**ALL THINGS IRISH WATER/WATER RELATED** Part 2 - MOD WARNING IN OP

Going Forward

I do not want to pay for water in any way

gladrags wrote: »

The rise of independents,and SF, are a good omen.

If the trend continues,with the three old corrupt parties losing their grip,it could mean real alternitaves could emerge.

There are definitely strong poll indications,on a consistent basis,that people have had enough.

The resistance to change by the supporters of the established corrupt parties,is essentially self centred,status quo,and fear and loathing.

Very little in the way of progressive democratic debate,or forwarding plans to end the corruption and cronyism.

Which is at the heart of the democratic demise,in society.

There is a crack in everything...thats how the light gets in.

What mainstream parties must now do is start employing some frankness and honesty to the electorate, and do it fast.

There's too much lies and spin and distrust, and it is all well earned.

The corporate garbage from Irish Water is being rejected wholesale by the public, no one trusts the entity, everything it states must be double checked for accuracy, the government has no authority on the matter.
Trust is gone, the brand image damaged beyond repair: cue rebranding.

What must come from the protests is some new engagement from people who never voted or took much interest in politics before now and start asking their local TDS some serious questions.

There will have to be some financial penalty system to deter parties from feeling it is ok to say that you must lie to get votes, after being elected.

Oh but we have democracy some will reply, but at this stage we need something with more independent oversight, because FG FF and Labour appear to be completely interchangeable, but no nation could either be run by a disparate group of independents.

Nor do I wish to see Sinn Fein in control.

They've earned a place in the North, but not yet in the South.

On the protests, for years the Irish have commended the French for not being afraid to protest over their grievances, times are beginning to change here to the way of peaceful mass protest, and not a minute too soon.

spaceHopper

I do not want to pay for water in any way

Back on the 23 of October I rang Irish water to let them know I hadn't gotten my water application back.
Girl on the phone tried to talk me into taking the application number and pin over the phone but I refused as I'm going to mark on the form that the data cannot be give to a third party.... I the end she said a pack would be in the post next week.

Today I called them again to say I hadn't gotten one and the poor girl on the line must have been having a hard time keeping a straight face when she told me "there is a back log sending them out" - they knew that there are about 1 million homes in Ireland and that each one had to be sent a pack. But yet they couldn't do the maths on how much work that is and get it right.

tayto lover

Red Pepper wrote: »

I am a high-income PAYE worker and I oppose Irish Water. The difference between me and you is I am not prepared to continually take it in the ass for a corrupt government of self serving wasters.

I'm in the same boat.
I also do not want to see my kids and grandkids suffering to make life cozy for some w****er who got the cream all his life because of his family's close relationship with FG or any other party.

Tony EH

I do not want to pay for water in any way

listermint wrote: »

My argument?

Clearly your new here.

I've been around a while.

Can afford to pay easily. Won't pay. I won't pay for Irish water. It's worse than the HSE. No lessons learned. Fine Gael took my vote and burned it failed on all the promises they gave me prior to power.

I'm in the top rate of tax and my money is being pissed up against a wall of chancers back handers long term failures and the term gets over used but is apt cronys.

Can afford to pay. Won't pay for that sham. They can swing for it.

Agreed completely.

I wouldn't complain if a meter was installed and I ONLY had to pay for what I used. The govt. can lower my income taxes further too. Frankly, if I was simply metered on what I used, I'd be paying out a lot less, I reckon as I have always been very conservative with my water usage.

However, I am NOT paying for John Tierney's (2nd? 3rd?) pension fund, or his fancy gym, or his car allowance, or his undeserved bonuses, or his outrageous salary.

Nor am I paying for any of the other cünts involved, no matter what they do. :mad:

I find it simply remarkable that ANYONE could defend Irish Water, after everything that has come out regarding them. I cannot help but have reservations about their honesty, integrity, motivation and intelligence.

We have had just too many years of political cronyism, backhanders, jobs for the boys in this country to simply let Irish Water slip by, because if people are pissed off at how much they have to pay for water now, the day will come when the rue the time they OK'd Irish Water as I can guarantee you the cost WILL go up and up. The initial bill proposals as they stand are already too high.

tayto lover

Barely There wrote: »

:rolleyes:

A bunch of economic illiterates and former terrorists.

Sure they'll have the budget deficit magicked away in jig time and we can all live happily ever after on the fruits of the money trees.

I'm not a SF person but i've seen the results of the bit in bold before and it wasn't done by SF in fairness.

mikemac1

jank wrote: »

Here is what is going to happen. Half the country gets free water and the other half have to pay for their own and others...

Already happens with travel passes

If you are a worker your annual ticket for Dublin Bus & Luas will be 1,550.

