nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

We already pay for water

Phat Dick

That was the most annoying sentence from anti water charges people

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

bellylint

super, well done, you have an opinion and no better place for it than on the internet. Provide some rational and you might get a discussion or did you just want to vent... this is AH after all

branie2

Back it up

ShadyAcres

Phat Dick wrote: »

That was the most annoying sentence from anti water charges people

And?

Pacifico

No it's was...my car tax pays for my water

[Deleted User]

branie2 wrote: »

Back it up

Id rather say "Let it go"

donegaLroad

Phat Dick wrote: »

That was the most annoying sentence from anti water charges people

'If petrol was coming out of the taps, we wouldn't be buying it in bottles...'

no wait, that was a comment about the launch of Ballygowan water.

Your Face

I don't get it.
Why would someone willingly agree to give away their money without a fight?
Its so weak willed.

Atlantic Dawn

Well who paid for it pre the charges, Willy Wonka?

Fighting Tao

Phat Dick wrote: »

That was the most annoying sentence from anti water charges people

Hi Phil Hogan.

baylah17

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Well who paid for it pre the charges, Willy Wonka?

The billions we borrowed each year I suppose

Hitman3000

baylah17 wrote:

The billions we borrowed each year I suppose

Nah it doesn't cost billions to supply water.

Edward M

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Nah it doesn't cost billions to supply water.

It does.

Tom Mann Centuria

Not a great thread, but I'm worried about chore sex guy, he's late.

Edit: oh no, I missed him didn't I? Heartbroken.

Jawgap

"Are you on your oath, Guard" was another gem.

Along with, on one occasion, "Hands up, don't shoot" (around the time of Ferguson) while they were walking towards four Guards lounging against a squad car.

Jawgap

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Not a great thread, but I'm worried about chore sex guy, he's late.

Edit: oh no, I missed him didn't I? Heartbroken.

Ah no......missed him too. Bloody mods seem to be getting quicker off the mark

Hitman3000

Edward M wrote:

It does.

It doesn't, when FG were pushing charges the figure put out was just over a billion to supply water needs. An article in the Times from 2014. Most up to date I could find although I remember Coveney suggesting a figure of 1.5/1.6 billion. So still not billions.

Fanny Wank

Bunch of net benefactors of the state shouting "I already pay for water"

The irony was not lost on me

I also learned that one can do anything as long as they say "peaceful protest" first

railer201

Update - We pay for water.

Zebra3

The main reason Irish Water was set up was to accommodate the future privatisisation of our water supply.

Yet this seems to have gone over so many people’s heads.

spindex

Zebra3 wrote: »

The main reason Irish Water was set up was to accommodate the future privatisisation of our water supply.

Yet this seems to have gone over so many people’s heads.

True story

Sky King

I just make my own with tanks of hydrogen and oxygen.

railer201

Sky King wrote: »

I just make my own with tanks of hydrogen and oxygen.

Bright spark. ???

arayess

Phat Dick wrote: »

That was the most annoying sentence from anti water charges people

sorry about that but given I pay 50% plus of my income - and fcuking employers PRSI too boot for my staff - I'm a little annoyed on the matter.
That much tax should cover basic services.

Yet the public services I receive are similar to a low tax economy.
I get f all health benefits - pay a fortune on health insurance and as a company owner I have no dole entitlement.

The governments role is to balance the books...they don't.
They have largesse and less important things they spunk my cash on.
Change that and then lets talk

We all know why this is ...we are paying the bank debt but the government and tbh few of the opposition will ever come out and say
"lads , you need to pay for more stuff despite the high taxes because of the bank debt...sorry" . treat people with some respect.
It all boils down to bank debt imo...

Fanny **** wrote: »

Bunch of net benefactors of the state shouting "I already pay for water"

The irony was not lost on me

I also learned that one can do anything as long as they say "peaceful protest" first

I earn and pay tax....I was there at several marches ,.what's your point again? Although I never said "peaceful protest".

[Deleted User]

Phat Dick wrote: »

That was the most annoying sentence from anti water charges people

Shame, shame, shame on you. Peaceful protest. Midget parasite.

Wheeliebin30

We're on hunger strike.

An hour later munching on cirrus chips.

branie2

Deleted User wrote: »

Shame, shame, shame on you. Peaceful protest. Midget parasite.

Heavy handed

S. Goodspeed

Hitman3000 wrote: »

It doesn't, when FG were pushing charges the figure put out was just over a billion to supply water needs. An article in the Times from 2014. Most up to date I could find although I remember Coveney suggesting a figure of 1.5/1.6 billion. So still not billions.

That’s assuming we only want water for one year I guess...?

Guy:Incognito

S. Goodspeed wrote: »

That’s assuming we only want water for one year I guess...?

And none of the infrastructure needs reparing/upgrading and no new buildings are built that need a supply.

Avatar MIA

arayess wrote: »

sorry about that but given I pay 50% plus of my income - and fcuking employers PRSI too boot for my staff - I'm a little annoyed on the matter.

You'd have to be earning approx €660,000 per year to be paying more than 50% of your income on tax. So, well done you. But, do you really have to complain about another few hundred euro?

I suspect you mean you pay a marginal tax rate of over 50%. It sucks, I know. But you and I are the very ones that should be in favour of a water charge. Because, and as you pay the higher marginal rate you've obviously got some intelligence, you know there's a relatively fixed cost to running the state including supply of water. And if there's not a universal charge then it's going to fall on those paying income tax.

So, that's either you and I paying more Income Tax or not receiving a greater tax reduction.

So, what do we want UNIVERSAL WATER CHARGES!, when do we want them, ACTUALLY LAST YEAR WAS QUITE A GOOD TIME, THANK YOU.

suicide_circus

Your Face wrote: »

I don't get it.
Why would someone willingly agree to give away their money without a fight?
Its so weak willed.

Because they understand the concept of investing in infrastructure,promoting conservation and civic responsibility?