Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Water meter protests

1…1314161819…39

Comments

  • #452
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Tony EH wrote: »
    What the hell are you talking about? I haven't made any comments confirming or denying the current amount of payments.

    What a stupid sentence. :pac:



    Except that's a lie.

    The ridiculously small allowance means that even if you are conserving water, you're still paying...twice.

    FG already tried to tack on a standing charge too, but that was, thankfully, vetoed by Labour.

    But, it'll come in eventually.

    You posited that the better approach would have been to increase general taxation for a period, which acknowledges that we are not paying enough to maintain the system as is.

    AAre you saying that people don't reduce unnecessary consumption of a product or service as the price rises?


  • #453
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,514 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Jester252 wrote: »
    Water being pumped into your homes is not vital. The water you use for a shower is not vital. The water you use for flushing the toilet is not vital.
    yes it is

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #454
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Uriel. wrote: »
    You posited that the better approach would have been to increase general taxation for a period, which acknowledges that we are not paying enough to maintain the system as is.

    AAre you saying that people don't reduce unnecessary consumption of a product or service as the price rises?

    It's a catch 22 you cannot get people to conserve water then be expected to pay even more to cover the cost of them not generating enough revenue to maintain upgrade the system.


  • #455
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,514 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    mickydoomsux wrote: »
    And those payments can be used to pay your water charges which will become part of basic living.

    So, no problem then and all the "can't pay" garbage is just rabble-rabble idiocy.
    no it isn't, rent, food, if you have kids, all adds up

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #456
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    It's a catch 22 you cannot get people to conserve water then be expected to pay even more to cover the cost of them not generating enough revenue to maintain upgrade the system.

    That wasn't the point being argued


  • Advertisement
  • #457
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    end of the road wrote: »
    yes it is

    But at a price where relevant


  • #458
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    mikeym wrote: »
    What annoys me is the people that say they pay for water already and that we should stop our whining.

    Yes they pay for private water but these schemes were generously subsidised by the government.

    Subsidised by taxpayers in more urban areas also, which some posters refuse to recognise.


  • #459
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,722 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Uriel. wrote: »
    You posited that the better approach would have been to increase general taxation for a period, which acknowledges that we are not paying enough to maintain the system as is.

    The system has been badly run by successive organs. It's been in bad shape in certain areas and largely ignored. The time to fix the problems in the system was when we were "awash" with money.

    But, no one gave a fuck then.

    That's an argument for better management, not increases in money.
    Uriel. wrote: »
    AAre you saying that people don't reduce unnecessary consumption of a product or service as the price rises?

    Some people will, some won't.

    That's not the point.

    Standing charges exposes the lie of a "polluter pays" mantra.


  • #460
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Uriel. wrote: »
    That wasn't the point being argued

    The Price rise will rise with people savings of water fact. People use less water save to a bear minimum, company cannot generate enough money to operate, company price rise to meet shortfall. only way this charge is going is up regardless of water conservation argument.


  • #461
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,722 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Which is exactly what will happen.

    This is simply a money generating exercise. It has fuck all to do with the environment, waste, or fixing the leaks.


  • Advertisement
  • #462
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Tony EH wrote: »
    The system has been badly run by successive organs. It's been in bad shape in certain areas and largely ignored. The time to fix the problems in the system was when we were "awash" with money.

    But, no one gave a fuck then.

    That's an argument for better management, not increases in money.



    Some people will, some won't.

    That's not the point.

    Standing charges exposes the lie of a "polluter pays" mantra.

    Standing charge cover fixed costs the rest is a per use basis


  • #463
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Standing charge cover fixed costs the rest is a per use basis

    Then why charge for usage if the cost of production and maintenance are covered via standing charge ?


  • #464
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Which is exactly what will happen.

    This is simply a money generating exercise. It has fuck all to do with the environment, waste, or fixing the leaks.

    Your difficulty is your inability to see beyond conspiracy theories and think outside of the box.

    NNone of these things need to be mutually exclusive. It can benefit the environment, Conservation, biodiversity while at the same time create a more sustainable tax Base into the future and raise revenue for the state coffers.

    These are not either or matters.


  • #465
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,722 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Your difficulty is your inability to see beyond conspiracy theories and think outside of the box.

    Oh FFS.. :rolleyes:


  • #466
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Then why charge for usage if the cost of production and maintenance are covered via standing charge ?

    Fixed charges may not cover the costs for capital projects (infrastructure improvement works etc)

    Plus you're forgetting, it's not ONLY about sustainability


  • #467
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Your difficulty is your inability to see beyond conspiracy theories and think outside of the box.

