cgcsb wrote: » the_pen_turner wrote: » that sounds great. when I was in Sweden we were in the middle of nowhere (or seemed like it) . all the hedges were neatly cut back and there was a separate footpath along the roads on both sides. why cant we have similar. Extreme taxation. Norway has oil wealth also.
the_pen_turner wrote: » that sounds great. when I was in Sweden we were in the middle of nowhere (or seemed like it) . all the hedges were neatly cut back and there was a separate footpath along the roads on both sides. why cant we have similar.
the_pen_turner wrote: » We have oil too . But we gave it all away
Macy0161 wrote: » It's not zero cost though - own well, own water treatment system, all running off paid for electricity, whilst still paying for water and waste water through that VAT increase way back, and general taxation (as we've been told so often in the last few years). There's also potentially other cost savings such as being on hand to help with elderly parents who would be more reliant on state services or support etc.
FreudianSlippers wrote: » The irony in rural Ireland objecting to wind turbines is that they could be lowering the cost of electricity in rural Ireland by having the turbines.
bk wrote: » It is only more affordable because you aren't paying the real cost of it. You aren't paying the real cost of the electricity, broadband, road maintenance to your one off. They are all highly subsidised for you by those who live in urban areas (including your close by town). Would it still be as affordable if you were asked to pay the real cost of these services like you are in Germany? And why should folks in urban areas be subsiding it?
LeinsterDub wrote: » http://www.daft.ie/wexford/houses-for-sale/castlebridge/27-woodview-castlebridge-wexford-1494345/ 4 bed , 2 bath. 195K. Your self build is hardly going to be much cheaper than that
cgcsb wrote: » That's the key problem the system is set up to artificially inflate the cost of urban living while subsidizing the cost of rural living. A rebalancing would solve the issue, let eir charge more for their more expensive rural services, impose a septic tank charge and stop placing ridiculous height limits and apartment specs in urban areas.
bk wrote: » Just on this point, it is almost as expensive to deliver 5mb/s BB as it is to deliver 100mb/s The biggest cost in telcos is by far labour and getting a guy to install the cable. Once the cable is in place it is pretty cheap and easy to replace the DSLAM at the end of the line for faster BB. A 1km run of cable in an urban area might serve hundreds if not thousands of homes, while in rural Ireland it might serve just a handful of homes, thus a much higher cost per home.BB in rural Ireland is heavily subsidised by urban Ireland. It is one of the mean reasons why we have one of the most expensive BB's in the world. Eir has asked Comreg if it would allow them to charge more for rural BB, to reflective the real cost of delivering BB in rural Ireland.
LeinsterDub wrote: » Ironically rural Ireland is being killed by the one off housing / road frontage brigade. The same people who are complaining about this plan.
Deleted User wrote: » What in terms of figures would be the difference within Germany. As I said I would consider living in nearby villages or towns but the trade off is too much. How much more do you want me to pay for electricity? Why is it all stick (make me pay more) and no carrot (make the alternative more affordable)?
bk wrote: » BTW In Germany you can only build new one off houses within 1km of a town or village. In other words within walking distance of the town/village. This policy has stopped the one off development you see in Ireland and has helped German towns and villages to actually grow and expand, rather then die like you see in Ireland.
blanch152 wrote: » the_pen_turner wrote: » We have oil too . But we gave it all away What oil?
blanch152 wrote: » We need to be cost effective.
the_syco wrote: » We have oil along the coasts, but no means to get it. AFAIK, the company that rents the drills only rents said drills to companies. Fcuk shale drilling; that gets oil and gas, but the price to the environment is not worth it.
Needles73 wrote: » What kind of nonsense are you on about....."the company that rents the drills...". we have no proven oil reserve or commercially viable oil producing reservoir at this time.
Deleted User wrote: » That looks like great value but isn't comparable to the price of housing around me next to Galway city.
the_pen_turner wrote: » the diference is that sweden has high tax rates but they get a lot back from that in services. here most of it is wasted
Shurimgreat wrote: » I wish people would move away from this subsidised thing. Its a huge grey area
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » The only thing that will save rural Ireland is twofold: the introduction of fibre-quality (not necessarily actual fibre) broadband, and an actual transition to acceptance of remote working. If you work in IT, for example, you'd loathe living outside Dublin because of the lack of employment opportunity choices. Bizarrely IT is still reluctant to allow remote working despite the positives of having some peace an quiet to actually get on with programming. So the real hold-back is the inability of slow broadband to measure up to the equivalent of being in the office. It'll happen eventually. Just like in Sci-fi movies, when I can do the equivalent of a meeting where I can virtually be in the middle of a meeting, and not just looking at a webcam picture, then there'll be no rationale for holding up remote working. So I think rural broadband is as important as the rural electrification scheme in the early days of the state. Not just for the benefit of Rural communities but also to take the pressure off commute choked Dublin and other cities.
CatInABox wrote: » A lot of companies are pulling back on the work from home thing, Yahoo and IBM are two that have drastically cut back in recent years. Right or wrong, they see a lot of resentment built up in staff who stay in the office, as they feel that they're picking up the slack.
markodaly wrote: » Oh, this myth again....