If you are a junkie on disability you travel for free

The free travel scheme was a good idea but it's gone way beyond what it was originally setup for. At least the new welfare cards are going to combat the battered pieces of cardboard that are currently out there, many of them fake. Eventually the welfare cards will go smart and can be scanned.

Tony EH

I do not want to pay for water in any way

Ace2007 wrote: »

So those who pay highest level of tax pay bigger proportion and those who don't pay tax don't pay anything?

So an unemployed family can use as much as they like and pay nothing

Whereas a single person paying top rate of tax is getting fleeced?

Fair?

You'll STILL be paying roughly the taxes AND you'll have a new bill on top, which will go up and up.

But if that'll make you less bitter, I'm sure that'll be grand. :rolleyes:

BTW, EVERYBODY pays taxes of some description.

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

At this stage I am somewhat lost in relation to the point of the protests, are people protesting because they don't want to pay for water, or are they happy to pay for water but are protesting about having to pay Irish Water for it?

It seems confusion like this in relation to the ultimate goal of the protesters will only diminish their ability to get a positive result.

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

Tony EH wrote: »

You'll STILL be paying roughly the taxes AND you'll have a new bill on top, which will go up and up.

But if that'll make you less bitter, I'm sure that'll be grand. :rolleyes:

BTW, EVERYBODY pays taxes of some description.

But not everybody uses their own money to pay taxes and then there is the issue that some people pay far more than others in terms of tax which raises the question of why do some people pay more for water than others.

gladrags

I do not want to pay for water in any way

Going Forward wrote: »

What mainstream parties must now do is start employing some frankness and honesty to the electorate, and do it fast.

There's too much lies and spin and distrust, and it is all well earned.

The corporate garbage from Irish Water is being rejected wholesale by the public, no one trusts the entity, everything it states must be double checked for accuracy, the government has no authority on the matter.
Trust is gone, the brand image damaged beyond repair: cue rebranding.

What must come from the protests is some new engagement from people who never voted or took much interest in politics before now and start asking their local TDS some serious questions.

There will have to be some financial penalty system to deter parties from feeling it is ok to say that you must lie to get votes, after being elected.

Oh but we have democracy some will reply, but at this stage we need something with more independent oversight, because FG FF and Labour appear to be completely interchangeable, but no nation could either be run by a disparate group of independents.

Nor do I wish to see Sinn Fein in control.

They've earned a place in the North, but not yet in the South.

On the protests, for years the Irish have commended the French for not being afraid to protest over their grievances, times are beginning to change here to the way of peaceful mass protest, and not a minute too soon.

I agree with most of what you say.

Alternitaves to the "norm" can only be good,irrespective of whether it is SF or inependents,or for example,a new party formed by independents,left or/and right.

The culture tolerated,and to a degree encouraged, by the electorate,that gave us corruption and cronyism,is difficult to overcome.

And as a lot of businesses,banks,and IW
for example,follow the same culture as the established parties,there is no room or stomach for alternitaves.

It upsets the "norm" of the last 70 years.

This crossed over to all sections of society.

To give but one example,their is one dedicated childrens hospital in the country.Built in the 1940/50's.

It serves people from all walks of life.

If you look at all the ghost buildings,and the financial buildings,running down the liffey from Busarus to the North Wall.

Why were there not three or four hospitals built,around the wealth of the tiger?

Corruption,and self interest,thats why.

tayto lover

geeksauce wrote: »

At this stage I am somewhat lost in relation to the point of the protests, are people protesting because they don't want to pay for water, or are they happy to pay for water but are protesting about having to pay Irish Water for it?

It seems confusion like this in relation to the ultimate goal of the protesters will only diminish their ability to get a positive result.

There are many reasons for the protests.

1. Another over-paid quango set up - I.W.
2. Blatant cronyism in setting it up. Jobs for the boys.
3. Arrogance of FG particularly Enda.
4. Inability to pay.
5. A tax too many.
6. Knowing it will rise considerably in time.
7. Don't believe water should be paid for.
8. Paying for water through other taxes already.
9. Denis O'Brien involved.
10. Wrong people getting the debt write-offs.

etc etc.

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

tayto lover wrote: »

There are many reasons for the protests.

1. Another over-paid quango set up - I.W.
2. Blatant cronyism in setting it up. Jobs for the boys.
3. Arrogance of FG particularly Enda.
4. Inability to pay.
5. A tax too many.
6. Knowing it will rise considerably in time.
7. Don't believe water should be paid for.
8. Paying for water through other taxes already.
9. Denis O'Brien involved.
10. Wrong people getting the debt write-offs.

etc etc.

