Are you going to pay the household charge? [Part 1]

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 8:40am

black francis wrote: »

No, it's actually an attempt to close the gap between what we're spending and what we're earning.
You can mention German banks as much as you like, the reality is we need to adjust our internal budget.
Tax increases, reductions in public spending and hopefully growth will achieve this.
You can howl at the moon about the unfairness of it all.
The rest of us shall attempt to pick up the pieces.

Nope. Closing the primary surplus would be a dawdle for a serious patriotic democratic Government.

The mess your Regime leaves won't be so easy to tidy; we'll need to separate debt form the German Bank scam - for repudiation purposes.

And I doubt your Regime will be around to do that

(I see Weird Al is sneaking around his "ignore" policy by hiding behind your tattered skirt. I miss nothing

)

btw - you are most unlikely to find my protesting at "unfairness", nevermind howling at the moon about it. Life is unfair. This is about defending democracy, not unfairness.

I leave the weepy stuff to others.

alastair · 24-03-2012 8:48am

phil1nj wrote: »

Right so the wealth they have accumulated in their house now becomes meaningless because they can't pay....now that's an amazing u-turn on what you've been saying along about a property tax being a tax on wealth . Please tell me how you can square that circle? Could they not rent out a room in their house to supplement their income? After all they have the potential to do so ? Or do you think it's fair to start tweaking the property tax rules to accommodate peiple like your folks who are lucky enough to own their own property? Paid for with cash that was actual wealth over the course if many years?

No need to square any circle - the point about renting a room was to demonstrate that the notion that you could only access revenue out of your house at point of sale was incorrect. It has no bearing on the value of a property. Ability to pay is a standard criteria taken into account in property taxes everywhere - as has been previously discussed. The waivers for the tiered system haven't been defined yet, but would obviously factor in ability to pay (as the costs move beyond the affordable to most €100 a year). It may transpire that those unable to pay, but with valuable property will have offsets applied until the sale of the property - we just don't know yet.

Frank Black · 24-03-2012 8:53am

Wild Bill wrote: »

Nope. Closing the primary surplus would be a dawdle for a serious patriotic democratic Government.

The mess your Regime leaves won't be so easy to tidy; we'll need to separate debt form the German Bank scam - for repudiation purposes.

And I doubt your Regime will be around to do that

(I see Weird Al is sneaking around his "ignore" policy by hiding behind your tattered skirt. I miss nothing )

btw - you are most unlikely to find my protesting at "unfairness", nevermind howling at the moon about it. Life is unfair. This is about defending democracy, not unfairness.

I leave the weepy stuff to others.

Oh, you're back to believing we live in a democracy now?

You really need to try to keep your story straight.

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 8:53am

alastair wrote: »

If you've a gaff worth over €300k it looks like you could be paying that in a year or two alright. But did you think we could keep borrowing for year after year?

"We"?

Why should someone with 'a gaff worth over 300k' be repaying the debts of you and your banker pals?

So....lemme sum up Al's position: he wants you to pay for his gambling debts 'cos if you put him and you together you get "we". :rolleyes:

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 8:58am

black francis wrote: »

Oh, you're back to believing we live in a democracy now?

You really need to try to keep your story straight.

Nope. I said "defending democracy" not defending this democracy which expired after the last election. Ask yer pal Al - I'll root out his posts clearly stating that this country "isn't a democracy".

Made a big fuss about that so he did. But then, like you are now about to do, he got a bit out of his depth in the ensuing melee and fled the field. To mix some metaphors

Frank Black · 24-03-2012 9:00am

Wild Bill wrote: »

Nope. I said "defending democracy" not defending this democracy which expired after the last election. Ask yer pal Al - I'll root out his posts clearly stating that this country "isn't a democracy".

Made a big fuss about that so he did. But then, like you are now about to do, he got a bit out of his depth in the ensuing melee and fled the field. To mix some metaphors

Who's democracy are you defending then?

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:02am

alastair wrote: »

No need to square any circle ...yad yada

Lads, I see there are only two of you logged in at the mo. Would ye not be wiser to wait for reinforcements?

Two to one is hardly "fair" odds is? Yer bow'n'arrows a match for my Uzi? :rolleyes:

My loins are girded - defeat here is gonna be rather humiliating for ye - no fog to hide in.

Frank Black · 24-03-2012 9:07am

Wild Bill wrote: »

Lads, I see there are only two of you logged in at the mo. Would ye not be wiser to wait for reinforcements?

Two to one is hardly "fair" odds is? Yer bow'n'arrows a match for my Uzi? :rolleyes:

My loins are girded - defeat here is gonna be rather humiliating for ye - no fog to hide in.

