dxhound2005 wrote: » People pay for water in other countries and I haven't heard of any great problems with the system anywhere. In England and Wales (water charges are separate from Council Tax) you don't get cut off for not paying but there is a process which happens, described here.http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_energy_and_water_supply_e/consumer_water_supply_e/consumer_problems_with_paying_your_water_bill_e/if_you_dont_pay_your_water_bill.htm If there was a similar system here I suppose mobs could be summoned up but like property tax I predict people will get used to the setup when it becomes established. Central taxation having to cover all spending has not worked out as proved by the privitisation of refuse collection.
Le_Dieux wrote: » And now it just keeps spinning... So Pat, tell me, who should the public believe more? Yourselves or Frau Merkel?http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1021/eamon-gilmore-europe.html#article I listened to an interpretation of Her speech,. and do NOT recall the word Spanien being mentioned. Why can't You people wake up and realise before the country sinks that we are stuffed. AT LEAST have the balls to accept the facts, and lets move forward to.........................................????? Heavens Help Our beautiful Nation, because all we have here are minister's so far removed from REALITY it is scary!
Ghandee wrote: » Serious question here. How many people on this thread would be prepared to nail their colours to the mast and declare themselves public servants, with guaranteed increments, jobs for life, and pensions? Forgive me for the cynicism, but I fear a few of the people advocating payment of all these extra charges and taxes are only interested in what's best for themselves, and not for the country. The failure to get a bank deal will further jeopardise any govts (this one or the next) ability to continue to pay some of these vastly over inflated salaries, and pension schemes may become pretty much worthless if things continue down the path their headed. Why should the rest of us pay through the nose to ensure the lifestyle and retirement packages of others remain untouched?
bgrizzley wrote: » i think rabbitte is trying to suggest she is lying to her electorate to get back in, (labour would know all about that,( ie not another red cent, labours way or frankfurts way, ad infinitum) )
emo72 wrote: » We already pay for water. Is that not obvious?
Le_Dieux wrote: » Hey Gh, hope Your little Lilly White is giving You some sleep?:-) On a serious note, I heard something on Friday which I think every man woman and child should really hope it doesn't come true - That if something doesn't give SOON, there will be NO money to pay the SW. I am trying to find the link, but no success so far.
Le_Dieux wrote: » Hey Gh, hope Your little Lilly White is giving You some sleep?:-)
Le_Dieux wrote: » On a serious note, I heard something on Friday which I think every man woman and child should really hope it doesn't come true - That if something doesn't give SOON, there will be NO money to pay the SW. I am trying to find the link, but no success so far.
dxhound2005 wrote: » Be careful. You might get accused of scare tactics.
dvpower wrote: » Yeah - afraid so. Sorry for looking for some evidence for 'facts' you put forward. Can I take it that you don't have any?
dvpower wrote: » :eek: Break out the tinfoil hats.
dvpower wrote: » Since you don't trust any politician, you should really study the legislation. It's your friend.
dvpower wrote: » It hasn't - not once. Care to give your take on the question? - it seems that, so far, it can be all things to all men.
dvpower wrote: » An any case, I think Varadkar was foolish to make promises that he didn't have the power to keep. If that eases your anger somewhat then all to the good.
darkhorse wrote: » I suppose you'll probably tell me that Enda Kenny did'nt know anything about this piece being inserted into the 2011 FG election manifesto:-Funding Local Government: [FONT=Myriad Pro,Myriad Pro][FONT=Myriad Pro,Myriad Pro]Fianna Fail’s proposal, now endorsed by the Labour Party, to introduce by 2014 an annual, recurring residential property tax on the family home is unfair. [/FONT][/FONT](Maybe he was a bit foolish, too, or coulda be just telling porkies. Actually, Ted, I might have made it all up)
dvpower wrote: » Catch up.http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81336890&postcount=143
Ghandee wrote: » A 'site valuation tax' is very different to a property tax though. Like i stated earlier, plenty of speculators and developers sitting on multi million euro land banks (which could be considered assets, they are not family homes after all) get away Scott free. Anyone would think someone was looking out for them. Btw, labour didn't envisage introducing said tax until at least 2014.
dvpower wrote: » A SVT is a property tax and the flavour of property tax we get is still to be decided (or at least the decision isn't public). I favour a SVT btw (although it would personally cost me more). Anyway, that's an aside from darkhorse's ridiculous suggestion.
emo72 wrote: » http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1021/eamon-gilmore-europe.html a surprise statement by merkel? it seems like a bit of rowing back. its official lads, we're a "special case".....duhhh
dvpower wrote: » Looks like hopeful news. Thankfully Enda Kenny didn't take the advise of many on this thread.
emo72 wrote: » so good news then. when ghandee and dv both agree, well its definitely good news!
Ghandee wrote: » dv and I are both sculling pints together at the min lol:pac:
Am Chile wrote: » Only one problem with this analysis was one promise by one Eamon Gilmore on property taxes pre election-so who exactly is comprising the other when both parties pledged opposition to property taxes pre election last year ?http://www.herald.ie/opinion/eamon-gilmore-the-man-behind-the-mask-2374050.html(THE man favoured to be the next Taoiseach has promised not to cut social welfare or raise tax rates.Instead Eamon Gilmore wants to tax the "high fliers" of the Celtic Tiger economy in order to rebuild our shattered economy. But at the same time he has promised:Not to introduce a property tax on residential homes)
K-9 wrote: » You actually prove my point. Pre-election promises mean nothing. Yet here we are, you quoting a pre-election promise as if it means something. The only thing that matters is what the party you voted for gets in the coalition deal. Seriously, do you believe advertising beal?
squod wrote: » So the current lot are in trouble for their misleading advertising?http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1988/en/si/0134.html
K-9 wrote: » Huh? You think one party gets everything it wants in a coalition? Its called negotiations. Toddlers throwing tantrums do get loads of attention for throwing a strop,, but ignored for being stroppy toddlers. Nobody likes tantrums.