Right so 150,000 people all protesting for different things, surely one clear message would be required in order to get the best possible result from the protest.

Tony EH

I do not want to pay for water in any way

geeksauce wrote: »

But not everybody uses their own money to pay taxes...

By that reckoning, they STILL won't be using "their own money" if they're paying a metered charge for water, so that point completely redundant.

The bottom line still remains that whingers complain about people unfortunate enough to find themselves on the dole not paying for water, are still going to be paying taxes AND a new bill.

The only thing changing is that they'll have a new bill to pay.

It's just such a tiresome non-point.

gladrags

I do not want to pay for water in any way

geeksauce wrote: »

Right so 150,000 people all protesting for different things, surely one clear message would be required in order to get the best possible result from the protest.

What clear message,would you suggest?

Daith

geeksauce wrote: »

Right so 150,000 people all protesting for different things, surely one clear message would be required in order to get the best possible result from the protest.

You're acting as if the protesters are just one group of people and not individuals who may have different ideas.


I thought all the protesters were tax dodging unemployed freeloaders? Easy to dismiss them when you group everyone like that.

Tony EH

I do not want to pay for water in any way

geeksauce wrote: »

Right so 150,000 people all protesting for different things, surely one clear message would be required in order to get the best possible result from the protest.

If you're looking to try and simplify it to one issue (although it's really not that difficult to understand), then, for 99% anyway, Irish Water is the lynchpin for everybody's motivation, once all the other issues are cleared.

Ace2007

tayto lover wrote: »

There are many reasons for the protests.

1. Another over-paid quango set up - I.W.
2. Blatant cronyism in setting it up. Jobs for the boys.
3. Arrogance of FG particularly Enda.
4. Inability to pay.
5. A tax too many.
6. Knowing it will rise considerably in time.
7. Don't believe water should be paid for.
8. Paying for water through other taxes already.
9. Denis O'Brien involved.
10. Wrong people getting the debt write-offs.

etc etc.

Which basically proves that it has little to do with water should be free for all, as certain groups are campaigning and claiming that the crowd are supporting.

Mia representation one could say

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

Tony EH wrote: »

By that reckoning, they STILL won't be using "their own money" if they're paying a metered charge for water, so that point completely redundant.

The bottom line still remains that whingers complain about people unfortunate enough to find themselves on the dole not paying for water, are still going to be paying taxes AND a new bill.

The only thing changing is that they'll have a new bill to pay.

It's just such a tiresome non-point.

No but developing a system whereby everybody pays for the water they use and pays the same amount for the water they use, we are at least guaranteed some level of fairness. As it stands now the higher earners are paying far more for their water than the lower earners.

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

Daith wrote: »

You're acting as if the protesters are just one group of people and not individuals who may have different ideas.


I thought all the protesters were tax dodging unemployed freeloaders? Easy to dismiss them when you group everyone like that.

Who grouped them like that?

It is possible to have a group of individuals with one common goal, i.e. get rid of Irish Water or get rid of Water Charges? But then I suppose having a wide ranging list of topics to protest over increases the numbers of people attending the protests which looks good at the outset but could ultimately undermine the protests when it comes to negotiations.

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

Tony EH wrote: »

If you're looking to try and simplify it to one issue (although it's really not that difficult to understand), then, for 99% anyway, Irish Water is the lynchpin for everybody's motivation, once all the other issues are cleared.

So 99% of people are protesting against the set up of Irish Water and would therefore be happy to pay water charges if they were paid to some other body.

tayto lover

geeksauce wrote: »

Right so 150,000 people all protesting for different things, surely one clear message would be required in order to get the best possible result from the protest.

Correct.
In my opinion all the problems have been rolled into one.
If they can stop IW they will be happy.
IW is the target especially as it's incompetent and filled with cronies. One in the mouth for Enda and Co. so to speak.

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

tayto lover wrote: »

Correct.
In my opinion all the problems have been rolled into one.
If they can stop IW they will be happy.
IW is the target especially as it's incompetent and filled with cronies. One in the mouth for Enda and Co. so to speak.

So people would be happy if Irish Water was abolished and Water Charges kept?

tayto lover

geeksauce wrote: »

So people would be happy if Irish Water was abolished and Water Charges kept?

Most of them imo.
Many still do not want water charges at all.
Those who would accept charges would want it kept low-cost.

I often wonder if a rise of 1 or 2% in VAT cover it. Maybe some of our economics people here could tell me.
It would mean everyone paying it.

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

tayto lover wrote: »

Most of them imo.
Many still do not want water charges at all.
Those who would accept charges would want it kept low-cost.

