize" and move to s cheaper house, but that's not exactly the easiest thing to do and it's a little different to buying a smaller engined car. If another stupid "boom" in house prices kicks off and levels hit anything like what they did ten years ago* my tax bill would triple. Again out of my control.






*and it wouldn't surprise me. An awful lot of kids were born in the last 20 years and they'll need housing. That and the mob have short memories.

nxbyveromdwjpg

Pedro K wrote: »

Can only speak for my own family home, nobody else's, but for us it's the straw that broke the camel's back.

We've had enough, and we've given enough (including the LPT/household charge) and there's not much left to take.

The main source of income in my house is my mother, who is on a widows pension. I'm in college and working part time on weekends to fund my education and to throw some money towards the house, and my little brother is in 6th year in school.

We can't afford it. Simple as. Enough is enough.

So it's a case of timing, and if the water charges came first that would be in now and it would be the property tax that would be the straw?

All this fuss should really be happening about the universal social charge in my opinion.

ThisRegard

bubblypop wrote: »

So, why the big protest against water charges but not property tax??

Or the VAT increase in previous years which hit people harder in the pocket.

Because it's economic illiterate populism.

_Brian

I'd say the biggest reason was that those renting avoid the property tax altogether but the water charge applies to the occupiers of the house.

So more folks on social welfare, particularly the serial professionally unemployed are being asked to pay their way and they just don't like that. Take, take, take and their entitlements is all they know !

renegademaster

RobertKK wrote: »

The far left solution is tax the rich, which shows how stupid they are to think the rich would hang around to pay excessive taxes.

sure that's grand so, dont tax the rich cos they can afford to **** off when it suits them, go for the poor, they can hardly afford to get a bus into town, what kind of fcuked up logic is that?

nm wrote: »

So it's a case of timing, and if the water charges came first that would be in now and it would be the property tax that would be the straw?

All this fuss should really be happening about the universal social charge in my opinion.

you are correct about the timing, but i will say that everyone i spoke to on Sat were there for the water tax but also you'd hear from everyone about every other little thing that brought them to where they are today, financially broken, come and join the protest even if it's the USC you feel should have brought us on the streets, dont sit on the sideline watching just cos it's water and you're not that bothered about that

ThisRegard wrote: »

Or the VAT increase in previous years which hit people harder in the pocket.

Because it's economic illiterate populism.

i heard some people giving out about and saying the vat increases at the weekend. please believe me when i tell ya many many people were fit to riot ecah and everytime the government squeezed a bit more from us, but it has taken a combination of it all to unite us, no populism about it, this is just the final straw with everyone.

_Brian wrote: »

I'd say the biggest reason was that those renting avoid the property tax altogether but the water charge applies to the occupiers of the house.

So more folks on social welfare, particularly the serial professionally unemployed are being asked to pay their way and they just don't like that. Take, take, take and their entitlements is all they know !

jebus!! after seeing such unity on saturday i am finding it extreemly difficult to not call you a ****

AnonoBoy

Is it as simple as the fact that the water charges are newer, hence more objections?

Pedro K

nm wrote: »

So it's a case of timing, and if the water charges came first that would be in now and it would be the property tax that would be the straw?

In a way, yes. Probably true for my family anyway.

ThisRegard

renegademaster wrote: »

but it has taken a combination of it all to unite us, no populism about it, this is just the final straw with everyone.

But you're not speaking for everyone, "we're" not all united. Newly elected TD Paul Murphy was on the Last Word yesterday evening and he made himself, quite frankly, sound like an idiot when it came being asked for actual facts and figures, not this "All us ordinary wurkers are united in this" populist rubbish.

renegademaster

ThisRegard wrote: »

But you're not speaking for everyone, "we're" not all united. Newly elected TD Paul Murphy was on the Last Word yesterday evening and he made himself, quite frankly, sound like an idiot when it came being asked for actual facts and figures, not this "All us ordinary wurkers are united in this" populist rubbish.

go back to sheep!

ThisRegard

renegademaster wrote: »

go back to sheep!

Wow, these type of responses are getting easier to come across. It's almost as if you all have been assimilated into providing the same idiotic response when you're actually challenged on something.

Debate or discussion too difficult without a prompt card or facebook page ?

homerjay2005

maybe the majority of the people protesting are not house owners or have their houses paid for by the state, so dont have to pay property charges?

renegademaster

ThisRegard wrote: »

Wow, these type of responses are getting easier to come across. It's almost as if you all have been assimilated into providing the same idiotic response when you're actually challenged on something.

Debate or discussion too difficult without a prompt card or facebook page ?

no, this is an auto response when i come across people intent on doing damage to anything different. if these people were as quick to jump down the neck of those imposing the hardships and not those rising up and trying to change the system for the better of everyone the whole country would be better off. again. baaaaaaaaaaa

seamus

renegademaster wrote: »

no, this is an auto response when i come across people intent on doing damage to anything different. if these people were as quick to jump down the neck of those imposing the hardships and not those rising up and trying to change the system for the better of everyone the whole country would be better off. again. baaaaaaaaaaa

When you start insulting people rather than actually debating the issue, it becomes pretty clear that you've lost or you don't understand your own argument well enough to defend it.

