Proposed "Free" Water Allowances

Avns1s wrote: »

If we could just put out buckets and collect the rainwater and expert it then there is a certain logic to what you say. However, you should now that its not that simple.

We have to have equipment for pumping, storing, treating, etc. and all of these are subject to intense regulations and not cheap.

I am sure you don't just want rainwater from the streets, roofs and pavements, being sent to your kitchen sink for any purpose, not least for drinking.

Come on thats not what I mean. In Ireland it is very cheap compared to other countries to collect and distribute water as water is easy to collect and store in reservoirs close to demand. We have a high proportion of rain days so supply is always there.

Therefore is not a scarce resource.

If I was charged for water, I would demand a proper supply (proper pressure) and drinkable. As I dont have a proper supply why should I pay extra for the service.

Again imo the only reason you should meter water is to detect and stop leaks.

Im sure people will say that paying for water will insure that they invest in water infrastructure. Well based on the past, this will never happen and the money will go into the general tax pot so it is pointless to charge for water, just increase PAYE instead and stop trying to increase tax by the back door.

Macha wrote: »

Do you think the water that comes through your taps is the same quality as rain water? Can you provide some figures to back up the claim that we are "very cheap" compared to other countries? This is something I doubt very much considering our low density population.


The system needs investment. Past generations haven't done it - you're stuck making up for it. That's life. But as for quality, if you read the EPA drinking water reports, you'll see that over 97% of public drinking water supplies are perfectly above standard.

Why shouldn't people who use more pay more?

Then there is no incentive for consumers to use water efficiently. Imagine if all electricity were free.

The main reason that im against water metering is that the money obtained will not be used to upgrade the water system.

I dont want to be paying for water when on any hot/cold period in Dublin I dont have any.

People here seem to think the once we charge for water suddenly the government will fully upgrade the supply and we will have a world class water infrastructure.

It will be exactly the same a road tax.

seamus wrote: »

We do? How often does it rain in Ireland, on average? How much water can we realistically harvest from rain, per capita/year?

These are the questions you must be able to answer before you can assert that water is somehow simple to collect and not finite. Note that you said water is not scarce. Nobody said it was. But it is finite, and all water however it's collected, costs money to process and move about.

What we do at the moment basically is collect rainwater in reservoirs and lakes and process it. We're lucky that we're one of the few countries with no reliance on desalinisation of seawater to collect our water.

So basically what you're saying is that in order to avoid water charges all we have to do is....build more reservoirs. With what, exactly? It's a chicken and egg scenario. If collection is managed by local authorities, then the funding can go back into the water infrastructure, and water infrastructure improves. Note the "if", as others have said.

http://www.askaboutireland.ie/reading-room/environment-geography/environmental-information/water/water-in-ireland/

What im saying is that the revenue gathered from metering water will not be used for water infrastructure so what's the point.

This is just a general tax. Just put another 1% on PAYE instead and save all the money it would cost in installing, servicing, billing and reading water meters.

dmclean1842 wrote: »

http://www.askaboutireland.ie/reading-room/environment-geography/environmental-information/water/water-in-ireland/

What im saying is that the revenue gathered from metering water will not be used for water infrastructure so what's the point.

This is just a general tax. Just put another 1% on PAYE instead and save all the money it would cost in installing, servicing, billing and reading water meters.

1% on PAYE really only has an impact on the higher earners in society, so the people who are generally wasting the most water really still don't care in the slightest.

dmclean1842 wrote: »

Ok increase the 20% income tax rate to 21%. Will that get everyone? Use that to pay for the water infrastructure.

Im in favour in installing meter or meter like devices to fix supply side leaks but think this should be taken off general taxation.

Why another state agency? why?

I agree. Honestly, I'm libertarian... I say drop 90% of the government. If we want good water we need a private company.


*won't do anything to our large number of people on the dole!

I think that FreudianSlippers represents the real thinking behind water charges and metering.

It is not a "green" agenda at all. It is an agenda that suits privatisation, and suits those who assume that the lower classes care less about wasting water than do their social betters.

dmclean1842 wrote: »

Ok increase the 20% income tax rate to 21%. Will that get everyone? Use that to pay for the water infrastructure.

Why? Do high-earners use more water than dole recipients? This isn't like the Defense budget, you can quantify who is using the resource. The government already levees fuel that you get at the pump. If they taxed Income instead of petrol for road and motor improvements, traffic and emissions safety, Or whatever it is that revenue gets injected into, how would that be fair to a pedestrian? Why bother putting a levee on anything at all? Just raise income tax and leave cigarettes, alcohol, cars, etc. alone, right? That seems fair doesn't it? Only it's not.

Boulevardier wrote:

Overheal, why the hell should I pay more when I am already paying a substantial amount for my meds? There are thousands of people with similar problems to mine. For their sake, you will have to come up with a less complacent and more compassionate answer than the one you have given.

