Iwasfrozen wrote: » lol, I was naive like that once ... Then I found out Santy isn't real. Had the weather been poor 100k people would not have turned up for the last protest. You'd be a fool to think otherwise.
Ogham wrote: » They clarified it later. (Must have been a new one on the Twitter Desk !)
Iwasfrozen wrote: » So what are odds in getting 100k again on November 1st if the weather is like today? 0.00001%?
Banjo String wrote: » Edit, they literally are making it up as they get along now. Updated 56mins ago.https://mobile.twitter.com/IrishWater This is fcuking cringe worthy stuff actually. They don't have a bloody breeze. Excuse me while I don't give a shag in what way they threaten me for withholding my info. Hoors don't know their arse from their elbow as far as I can tell :pac:
FREETV wrote: » You may have an issue now as there is a story on the Irish Independent website that Irish Water will be allowed to increase the prices every year. I told you all this would happen. Bye bye Fine Gael, Labour and Fianna Fail!http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-water-will-be-allowed-raise-prices-every-year-29798831.html
Deleted User wrote: » I'm glad to hear this. He struck me a being a bit vulnerable and in need of support. I hope he's going to be ok.
Grandpa Hassan wrote: » Tenants opposed to the charges, intending not to pay, might find themselves in a difficult position.
Pocoyo wrote: » RTE should lose their license fee's over this issue also,Apart from joe duffy's show its been balls.
Bob24 wrote: » Not difficult, completely unsustainable. Let's be honest, people are not fighting water charges because they have great ideals ... they just don't want to pay themselves and don't care about others. So even the most anti-charges landlord will not engage their own responsibility to cover for their protesting tenant ... they will just tell them to pay or leave the property.
dxhound2005 wrote: » You have identified the nub of the question there. This issue just happens to temporarily unite some people who are really only interested in their own selfish interests. The OAP's among them would never go marching to oppose student fees, neither would the students march to protest at cuts to Child Benefit. They all just want to keep their money in their own pockets. Fair enough but not when that entails breaking the law.
Irish Steve wrote: » well, for what its worth, which is very little at this stage, I'm wondering if IW is nothing more than a department printing registration demands, and a computer processing them, with nothing else in the place.
Irish Steve wrote: » I was already thinking that FG were going to have to work damned hard to get my vote in future, as it's now clear that they are no longer interested in IW or anything to do with it, given FG's total lack of engagement with the electorate on the issues around IW, they can whistle for my vote, simply because they've made it very clear that they too cannot be trusted to deliver on their promises.
Irish Steve wrote: » well, for what its worth, which is very little at this stage, I'm wondering if IW is nothing more than a department printing registration demands, and a computer processing them, with nothing else in the place. I sent them an E-mail that's not water or meter related, as they are supposedly also responsible now for waste water infrastructure, and in theory, according to their web site and the guff that's on it, they are supposed to respond within 5 days. That 5 days, (working days, so 7 in reality) expired this evening, and they've not even acknowledged receipt of the E-mail, let alone responded to it. You don't get a second chance to make a first impression, as far as I'm concerned now, IW is just another semi state quango stuffed with the dead wood that the local authorities were desperate to get shot of, and it can't even perform the basic tasks that it was set up to perform. I will be writing to the relevant TD, and to the energy regulator, but I will be surprised if that achieves anything, the TD's won't give a continental damn, and the regulator is likely to respond with the normal quango garbage that it's "not within their remit". I was already thinking that FG were going to have to work damned hard to get my vote in future, as it's now clear that they are no longer interested in IW or anything to do with it, given FG's total lack of engagement with the electorate on the issues around IW, they can whistle for my vote, simply because they've made it very clear that they too cannot be trusted to deliver on their promises. Yes, I'm totally p*ssed off with Politicians and semi states, and the complete lack of accountability and responsibility, probably because the toxic combination of these 2 factors means I'm now stuck in an unsaleable house that was badly (€120K) damaged by sewage overflowing in 2002, and it's still not been resolved 15 years later, I've written to TD's, local councillors, the Meath CC, and others, and the nett result is sweet damn all, Looks like the only answer is to treat them with the same contempt that they are treating me with.
hju6 wrote: » Paying the gambling debts of others did not seem to be a problem and did not create such a protest. Don't see the validity of your point,
fxotoole wrote: » Wonder all you want. It's not a Department at all. It's a Semi-State. Seriously, this is basic stuff. What promises are these? The promise to set up a State owned water utility company and charge people for usage? Page 43 of their Election Manifesto made it clear that's what they promised to deliver. I guess you missed that part of their manefisto when you voted for them? Did you even bother reading up on their policies at all?
Bob24 wrote: » It only affected taxpayers, with the highest earners having to chip in the most (logically but still). Water charges are hitting absolutely every household and the same amount regardless of their income (to your exemple you can add students and people on very low income or social welfare - not a small group).
Banjo String wrote: » I missed the bit in their manifesto where they said they'd implement a property tax. I didn't vote for them incidentally, but I've read the manifesto a few times now, usually after some party supporter tells me "they always wanted to introduce an lpt"
hju6 wrote: » It sunk the whole population and put a lot of workers on the dole, And hit everyone with austerity for years.
dxhound2005 wrote: » You hardly expected Joe to bring on callers who are in favour of water charges. That is not his agenda.
Pocoyo wrote: » But he did.... Two days be fore the protest...might i ad in typical RTE fashion I guess after the protest they could ignore the calls no longer...
dxhound2005 wrote: » You forgot the bit about what Enda said in 1994 or thereabouts.
Highflyer13 wrote: » Has it ever crossed your mind that people maybe cant afford to pay after the absolute pillaging we have got in the last 6 years? I really think some poster are have not been a bit affected by recession and are taking glee in seeing others suffer. These same people would probably tell you the hospitals are grand and deny the housing crisis exists.
Bob24 wrote: » Do you think a landlord will care?
Banjo String wrote: » Are you a landlord?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f054c80ff399c4eba8d719c617220a57.svg)