You do realise that repeatedly stating you've won the argument, doesn't make it true?

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:08am

black francis wrote: »

Who's democracy are you defending then?

Democracy is a concept; the problems start when people like you and the current Regime start to claim they own it.

I'm defending democracy, like a million other householders. Read a very good article by Martina Devlin in yesterday's Indo explaining how Big Phil can't claim to be a democrat.

When even the Indo can see it :eek: - the game is up for the current Regime and their illegitimate extortion.

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:09am

black francis wrote: »

You do realise that repeatedly stating you've won the argument, doesn't make it true?

It's true whether I repeatedly state it or not.

Wibbs · 24-03-2012 9:10am

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Been reading this thread the last few days. The arguement from the yes camp is that our €100 goes back into services in the community. I live outside a small village. There is no street lighting where i live, i pay for my own waste disposal from a private operater like my neighbours do. I don't have kids but there is a playground on the village, paid for thru fundraising that was done by the community themselves. So i fail to see what "services" we would all be getting from our €100. And Fergus O Dowd wasn't very convincing on the LLS telling us that he has kids and he was paying it and we were all in it together blah blah blah... This guy is on over 100 grand a year and i have to live on the minimun wage. If it was like Britain and we were getting good services for our money then fair enough but realistically we could all pay it and we would get F*** all in return for it. That's the reality.

That's the issue I have. I already pay for my electricity, gas, telephone, telly and pay for my refuse collection(and healthcare). I pay car tax to use the road and I'll happily pay a water charge for the production of my fresh water. A friend of mine who bought his own house(before the boom) paid for connection charges for his services which ran into the thousands, never mind the stamp duty which ran into the many thousands and never mind the many thousands he's paid and continues to pay in taxes associated with his mortgage. Now he, me and others are asked for more? For the local councils? My local council are about much use as tits on a bull and I'm living in the big schmoke.

OK we're broke? Streamline local councils, make them more efficient, reduce or stop the half billion euro a year that goes to overseas charity, reduce/streamline the costs involved with the arts/Irish language stuff. Thats before you look at streamlining the public service to remove the non jobs for the idiot sons of idiot sons. You'd save at least a billion with that lot. Of course that will barely register with the gombeen men and women.

I dunno we Irish are a strange lot. Drop us anywhere else in the world and we've built nations. Our private sector business men and women are bloody good(again mostly overseas), we have a wealth of talent out there going to waste and again going overseas, yet as far as governance and organisation in this country, we're like some tired old english comedians Paddy joke.

Frank Black · 24-03-2012 9:12am

Wild Bill wrote: »

Democracy is a concept; the problems start when people like you and the current Regime start to claim they own it.

I'm defending democracy, like a million other householders. Read a very good article by Martina Devlin in yesterday's Indo explaining how Big Phil can't claim to be a democrat.

When even the Indo can see it :eek: - the game is up for the current Regime and their illegitimate extortion.

Oh, you're defending the democracy we lost?

Would you not be better fighting for democracy?

Your ramblings are becoming ever more difficult to understand.

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:16am

Wibbs wrote: »

I dunno we Irish are a strange lot.

I'm with you Wibbs, but careful with the generalizations. Some Irish are strange, stupid, corrupt and incompetent.

Pretending we are all the same is their first and best defense.

The time-serving sinecurists who leech off the general public are not the same folk who are building nations abroad.

We need to get some heads rolling :mad:

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:17am

black francis wrote: »

Oh, you're defending the democracy we lost?

Would you not be better fighting for democracy?

Your ramblings are becoming ever more difficult to understand.

I'd imagine you find many things difficult to understand :rolleyes:

Frank Black · 24-03-2012 9:17am

Wild Bill wrote: »

It's true whether I repeatedly state it or not.

Hmmmm.

I reckon someone who's confident they've won an argument doesn't feel the need to constantly claim in their own posts they've done so.

Shows a lack of confidence.

Ghandee · 24-03-2012 9:21am

Question for black Francis.

Are you in the private or public sector?

Not a trick question, a simple answer will do.

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:25am

black francis wrote: »

Hmmmm.

I reckon someone who's confident they've won an argument doesn't feel the need to constantly claim in their own posts they've done so.

Shows a lack of confidence.

Nah! Just some folk are slow learners and being an educationalist I realize that repetition can help.

I notice Al has fled again - just you'n'me now Francie - so careful...one dodgy post and you're toast.

I can almost smell it.

Takin' a coffee break now - give it yer best shot.

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:26am

Ghandee wrote: »

Not a trick question, a simple answer will do.

All his answers are simple!

TimmyoTooleI · 24-03-2012 9:30am

Wild Bill wrote: »

Ghandee wrote: »

Not a trick question, a simple answer will do.

