Off Topic Thread too point uh

errlloyd wrote: »

I agree completely. It should be metered, that's the point. Even if it was though it'd still be a tax that his low income earners harder (proportionally) than usc.

Not a tax, a charge. Do you call food bills a 'food tax'?

It's an absolute truism that user-pays hits lower income earners harder proportionally. It's a great soundbite that is often used as some sort of emotional leverage, but it's not anything new.

It applies to absolutely everything! The TV Licence hits low income earners harder proportionally. Bus fares, train fares, taxi fares. Sweets, drinks, bread etc. Should food bills be based on a percentage of the person's income? Should electricity bills? What about gas and oil? Petrol? Why water and not these?

Mises Economic Calculation problem gives you the answer.

errlloyd wrote: »

At the moment water is paid for out of the exchequer, which basically means 10 percent of the population pay 80 of it and 50 percent pay almost nothing.

Why is this a good thing?
Ireland is a social democracy, those that genuinely cannot pay will be supported by the state to the extent that they will be able to afford the charges that have been directed upon them instead of the exchequer. There really would be no change in net position to a low income family (in the long run) who are not wasting water.

errlloyd wrote: »

By changing it to water metres they're massively shifting the cost for water from weathier families to poorer ones.

Except there were tax decreases and social welfare increases to offset the introduction of charges.

There is also the added benefit of getting rid of the tragedy-of-the-commons effect as people become more responsible for the water that they use. This results (strictly) in a reduction of overall water usage in Ireland, which results (strictly) in a reduction of the overall water provision costs in Ireland.

This means that by simply linking the user to the cost of their service, we reduce how much that we the people pay! (we would pay less when you consider us as a group when we have responsibility for our own usage than when we pay as a group that don't.)

errlloyd wrote: »

The reason why middle class people are cool with water chargers is becuase if you're a high earner paying for them this way effectively saves you money (assuming the extra revenue comes back to you in the shape of the usc cut everyone is so fond of suggesting).

What of those that can simply see that the previous system has left us with a Victorian water system that is in dire need of capital investment, no incentives to conserve/reduce wastage which results in an overall increase (strictly) in the cost to the state of the service, a 'public service' coming out of the exchequer's purse that therefore has wastage baked in (requiring higher taxes than might otherwise be elicited) to an already narrow tax-base?

Are they simply middle class people being cool with water charges or are they sensible analytical people who understand the problem that the State has and can see the viable solution?

Again, Ireland is a Republic, it offers a considerable social welfare safety net already to its people. The benefits of metered charging are plain and simple, and a far more pragmatic way of reducing our overall wastage (and therefore costs) is to connect the user with the cost. For those that genuinely cannot afford the change in the system which requires them to now bear that cost, we have a social welfare system that will indeed assist them.

The pragmatic solution for those people who genuinely cannot afford the change in system is campaigning for a Water Benefit to be added to Social Welfare, which could be flexed based upon number of dependants. Not removal of charges for all, but only a subsidy which in effect removes those charges for the genuine Can't Pay group. This gives us the benefits of what metered Water Charges brings, whilst also shielding the worst-off from some of the costs.

Swan Curry wrote: »

opposition to water charges is just poors being irrational, glad we've cleared this up, if only they could be sensible and analytical like the middle classes

Present the sensible arguments against water charges and we can analyze them so.

Excellent false dichotomy btw.