Ironically, the protestors are in fact the ones who are resisting change and jumping down the necks of those attempting to change the system for the better.

Water charges are a better system than what we have at present. They move the cost of water provision to the user of that provision and put the water infrastructure into the hands of a national authority who will have both the power and the obligation to improve the infrastructure for all people.

Yet those protesting would rather higher taxes and a shoddy water infrastructure. Turkeys protesting in favour of Xmas.

ThisRegard

renegademaster wrote: »

no, this is an auto response when i come across people intent on doing damage to anything different. if these people were as quick to jump down the neck of those imposing the hardships and not those rising up and trying to change the system for the better of everyone the whole country would be better off. again. baaaaaaaaaaa

I've genuinely no idea what you're exactly trying to say here.

But I think you might be trying to say that not paying for essential services, freeing up money to go elsewhere in the state, makes the country a better place ?

the_syco

renegademaster wrote: »

trying to change the system for the better of everyone the whole country would be better off. again. baaaaaaaaaaa

Actually, the only people better off would be those not paying tax on the hours they worked, and those that have worked have their tax increased.

Have you considered that you are a sheep to the nice sounding soundbites, as opposed to opening your eyes to the harsh reality that the money will come from somewhere regardless?

listermint

seamus wrote: »

Your tax is being calculated wrong.

There is no way you can have a net tax liability of €4,500 a year and only come home with €300 in your hand.

Granted, you're getting less hours now, but if that's the kind of work you have, you should be budgeting accordingly for drops in income. If you've paid €3k in tax already this year, that means you earned on average €550/week up to now (assuming you're PAYE).

Look, water charges are simple: You either pay for your water directly and get a better standard of water, or you have your income tax raised to pay for the same sh1te standard of water we've had for the last 40 years.

Your choice.

dont try to simplify it with nonsense that you have nothing to back up those comments on. There is absolutely NOTHING to indicate water quality or service will increase with its move into private hands. NOTHING.

So stop trying to 'simplify' things for 'simple' people. throw away comments like that nonsense mean nothing in reality.

listermint

seamus wrote: »

When you start insulting people rather than actually debating the issue, it becomes pretty clear that you've lost or you don't understand your own argument well enough to defend it.

Ironically, the protestors are in fact the ones who are resisting change and jumping down the necks of those attempting to change the system for the better.

Water charges are a better system than what we have at present. They move the cost of water provision to the user of that provision and put the water infrastructure into the hands of a national authority who will have both the power and the obligation to improve the infrastructure for all people.

Yet those protesting would rather higher taxes and a shoddy water infrastructure. Turkeys protesting in favour of Xmas.

Throughout the history of the state, Is there anything you can point to that is a shining example of what you have just said or is Irish Water another shining example of inept cronyism and literally farcical setup that is exemplified by its creation start to finish.


I take great offence with much of your so called debate and trying to simply matters for people here, When the facts of the matter is you have nothing to back up your statement. It has been demonstrated time and time and time again that irish water is full of Jobs for the boys, it has contractors for the boys and it had a serious attempt to exclude itself from the FOI act in this country.

Seamus, frankly i am disappointed that you firmly believe this company as it stands today is the answer to the ills we have in water infrastructure.

Im no lefty and im no righty, and i have no qualms in paying for water. But i will not pay Irish Water it is rotten to the core.

seamus

ozmo wrote: »

Just wondering - would threads or posts about Water protests be banned from discussing on this site?

Just- 100K+ people protesting in Dublin last week and more marches planned - all over other Irish web forums and usual social media and newspapers - only found some posts in the photography forums and this thread.

but near silence from RTE and very little debate here?

Very little debate here?

What do you think this thread is? And the other two threads on this forum? And the one on the politics forum?

One thing that you need to watch out for in your media & social media consumption is confirmation bias. If all of the people you know were at the march, then your facebook feed will be nothing but protests and from your point of view it looks like the world and their mother is up in arms about this.
By comparison, my feed is probably about one in ten people talking water metering, and even then I would say it's the "usual suspects" whom I expect to protest every charge without question. So from my point of view most people don't care about water charges except for a core group of career protesters.

The same lies true for the online news that you read and sites that your frequent; you're drawn to sources which more closely reflect your own personal feelings and tend to avoid ones which don't.

We're both wrong of course; there's an actual number of people for whom this is an important issue. But our individual online habits have skewed our perception of what this number actually is and made it look like it's more/less than it actually is.

seamus

listermint wrote: »

Throughout the history of the state, Is there anything you can point to that is a shining example of what you have just said or is Irish Water another shining example of inept cronyism and literally farcical setup that exemplified by its creation start to finish.

National Roads Authority.

Seamus, frankly i am disappointed that you firmly believe this company as it stands today is the answer to the ills we have in water infrastructure.

I never said it was the answer to all ills, and certainly there are plenty of questions about its inception. But at the moment is the better solution, and since we're already 90% down the road of setting this whole thing up, it makes more sense to finish this out and then hang those who filled their troughs, then to rip up what's been down and flush all of the money already spent down the toilet.

