Vladimir Kurtains wrote: » If the Fines Act is passed before they start prosecuting, they won't need to jail anyone.
Ghandee wrote: » Dry up Lugha lol. Comparing a Quinn, who defrauded the state I'm BILLIONS to a man refusing to pay a hundred euro service charge is ludicrous (even for you) Just when I thought you guys had reached the bottom. :pac:
dvpower wrote: » You still don't seem to get it. They will just take it from you along with fines and costs. You do not have a choice in the matter. You may not willingly pay it, but you will pay it.
lugha wrote: » There should be a tax on posters missing the point! You lads would have us out of the mire in no time. :pac: Poor old Tayto certainly does not equate to Sean Quinn on most scores but if he openly defies a clear court directive you can be certain that he will find that he will have at least one thing in common with the (very) bauld Sean! Seriously, do you guys really not get that a court simply cannot turn a blind eye to citizens openly defying it, no matter what the issue is? The seriousness of the primary offence has no relevance.
tayto lover wrote: » Nah You always have a choice. I won't be paying it.
dvpower wrote: » Only one court appearance is required.
Following the enactment of the Bill, the fine collection system will work as follows: o In the first instance, a person may pay the fine in full or pay by instalments over 12 months. o If they fail to do either, they will be summonsed to court where the court will impose either: an attachment of earnings order; a recovery order; or a community service order.
Ghandee wrote: » Then they've got to do that another 699,999 times.
Vladimir Kurtains wrote: » Actually, it's two:
tayto lover wrote: » Ha ha sure we will all opt for the Community Service Order. Have you seen how these work? In Dundalk some of the people on them send in sick notes. The whole thing is a laugh.
Vladimir Kurtains wrote: » What makes you think you can "opt" for that.
donalg1 wrote: » Alot of people working at the minute would probably be better off on Social Welfare as is, now if you raise Income Tax while leaving Social Welfare untouched well there are some out there that will make a conscious decision to give up working. So in that sense paying higher taxes is a deterrent.
bgrizzley wrote: » there is no difference in take home pay, from taking E10 pw out of a paye workers wages for the property tax, or taking E10 pw out of his wages in higher income tax.
DoesNotCompute wrote: » Whereas a Property Tax nets tax from the rich who inherited property and never worked a day in their lives (and paid inheritance tax over the threshold), those who are retired(and have already paid tax all their life), those do not pay income tax,(revenues job to collect this not double charge the rest of us to make it up) or have purchased a home in cash,(same, even though they wont have time now they will be collecting all those E100s) from cash in hand jobs,(same) and those who work in the black market.(same (but add social welfare)) It creates a more predictable, dependable, stable tax base, and is not a disincetive to creating jobs, which raising income tax would be.(See my reply to Donal)
Johro wrote: » I've worked hard and saved to build my house, I've built it myself, my water supply comes from a well and pump I've paid to have installed and I pay for its maintenance. I also pay for wheelie bins to take away my refuse and recycling. Years ago I bought a special composting toilet at the cost of about a grand, which means I don't need a septic tank as there's no plumbing involved. To be fair, if the council supplied me with water I would not have a problem with paying a reasonable water charge, as I don't believe you have a right to complain about the state of the water you get out of your tap if you won't help pay for it's supply and to improve its quality, that all costs money. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with paying some kind of council rate to pay for things like road maintenance (by fuck do we need it), cleaning up of roadsides and streets, hedge trimming, keeping ditches and drains clear, streetlighting etc. Just be honest and call it a council rate or corporation charge though and don't charge me for having a fuckin roof over my head. I believe people don't mind paying when they know the money is going to be well spent, and on the things they're meant for. Not like, say, road tax, which doesn't even mean they'll fill our potholes.
Vladimir Kurtains wrote: » For the property-owning, PAYE worker, yes. But there are non-property owning PAYE workers. And lots of property owners who aren't PAYE>
Ghandee wrote: » Fcuking scaremongering of the highest order (yet again) First, they need to identify you. Second, they need to Summons you to court for not paying. Thirdly, when you refuse to pay fine, they've to summons you to court again[ to attach the charge to your income. Then they've got to do that another 699,999 times.
Vladimir Kurtains wrote: » Do you honestly believe that they'll have to take 600,000 people to court?
View wrote: » Did the Guards have to give every single speeding motorist on the road penalty points before people started slowing up because "Sure, I don't want to get penalty points"? Did "the Clampers" have to clamp every illegally parked vehicle? Does Revenue have to catch every single income tax-evader? This is real "If we all park illegally, the Clampers can't clamp us all stuff", you are putting out.
bgrizzley wrote: » there is no difference in take home pay, from taking E10 pw out of a paye workers wages for the property tax, or taking E10 pw out of his wages in higher income tax. Smoke and mirrors from the gombeenmen, Donal
donalg1 wrote: » Ah yeah but you see say I was lucky enough to get paid more next year after a promotion or something then that increased income tax takes more than a tenner every week whereas my property tax doesn't increase with my income so I can better afford it.
dvpower wrote: » or... Income tax - Whether ya can afford it or not, we want it. Property tax - Ability to pay depending on asset value.
Maggie 2 wrote: » After the first couple of court cases, when people see how much will be stopped out of their wages/social welfare, they will soon cop on and pay up, so it won't take long to process the few that will be left.
I'll bet certain Politicians elderly relatives will keep their many home help hours.