And you pay for the meds, don't you? They aren't all given to you free, the costs aren't all taken out of everyone's tax. People in good health pay less in health expenses than those in poorer health. Similarly those who use more water should logically be spending more on water. I'm sorry if that's not the answer you're looking for but I'm not a fan of pulling punches. If it's a concern for you can you not install a well to operate your toilets?

dmclean1842 wrote: »

Everyone needs water thats why a 1% increase here would be ok.

A 1% tax on the 20% bracket effects everyone paying tax roughly equally not just high earners.

Not everyone drives or smokes.

A water tax is a consumption tax. A 1% increase on income tax would mean that a person earning €60,000 would pay more for their water than somebody earning €30,000 (if water were the reason for the tax increase.)

I got my water for €300 a year, you have to pay €600 for the same service. Hardly fair, unless you get to have twice as long a shower in the morning.

Nijmegen wrote: »

A water tax is a consumption tax. A 1% increase on income tax would mean that a person earning €60,000 would pay more for their water than somebody earning €30,000 (if water were the reason for the tax increase.)

I got my water for €300 a year, you have to pay €600 for the same service. Hardly fair, unless you get to have twice as long a shower in the morning.

Tax the rich to benefit the poor, is that not the point of our taxation policy. Why change it now.

If you break down tax that way. All the tax we pay can be view as consumption.

dmclean1842 wrote: »

Tax the rich to benefit the poor, is that not the point of our taxation policy. Why change it now.

If you break down tax that way. All the tax we pay can be view as consumption.

Well, that's a different debate. Raise income tax from 30% (as it is) to 50% effective (Germany), and you hit everyone, and get diminished returns from lack of spending, confidence, and the fact that a lot of folks would just move somewhere else.

Anyway, a water tax is consumption based. Income taxes are not. I pay much more tax than a person who claims social welfare, despite having never (touch wood) in my working life taken a cent from it. I pay but I don't consume.

BrianD wrote: »

Nearly all the water usage that you describe here does not have to come from the mains water system.

You could set up a rainwater system to collect water from your roof that would cover all the above. There would be an initial capital outlay and it does depend on your dwelling type and site specific criteria.

Of course, during dry spells your rain water reserve will run low so you will need to switch to mains.

Actually I would prefer to use mains water for most of the above.
Say the crow sitting on your roof had a curry last night:D, would you fancy using that harvested water for anything other than flushing your loo, I don't think so. The only realistic use for harvested water is flushing the loo, and don't forget if it's stored for long periods it can become rank, adding to costs, to rectify this.
Quite frankly sensible usage is the key, full loads of washing and dishes, dual flush loos, and no washing the car or lawn.
BTW if they produce 1 million litres and lose half of it in the ground (most leakage is almost certainly on the supply side) and rig the billing to cover this cost, then no matter what they say you are paying for the water you do not get. In fact if they recoup all of this cost then there is actually no incentive to fix leaks. Fixing leaks has to have a carrot and stick approach, charging for something to recoup costs only does not do this and only maintains the status quo.

"Well, that's a different debate. Raise income tax from 30% (as it is) to 50% effective (Germany), and you hit everyone, and get diminished returns from lack of spending, confidence, and the fact that a lot of folks would just move somewhere else"

Nijmegen, that is nonsense. If that is true, why have Germans not emigrated in droves? I cannot believe that there are still people out there who are arguing against our having higher income tax on the better off. The arguments against it are patently bogus.

Anyway, I think that if this thread has shown anything, it has shown prety clearly that water metering has a lot more to do with outdated and discredited neoliberalism that it has to do with the environment.

Boulevardier wrote: »

"Well, that's a different debate. Raise income tax from 30% (as it is) to 50% effective (Germany), and you hit everyone, and get diminished returns from lack of spending, confidence, and the fact that a lot of folks would just move somewhere else"

Nijmegen, that is nonsense. If that is true, why have Germans not emigrated in droves? I cannot believe that there are still people out there who are arguing against our having higher income tax on the better off. The arguments against it are patently bogus.

Anyway, I think that if this thread has shown anything, it has shown prety clearly that water metering has a lot more to do with outdated and discredited neoliberalism that it has to do with the environment.

Firstly, you can't simply raise income taxes on the 'better off' - you raise tax on everyone, and the better off simply pay most of all.

If you want a German style system that's fine, but you introduce it slowly - an overnight jump of 66% in income taxes across the board (from 30% to 50%) would kill the economy stone dead.

It's an argument about what kind of a state you want to live in: A moderate tax one like Ireland, where we all (on average) pay 30%, or Germany where we all (on average) pay 50%, and get service provision to match. Do you want to earn less but have the government provide more, or earn more and spend it yourself?

I'd rather spend it myself thank you, and I felt the same when I entered the workforce at 15 without an arse in my trousers as I do now, after being successful. (There was, by the by, a time when Ireland had income taxes like Germany: The '70's and 80's. We got as high as 60%.)

Water metering is, in the end, another step to plug our deficit and meet the targets set by our lenders. I agree it has bugger all to do with ecological water management.