Those arguing that Irish Water shouldn't exist because it cost so much to set up is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

listermint

seamus wrote: »

National Roads Authority.

Is this the Same NRA that presided over the building of a Toll Bridge which cost an absolute 'fraction' of what we could have built it for ourselves. and sold it off to a PPP. the same bridge which was obsolete within a few years and then required a secondary bridge to be built again at farcical contract terms.

The same bridge which caused toll gate backlogs for years and was finally fitted with an open toll gantry system. and the same NRA who are still paying that same owners money back on the sale.

that NRA ?

Or is it some other NRA ? unsure..

seamus

listermint wrote: »

Is this the Same NRA that presided over the building of a Toll Bridge which cost an absolute 'fraction' of what we could have built it for ourselves. and sold it off to a PPP. the same bridge which was obsolete within a few years and then required a secondary bridge to be built again at farcical contract terms.

The same bridge which caused toll gate backlogs for years and was finally fitted with an open toll gantry system. and the same NRA who are still paying that same owners money back on the sale.

that NRA ?

Or is it some other NRA ? unsure..

Ah, the old "no true scotsman" fallacy.

Find me an example of anything anywhere in the world which has operated with absolute perfection.

Expecting me to provide an example of an authority which has never made a single mistake just goes to show how weak your argument is.

Anyone who would deny that the impact the NRA has made to quality of our road infrastructure during its existence is almost entirely beneficial (compared to what went before), is either living with their eyes closed or being deliberately argumentative. Explain to me how the NRA made the roads worse, or even explain to me how they made no difference at all.

Then give me a shining example of a country with decentralised and centrally tax-funded water provision.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

There is absolutely NOTHING to indicate water quality or service will increase with its move into private hands. NOTHING.

Really?

http://www.water.ie/news/proposed-capital-investme/

listermint

seamus wrote: »

National Roads Authority.
I never said it was the answer to all ills, and certainly there are plenty of questions about its inception. But at the moment is the better solution, and since we're already 90% down the road of setting this whole thing up, it makes more sense to finish this out and then hang those who filled their troughs, then to rip up what's been down and flush all of the money already spent down the toilet.

Those arguing that Irish Water shouldn't exist because it cost so much to set up is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I dont think any legitimate people are arguing that Seamus, frankly even Sinn Fein were for an Irish Water of some description.

But why should we not 'hang people out to dry' excuse the pun.

Why was the CEO chosen, with such a poor current (not historical) track record.

why were managers picked up from retirement from several countys again with massive holes in their planned budgets and failed projects left behind.

And jesus christ if you cant ask questions about Site Serv well there is something missing.

listermint

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Really?

http://www.water.ie/news/proposed-capital-investme/

Did you just link a proposed market speel !?!?

REALLY!

is that what you linked ?

Do you want me to pull our proposals and mandates pre-election from FG and Labour , both whom i voted for.

Is that what you would like ?

listermint

seamus wrote: »

Ah, the old "no true scotsman" fallacy.

Find me an example of anything anywhere in the world which has operated with absolute perfection.

Expecting me to provide an example of an authority which has never made a single mistake just goes to show how weak your argument is.

Anyone who would deny that the impact the NRA has made to quality of our road infrastructure during its existence is almost entirely beneficial (compared to what went before), is either living with their eyes closed or being deliberately argumentative. Explain to me how the NRA made the roads worse, or even explain to me how they made no difference at all.

Then give me a shining example of a country with decentralised and centrally tax-funded water provision.

I am sorry Seamus, you specifically indicated that by putting the infrastructure into Irish Waters hands that it would solve the problems. If that is not what you said then retract your original 'to put it simply' condescending post.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

Did you just link a proposed market speel !?!?

REALLY!

is that what you linked ?

Do you want me to pull our proposals and mandates pre-election from FG and Labour , both whom i voted for.

Is that what you would like ?

Why don't you post a coherent alternative plan for raising the €1.77 billion required to repair a chronically underfunded and antiquated system. While you're at it, the further several billion required to fund the system for future expansion beyond 2016.

If you do so you'll be the first anti-water charge protestor to do so - all others I've engaged with on social media have failed to do so.

seamus

listermint wrote: »

But why should we not 'hang people out to dry' excuse the pun.

I didn't say we shouldn't.
And while plenty of people are incensed about that, the majority are protesting water charges because they don't want to pay. I don't see anybody specifically protesting about how IW was set up, just protesting because it was set up.

I am sorry Seamus, you specifically indicated that by putting the infrastructure into Irish Waters hands that it would solve the problems. If that is not what you said then retract your original 'to put it simply' condescending post.

"Specifically". Look up the meaning of that word. I didn't specifically say anything. I pointed out that IW will have both the power and the mandate (enforced by the CER) to improve the infrastructure on a national scale, which is the better of the two solutions on the table.

I'm not entirely sure what you're arguing here. You seem to think that because we're unable to use a crystal ball to look into the future, then we shouldn't do anything, lest nothing improves.