Little CuChulainn wrote: » It's idiotic because it's nonsense. You cannot remove yourself from under a law by saying you simply don't agree to it.
DamagedTrax wrote: » if 66% of households do it also, then you can. how will a government inflict this 'law' on people when that amount refuse to participate?
Little CuChulainn wrote: » Same way they dealt with the property tax I expect.
DamagedTrax wrote: » once again you're throwing up situations that are in no way related. motorway =/= water, property =/= water revenue have nothing to do with this. getting them involved would result in the end of this government. what happens when 66% of households march to the park and demand to michael d that the current government step down?
Little CuChulainn wrote: » They won't.
DamagedTrax wrote: » what happens when 66% of households march to the park and demand to michael d that the current government step down?
DamagedTrax wrote: » and revenue wont be collecting for irish water. see how that game works?
BoJack Horseman wrote: » Sit tight. Just 18 months to go & you will have your shot at electing Taoiseach Adams/Joe Higgins. Then everything will be sweet!
Little CuChulainn wrote: » I'm just going by precedent. Pretty much every argument here against IW is probably word for word in the household charge threads from when it was introduced.
Mrs Garth Brooks wrote: » I was sure she would be paying up for this extra charge, but no, she's taking a stand and she's even coming out on the 1st of November.
DamagedTrax wrote: » wouldnt give either of those idiots my vote.
DamagedTrax wrote: » except the two are set up differently. unless the government can somehow overhaul the company set up itself, revenue cannot collect for IW.
Little CuChulainn wrote: » Can't see why they couldn't. HHC was not originally a revenue issue either, it was a local council one.
Little CuChulainn wrote: » So who would you put at the top?
BoJack Horseman wrote: » Sit tight. Just 18 months to go & you will have your shot at electing Taoiseach Adams Then everything will be sweet!
listermint wrote: » You obviously because you have the answers to everything. Sure isnt everyone who is against IW a shinner ?!? Or Socialist ??
Little CuChulainn wrote: » I doubt it. Anything relevant to add?
Banjo String wrote: » https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYFVZJhW8xw
Satriale wrote: » lol, i thought nobody else had noticed.
listermint wrote: » Just responding to your idiotic posts about voting in Adams or Higgins.
Little CuChulainn wrote: » That wasn't my post. It was another poster who mentioned them. I asked who he would put at the top.
gladrags wrote: » Irish Water debacle won’t end if ‘bosses thrown under bus’Barry Cowen FF said people in Government circles appeared to think the Irish Water debacle could be resolved by throwing managing director John Tierney, his management and board “under the bus”.“I won’t buy it, the people won’t buy it,” he said.Speaking ahead of a Dáil debate on a Fianna Fáil Private Members Motion on Irish Water today, Barry Cowen said the public would not buy change at the top of Irish Water as a means of ending the controversy that has built up around the semi-State firm.http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-water-debacle-won-t-end-if-bosses-thrown-under-bus-1.1971380" Amazing, and some thought the water protesters were threatening.
Banjo String wrote: » He obviously hasn't noticed that that's exactly where it comes from lol.
keno-daytrader wrote: » Its a depressing thought, Kenny, Adams or Martin as next Taoiseach for 5 years.
