Lunchtime Live with Ciara Kelly [Mod warning post #1]

Deleted User wrote: »

this is pure rubbish today, like a phone in agony aunt slot.....

this guy saying he is 55, surplus to requirements, its always been that way, nothing to offer, on invalidity pension. I know that man could be depressed but this isnt very uplifting radio. ……..and Ciara saying he "amazes" her? Why? (maybe I missed something?) I think 55 is young, so much living still to do, so many opportunities these days to grab life and start again!
next caller saying how hard and isolating life is as a smoker...……. not topics most people can relate to or get engaged with. This is becoming like the Joe Duffy Show!

The Late Late Show, Ray D'arcy Show, are all becoming one big whingefest, sad stories, cancer, terminal illness. Am I out of step or is this the new entertainment, hearing other people's hard life stories? A lot of people need counselling and support but the national airways aren't where its found.

I honestly don't know are you taking the p*ss with this comment or not.

Seriously? Have you read this thread or do you just come in to post when something annoys you (as you have said you do) and then leave.

Breaking News. Someone on the internet is constantly annoyed and today it is the fact that other people seem constantly annoyed which annoys them.

Thank you. That's enough internet for me today.

they would probably be right- how she got on Virgin media is beyond me - her and Matt well suited

Does she still practice medicine?

Did her media work start from her weekly slot on George Hook's show or did she write for the Sindo before that?

meeeeh wrote: »

She doesn't practice medicine anymore. I don't know what started first (I don't read Indo or Sindo) but I know she mentioned once that parent of her child's schoolmate asked he to write an article about something and the writing continued from there.

Ah yeah that sounds familiar, thanks.

Del.Monte wrote: »

I don't read the chip wrapper either. Does she having anything to say or is she writing there because she's just part of the meeja golden circle?

Never read it and never plan to, the two hours inflicted daily by my employers is enough without reading her at the weekend.

Boyd Barrett is a flute.

Talking out through both sides of his mouth is his party piece ( pun intended ) .

Ah come on everyone will whinge about paying for property tax and how they don't earn enough, that is just in human nature. People who have to pay rents are a lot more affected, their monthly increases are comparable to what yearly increase in property tax would be. Property owners have it a lot easier, we own an asset and property tax is basically a wealth tax. I'm not going into what our house value is but it was valued cheaply when the house prices were at the bottom. Property tax is a stable tax, not dependent on boom bust cycles, it would make a lot of sense to increase it at the time of economic growth to build some sort of a buffer before Brexit. I certainly wouldn't rely on corporation or income tax. They are just buying the votes because the election is looming. It seems nobody remembers the bust anymore and what over reliance on very variable taxes did to the public finances.

Ciara Kelly's arguments were completely valid.

meeeeh wrote:

Means testing would similarly as income tax affect middle income earners. Frankly if people can afford a house they should be able to afford property tax. Broad tax base is needed. And btw tax is means tested by the value of your property.

It's not right that an OAP in a mid terrace house in Donnycarny can pay more property tax than a large six bedroom one off house in Cavan.

I'm all in favour of property tax (& water charges) but the present setup is not a fair setup. House size should be included in the calculation & not just house valuation.

meeeeh wrote: »

Local authorities can already charge less or more than it's set up by the government. Frankly whenever people start wheeling out OAPs as the most vulnerable category I stop listening to the argument. The same OAP will have transport cost covered and will have a lot better transport, their medical cost will be covered, as far as I kmow there are other subsidies. The oap is sitting on a nice expensive asset with a lot more amenities than six bed in Cavan where most likely they have to pay for their own sevage, water well and install their own oil/gas tank or whatever source of heating they have. They have no public transport, footpaths or lighting. Local property tax pays for local amenities, why should people with a lot less pay more.

People pay for the privilege to live in expensive neighbourhoods because they have more amenities. Property tax reflects that. I really don't see what the issue is. It's typical bs socialist mentality where we agree with taxes as long as other people pay them not us.

In bold isn't true. Councils can charge the full amount or less. They can not charge more than the government set up.



The OAP you saying living in a nice expensive asset is living in a tiny ex council house that is around 80 years old now. It's mid terrace with toilet downstairs. This was fancy at the time it was built as older houses had the outhouse. The six bed house in Cavan could be on an acre of land with stables. You are not comparing like with like. The newly built cavan house will be fully insulated & cost hundreds per year less to heat. Jasus the stables will be better insulated than some old Dublin homes.



I have a major issue with the excess collected in Dublin going to councils not charging their residents the full amount. It is very wrong that these councils can reduce the amount they charge knowing that ripped off homeowners in Dublin will pick up the slack. The whole setup needs looking at. House & land size needs to be taken into account aswell as property value. Someone in a massive house on it's own plot of land should not be paying less than a tiny mid terrace house anywhere in the country