All his answers are simple!

Why so bitter and angry Bill?

Frank Black · 24-03-2012 9:33am

Ghandee wrote: »

Question for black Francis.

Are you in the private or public sector?

Not a trick question, a simple answer will do.

Private, you?

phil1nj · 24-03-2012 9:33am

alastair wrote: »

. Ability to pay is a standard criteria taken into account in property taxes everywhere - as has been previously discussed. The waivers for the tiered system haven't been defined yet, but would obviously factor in ability to pay (as the costs move beyond the affordable to most €100 a year). It may transpire that those unable to pay, but with valuable property will have offsets applied until the sale of the property - we just don't know yet.

And would these offset costs accumulate interest and penalties? Because the way I'm reading it, once someone can not pay a property tax (for whatever reason), it gets applied against the final sale of the house which, incidentally , is the only way the person can access the "wealth" contained within the property, this is despite your stance that there is an immediate taxable wealth associated with the property. You could end up in a situation whereby the government gets a lions share of the value of the sale (an extreme case but then again who's to say it won't be the norm)?

Hardly seems right that a government can effectively take money from something that was bought and paid for long before this tax came in. What if a person on a low income lives in an area that suddenly becomes desirable to live in ( maybe they inherited / bought their parents house to stay in the area). I know you'll say that waivers/exemptions will be made for such situations but then you end up with a taxation system that will once again squeeze people who are in the middle (middle income earners with mortgages and slightly above average incomes). The usual suspects for every tax in this country.

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:33am

As we can't get any answer from Al on the "negative equity = wealth" claim he made, maybe Francie would tell whether he agrees with pal Al?

Francie; if I have a house worth 200k and owe 300k on it - does my house constitute wealth for me?

This apparently easy Q has Al flummoxed :rolleyes:

If you get this one right we can move on to exploring Al's notions of "democracy".

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:36am

TimmyoTooleI wrote: »

Why so bitter and angry Bill?

Anyone who isn't angry at the destruction and betrayal of this country, it's economy and democracy, is a moral derelict. :mad:

Are you angry about that Timmy?

Ghandee · 24-03-2012 9:37am

black francis wrote: »

Private, you?

Private also.

And, I've been relatively lucky, the business I'm in tends to run more smoothly during recessions.

Still on about 40% less take home compared to say, 2007.

I only asked because I'm interested in how many PS/CS workers are contributing to this thread.

tfitzgerald · 24-03-2012 9:43am

Wild Bill wrote: »

As we can't get any answer from Al on the "negative equity = wealth" claim he made, maybe Francie would tell whether he agrees with pal Al?

Francie; if I have a house worth 200k and owe 300k on it -

Then if that's the Case don't the bank own the house so shouldn't they pay the household charge

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:45am

tfitzgerald wrote: »

if I have a house worth 200k and owe 300k on it -

Then if that's the Case don't the bank own the house so shouldn't they pay the household charge

Spanking idea!

TimmyoTooleI · 24-03-2012 9:49am

E

Wild Bill wrote: »

TimmyoTooleI wrote: »

Why so bitter and angry Bill?

Anyone who isn't angry at the destruction and betrayal of this country, it's economy and democracy, is a moral derelict. :mad:

Are you angry about that Timmy?

Indeed I am Bill (though not at the poster you're angry at) but my view is that it is preferable to try and correct the mistakes, to ensure a brighter future. We mightn't like it but there's certain sh&t we gotta do now

phil1nj · 24-03-2012 9:51am

Wild Bill wrote: »

As we can't get any answer from Al on the "negative equity = wealth" claim he made, maybe Francie would tell whether he agrees with pal Al?

Francie; if I have a house worth 200k and owe 300k on it - does my house constitute wealth for me?

This apparently easy Q has Al flummoxed :rolleyes:

If you get this one right we can move on to exploring Al's notions of "democracy".

Bill, he did actually answer this (around the time I joined the thread after following it for several days).

His answer was (to paraphrase) you have 200k worth of wealth still attached to your home. The fact that you paid 300k for it is really tough cheese. But the 200k of "wealth" is fair game to be taxed. That appears to be his take and from some of his replies he is standing by it.

Not my take on it to be honest.

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:51am

(Unfortunately legally you own the house and they have a 'claim' on it...they make the rules you see)

Sadly, the divil is in the small print.

Any sign of an answer to my 300k question Francie? (I realize your reactions are so much slower than mine - but come on - fgs!)

Wild Bill · 24-03-2012 9:53am

TimmyoTooleI wrote: »

but there's certain sh&t we gotta do now

Exactly my point!

Are you going to pay the household charge? [Part 1]

Comments