But that is where the confusion comes into it imo. At first I thought the protests were about trying to have the charges abolished now it appears that the protests are about trying to have Irish Water abolished, surely the organisers of the protests should have one clear goal in mind.

seamus

tayto lover wrote: »

Most of them imo.
Many still do not want water charges at all.
Those who would accept charges would want it kept low-cost.

It's pretty low-cost as it is.

I'm pretty sure if you asked people what a fair price for anything is, it's about 100% less than the current cost.

As time has gone on, this whole protest has morphed from "No water charges" to "I'll pay water charges, but not to Irish Water".

The latter conveniently ignoring the fact that without a water authority, there's no way to pay water charges. How do the protesters propose paying water charges without an authority? Oh no wait, they just want Irish water scrapped. So let's bin the hundreds of millions already spent and spend a few more hundred million setting up a new authority. Even if they put water charges on hold until they "fixed" Irish Water, do you think all of the protesters will turn around and start paying water charges? They will in their rings.

If they decided to put a hold on water charges while they got their house in order, the first thing the protesters would say is, "We've got them on the back foot lads, let's get water charges abolished!"

As with so many protests in Ireland, it lacks a coherent focus. You want Irish Water scrapped? Then what?

geeksauce

I would like Irish Water as a company to remain in it's current form

tayto lover wrote: »

Most of them imo.
Many still do not want water charges at all.
Those who would accept charges would want it kept low-cost.

I often wonder if a rise of 1 or 2% in VAT cover it. Maybe some of our economics people here could tell me.
It would mean everyone paying it.

An increase in VAT would be counter productive and would only have the SME's up in arms, asking every household in the country to pay for water through metered usage could ultimately lead to a reduction in the VAT rates which would be far more beneficial to the economy I would imagine.

323

I do not want to pay for water in any way

Barely There wrote: »

:rolleyes:

A bunch of economic illiterates and former terrorists.

Sure they'll have the budget deficit magicked away in jig time and we can all live happily ever after on the fruits of the money trees.

+1

Although IMO this has already gone way beyond IW.

Saddest thing of all is the the established political parties have had their head up their own A holes for so long they don't seem to get that IW is just the last straw.
They're totally out of touch and are effectively handing the country to Sinn Fein.
God help any middle income earners left in the country (the evil well off) in SF's socialist utopia.

Banjo String

I do not want to pay for water in any way

geeksauce wrote: »

But not everybody uses their own money to pay taxes and then there is the issue that some people pay far more than others in terms of tax which raises the question of why do some people pay more for water than others.

What

geeksauce wrote: »

Right so 150,000 people all protesting for different things, surely one clear message would be required in order to get the best possible result from the protest.

What about the 1m missing application packs?

tayto lover

seamus wrote: »

It's pretty low-cost as it is.

I'm pretty sure if you asked people what a fair price for anything is, it's about 100% less than the current cost.

As time has gone on, this whole protest has morphed from "No water charges" to "I'll pay water charges, but not to Irish Water".

The latter conveniently ignoring the fact that without a water authority, there's no way to pay water charges. How do the protesters propose paying water charges without an authority? Oh no wait, they just want Irish water scrapped. So let's bin the hundreds of millions already spent and spend a few more hundred million setting up a new authority. Even if they put water charges on hold until they "fixed" Irish Water, do you think all of the protesters will turn around and start paying water charges? They will in their rings.

If they decided to put a hold on water charges while they got their house in order, the first thing the protesters would say is, "We've got them on the back foot lads, let's get water charges abolished!"

As with so many protests in Ireland, it lacks a coherent focus. You want Irish Water scrapped? Then what?

It is at that stage now though.
It should have been left with the Co Councils in my opinion.
Also don't discount the other reasons.

323

I do not want to pay for water in any way

tayto lover wrote: »

Most of them imo.
Many still do not want water charges at all.
Those who would accept charges would want it kept low-cost.

I often wonder if a rise of 1 or 2% in VAT cover it. Maybe some of our economics people here could tell me.
It would mean everyone paying it.

We are already paying for these services since 1997, 2% hike on VAT and 5% hike to motor tax to fund domestic water & disposal of domestic sewage

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (FINANCIAL PROVISIONS) ACT, 1997

"...THE POWER OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO MAKE
CHARGES FOR THE SUPPLY OF WATER FOR DOMESTIC
PURPOSES OR FOR THE DISPOSAL OF DOMESTIC
SEWAGE, TO ENABLE STEPS TO BE TAKEN FOR
THE PURPOSE OF SECURING THE PROVISION BY
LOCAL AUTHORITIES OF SERVICES IN A MORE
ECONOMICAL AND EFFICIENT MANNER,..."