    NNone of these things need to be mutually exclusive. It can benefit the environment, Conservation, biodiversity while at the same time create a more sustainable tax Base into the future and raise revenue for the state coffers.

    These are not either or matters.

    What conspiracy theory is that ? The government has repeatedly said if they cannot generate enough money because people save water they will charge more for it.


  • #468
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,514 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Nice to see you finally admit that we aren't paying enough for our current services.

    who says?
    Uriel. wrote: »
    the polluter pays principle encourages water conservation and reduces waste.

    does it? i don't know anyone who uses any more then they need
    Uriel. wrote: »
    This significantly contributes to the sustainable living that this planet requires.

    sustainable living is not what these charges are about, its about getting in more revenue, thats fine, but lets be honest about what they are for

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #469
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Oh FFS.. :rolleyes:

    Oh I'm sorry, the sinn fein q and a book for running the country didn't have an answer for that? Thought not, must have spent too much time working on the section providing guidance for how to lie on the water meter access point


  • #470
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,722 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Oh I'm sorry, the sinn fein q and a book for running the country didn't have an answer for that?

    Yet another stupid comment.

    Keep going. :pac:


  • #471
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    end of the road wrote: »
    who says?



    does it? i don't know anyone who uses any more then they need



    sustainable living is not what these charges are about, its about getting in more revenue, thats fine, but lets be honest about what they are for
    Tonyeh said.

    You must know a lot of environmentalists then.

    These charges are not solely about one thing or another. Multiple benefits derive. I know that's difficult to comprehend, but mary lou will put you on the straight, I'm sure


  • Advertisement
  • #472
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,722 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Tonyeh said.

    No I didn't

    You and your friends are really having a lot struggles reading.


  • #473
    Jester252
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Jester252


    end of the road wrote: »
    yes it is

    Its not vital to have your crap washed away with treated water.


  • #474
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Jester252 wrote: »
    Its not vital to have your crap washed away with treated water.

    And when the hospitals are jammers with people with sewerage related conditions off work economy collapses ? Its vital to have sanitary water in a 1st world country.


  • #475
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,062 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Yet another stupid comment.

    Keep going. :pac:

    Just trying to keep up (or down as it seems) with you.


  • #476
    mickydoomsux
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,287 ✭✭✭mickydoomsux


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    And when the hospitals are jammers with people with sewerage related conditions off work economy collapses ?

    There's words there, but i refuse to believe it's a sentence.


  • #477
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,514 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Tonyeh said.

    You must know a lot of environmentalists then.

    These charges are not solely about one thing or another. Multiple benefits derive. I know that's difficult to comprehend, but mary lou will put you on the straight, I'm sure
    how and why would she

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #478
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,514 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Jester252 wrote: »
    Its not vital to have your crap washed away with treated water.
    yes it is

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #479
    Jester252
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Jester252


    end of the road wrote: »
    yes it is

    Anything to add


  • #480
    Jester252
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Jester252


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    And when the hospitals are jammers with people with sewerage related conditions off work economy collapses ? Its vital to have sanitary water in a 1st world country.

    Does it need to be treated before ut flushes your crap away? No.

    How do you expect we provide water if you're not willing to pay and the country can't afford to pay


  • Advertisement
  • #481
    RandomName2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,575 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    Uriel. wrote: »
    NNone of these things need to be mutually exclusive. It can benefit the environment, Conservation, biodiversity while at the same time create a more sustainable tax Base into the future and raise revenue for the state coffers.

    It can?

    Well hot damn!

    Who'd have thought that having pay per use water usage could do such things? I certainly wouldn't, because the water table is never adversely affected by water usage, not that penalising personal water usage would make a huge amount of difference anyway when (A) people can only cut out so much and (B) leaks in public mains don't care about pay per usage.

    Wouldn't have thought that the volume of water in our sewers would have had an impact on the environment either. Must have really bad impact on wildlife when it rains in general in that case. Man, ought to do something about that.

    But the great thing is that if people take less showers, or don't water the grass, biodiversity will improve because...

    because..

    ...

    Irish Water will donate some of its profits to environment agencies? I mean the government wouldn't be able to take that money directly, what with Irish Life being privatised and all. But if people say trust the corporation, it's in the best interest of sustainability and the environment, then I for one, am on board.

    Hold on? Won't Irish Water have LESS profits if people don't use water?

    That would sound like a scary prospect, indeed, if we didn't have the promise that rates will just be increased if that happens across the board.

    Stay strong.
    Keep the faith.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement