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

Government quakes as a massive 3000 people attend national property tax protest

Options
1235»

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    john reilly
    Closed Accounts Posts: 409 ✭✭john reilly


    JustinDee wrote: »
    People moan about the charge and how a 'rich' person pays the same as a 'poor' (both are wealthy enough to afford a home loan as it happens. Judging by some comments, this would imply that means-testing it would deem it fairer in their eyes.

    Yet . . . when it comes to non-means tested movement of money the OTHER way round (child allowance, for example), making it fairer is vehemently opposed.

    That's the Irish for ya.

    affording a home loan and having one are two different things.
    who is arguing against making childrens allowance fairer
    dont think racist comments help


  • Options
    #123
    john reilly
    Closed Accounts Posts: 409 ✭✭john reilly


    djpbarry wrote: »
    You know it's possible to pay your taxes and protest at the same time, right?

    For example, I am none too happy about the fact that the Ministry of Defence costs every man woman and child in the UK about £440 per year. However, I have chosen to live in the UK so I have to accept the policies of the democratically-elected government. But, that doesn't stop me from letting my local MP's know that I would like to see a substantial reduction in MoD funding.
    its a bit like f.g policy of paying bondholders and hoping that someday they
    might agree to some write down. rest assured if you dont pay they would definetly be more interested in hearing from you
    so you would accept any policies regardless. isnt that what happened in nazi germany


  • Options
    #124
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    djpbarry wrote: »
    It will be used to close the gap between public revenue and expenditure. It's pretty simple.

    "Expenditure", of course, which includes Bertie's expenses and Anglo's bondholders.
    Again, this is why IMO people should boycott it. Sort out what we should be spending money on, and then spend it.

    BluntGuy wrote: »
    At the very least it'd be nice to see some groups come out and state their reason against paying is because of the bloat in the local councils, say, rather than allowing Joe and his gang to pretend as usual that it's a "mass revolt" fuelled by a rejection of the "capitalistic gambling IMF gambler speculator gambler" etc.

    What's wrong with saying that, though? Is it really such an invalid position to hold? I don't want a cent of my money going into Bertie's or Anglo's pocket, simple as. Many others hold this same view.
    As long as such unjust and unjustifiable payments fall under the bracket of "public expenditure", such people will be saying "cut that instead of charging ordinary people more". It may not make up the shortfall but it would be fair. THEN you can charge people €100 for a household charge and there would no longer be such a huge amount of bitter resentment about it.

    I ask very simply, why should we pay extra when a man who no longer works for the taxpayer is still inexplicably being paid expenses by the taxpayer? Why should we pay extra when private investment banks like Anglo are being being pumped full of cash from our pockets with absolutely no discernible benefit to any of us ordinary people?


  • Options
    #125
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    "Expenditure", of course, which includes Bertie's expenses and Anglo's bondholders.
    Again, this is why IMO people should boycott it. Sort out what we should be spending money on, and then spend it.
    And in the mean time, Ireland has to borrow the shortfall. It'd be a case of biting one's nose to spite one's face.
    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    What's wrong with saying that, though?
    It's gibberish?
    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I don't want a cent of my money going into Bertie's or Anglo's pocket, simple as.
    And I don't want a significant chunk of my taxes going to the MoD, but that's democracy.
    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I ask very simply, why should we pay extra when a man who no longer works for the taxpayer is still inexplicably being paid expenses by the taxpayer?
    Because thems the rules. By all means, campaign for a change of the rules, but you can't pick and choose what taxes to pay and what not to pay in the mean time - that'd make you no better than Lowry.
    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Why should we pay extra when private investment banks like Anglo are being being pumped full of cash from our pockets with absolutely no discernible benefit to any of us ordinary people?
    I don't like the fact that Anglo (in particular) was bailed out either, but making up the revenue shortfall would still have been necessary in the absence of the bailout.


  • Options
    #126
    JustinDee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    john reilly wrote: »
    affording a home loan and having one are two different things
    If you can get the deposit down for a mortgage and have the income to attract a bank taking you on as a customer, then your "difference" is just subjective.
    If you couldn't afford it and got one, then thats a different matter altogether. No-one held a gun to your head and forced you to take a mortgage you couldn't afford.
    john reilly wrote: »
    who is arguing against making childrens allowance fairer
    Propose it and you'll find out.
    john reilly wrote: »
    dont think racist comments help
    It wasn't "racist" so you can reel that one in. Don't be so melodramatic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    john reilly
    Closed Accounts Posts: 409 ✭✭john reilly


    JustinDee wrote: »
    If you can get the deposit down for a mortgage and have the income to attract a bank taking you on as a customer, then your "difference" is just subjective.
    If you couldn't afford it and got one, then thats a different matter altogether. No-one held a gun to your head and forced you to take a mortgage you couldn't afford.


    Propose it and you'll find out.


    It wasn't "racist" so you can reel that one in. Don't be so melodramatic.
    what if you could afford and got one but due to paying increased taxes, higher cost of living and lower wages, your bags out trying to pay it.
    re. childrens allowance dont propose it just do it and have the balls to see it through not like the old codgers and their medical card.
    i know it wasnt racist sure all irish are mad stupid eejits (even enda admitted that) now say the same about africans and see how you get on


  • Options
    #128
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    john reilly wrote: »
    what if you could afford and got one but due to paying increased taxes, higher cost of living and lower wages, your bags out trying to pay it.
    Moving house might be an option.


  • Options
    #129
    JustinDee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    john reilly wrote: »
    what if you could afford and got one but due to paying increased taxes, higher cost of living and lower wages, your bags out trying to pay it
    Risks you must consider when preparing to borrow a house loan. Do you count the people who went for 100% loans in this apparently massive section of society of yours?
    john reilly wrote: »
    re. childrens allowance dont propose it just do it and have the balls to see it through not like the old codgers and their medical card
    Start a thread on means-testing Children's Allowance and see the response.
    john reilly wrote: »
    i know it wasnt racist sure all irish are mad stupid eejits (even enda admitted that) now say the same about africans and see how you get on
    Yes, it was nothing like a racist comment. It might be xenophobic were I not Irish myself. Racist though? Don't be ridiculous.


  • Options
    #130
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    nice_guy80 wrote: »
    the main reason I will not pay, nor will my parents and why I have told anyone I met not to pay is that while €160 million is supposedly going to be collected by this charge, the government are going to continue cut funding of local government

    allied to this, is the failure to rationalise local councils and other services
    why do we need so many councils?? the amount of money being squandered every year is crazy

    to keep some people in well paid jobs and lots of councillors on the gravy train!

    So you are not going to pay is because the government "are going to continute cut funding of local government" which means you are against cuts in local government funding.

    But you are also not going to pay because of "the failure to rationalise local councils and other services....the amount of money being squandered every year is crazy....to keep some people in well paid jobs" which means you support cuts in local government funding so that money isn't wasted.

    So you oppose the household charge because you don't want cuts in local government funding and because you want cuts in local government funding. This is the twisted logic of those against the household charge thrashing around looking for any reason not to pay. There is a complete absence of logic to the opposition.


  • Options
    #131
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    "Expenditure", of course, which includes Bertie's expenses and Anglo's bondholders.
    Again, this is why IMO people should boycott it. Sort out what we should be spending money on, and then spend it.




    What's wrong with saying that, though? Is it really such an invalid position to hold? I don't want a cent of my money going into Bertie's or Anglo's pocket, simple as. Many others hold this same view.
    As long as such unjust and unjustifiable payments fall under the bracket of "public expenditure", such people will be saying "cut that instead of charging ordinary people more". It may not make up the shortfall but it would be fair. THEN you can charge people €100 for a household charge and there would no longer be such a huge amount of bitter resentment about it.

    I ask very simply, why should we pay extra when a man who no longer works for the taxpayer is still inexplicably being paid expenses by the taxpayer? Why should we pay extra when private investment banks like Anglo are being being pumped full of cash from our pockets with absolutely no discernible benefit to any of us ordinary people?


    Look, where the money is going doesn't justify not paying the household charge.

    For example, the €100 I paid could be going to pay the overtime of the City Council cleaning staff who had to clean up the mess left on Dame Street by the ODS protesters. I would certainly resent that but it doesn't stop my paying the charge.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    john reilly
    Closed Accounts Posts: 409 ✭✭john reilly


    JustinDee wrote: »
    Risks you must consider when preparing to borrow a house loan. Do you count the people who went for 100% loans in this apparently massive section of society of yours?


    Start a thread on means-testing Children's Allowance and see the response.


    Yes, it was nothing like a racist comment. It might be xenophobic were I not Irish myself. Racist though? Don't be ridiculous.
    sorry i thought you were british


  • Options
    #133
    john reilly
    Closed Accounts Posts: 409 ✭✭john reilly


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Moving house might be an option.

    what if it wasnt


  • Options
    #134
    colly10
    Registered Users Posts: 3,008 ✭✭✭colly10


    Einhard wrote: »
    It was something of a surprise then, to note that a grand total of 3000 people turned out for the nationa protest against the charge in Dublin today. That's less than some League of Ireland matches. It could be argued, of course, that people weren't aware of today's protest, but that's unlikely given the leaflets that I received on it over the past few days, and the posters I've seen erected in several different counties.

    The goverment ignored around 80k signatures, numerous emails and TD visits for the Irish SOPA act. What's the point in a protest, the fact that people aren't paying shows the people are against it.
    The people of this country have been ignored for a long time so they won't bother protesting, the majority will just refuse to pay.


  • Options
    #135
    JustinDee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,684 ✭✭✭JustinDee


    john reilly wrote: »
    sorry i thought you were british
    Strange presumption to make.


  • Options
    #136
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    john reilly wrote: »
    what if it wasnt
    It almost always is, it just seems to be unconscionable to a lot of people for some reason.
    colly10 wrote: »
    The people of this country have been ignored for a long time so they won't bother protesting.
    Wasn't there a general election last year?


  • Options
    #137
    colly10
    Registered Users Posts: 3,008 ✭✭✭colly10


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Wasn't there a general election last year?

    There was, that doesn't mean that we're not being ignored. All make promises they won't keep and all ignore the people when they get into power. It's a case of choosing the party that you think is the best of a bad bunch, it doesn't mean that I think the party i'm voting for will listen to me or they will run the country well


  • Options
    #138
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    colly10 wrote: »
    There was, that doesn't mean that we're not being ignored. All make promises they won't keep...
    This has been covered already on this very thread - politicians make promises that they can't keep and it's up to the electorate to call them on this. I posted this earlier:
    djpbarry wrote: »
    Ruairi Quinn's pledge on third-level fees is a good example. If he came to my door telling me that he would absolutely not consider asking students to contribute toward their education, the first question that would come to my mind would be “ok, so what are you going to do about the under-funding of third-level education?”


  • Options
    #139
    colly10
    Registered Users Posts: 3,008 ✭✭✭colly10


    djpbarry wrote: »
    This has been covered already on this very thread - politicians make promises that they can't keep and it's up to the electorate to call them on this. I posted this earlier:

    I know it's been covered on this thread. I have said that people don't bother protesting because they are ignored. You said that the fact there was a general election means we are not ignored.

    I pointed out the Irish SOPA act had around 80k signatures, they brushed this off and barely debated it. They ignored emails and TD visits. This is ignoring the people.

    If you call them on it and you are ignored then whether or not there was a general election does not mean the people are not being ignored. They are happy to listen to the people until they get to power.

    The thread is on why there is poor turn out at protests, in my opinion this is why. I will not waste my time protesting when my opinion is ignored.


  • Options
    #140
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    colly10 wrote: »
    I know it's been covered on this thread. I have said that people don't bother protesting because they are ignored. You said that the fact there was a general election means we are not ignored.
    Yes I did, and I also alluded to the fact that the reason people feel that politicians break “promises” is because those promises are totally unrealistic. In my opinion, it’s something of an indictment of Irish democracy that a politician can promise their electorate pretty much anything, get elected on the back of said promise (no matter how unrealistic) and then be the subject of absolute fury when reality kicks in and they “break” their promise.

    The problem with that chain of events is not that an unrealistic promise has been made. The problem is that nobody questions the likelihood that the politician in question can live up to their promises.
    colly10 wrote: »
    I pointed out the Irish SOPA act had around 80k signatures, they brushed this off and barely debated it. They ignored emails and TD visits. This is ignoring the people.
    How many people marched on the Dail in protest at SOPA? I think the scale of the protest was somewhat exaggerated, but I could be wrong. I'd be pretty confident the average person in Ireland has no idea what SOPA is.


  • Options
    #141
    goat2
    Registered Users Posts: 4,939 ✭✭✭goat2


    i dont see why we should pay this fee, when those who borrowed so heavily are still living the life of riley and being paid to do so, still living in their mansions and driving in top of the range vehicles, instead they should being taking all property from these people and selling it for what ever they can get for it,
    and also cutting the dole on those who are on it over five years, they never had a notion to work in first place, and looking into disibility claims a bit more intensley,


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Peanut2011
    Registered Users Posts: 1,001 ✭✭✭Peanut2011


    Personally I can say that I am against the charge and have not and will not pay it even if I am the last one or the only one that does not do it.

    The reason I did not go to the protest is the fact that most of the protest lately have gotten a bad name for the antisocial behaviour a small minority will inflict.

    I don't want to be associated with that. If I knew it would be a peaceful protest like the organisers would want to have it, I would be there.


  • Options
    #143
    femur61
    Registered Users Posts: 1,588 ✭✭✭femur61


    colly10 wrote: »
    I know it's been covered on this thread. I have said that people don't bother protesting because they are ignored. You said that the fact there was a general election means we are not ignored.

    I pointed out the Irish SOPA act had around 80k signatures, they brushed this off and barely debated it. They ignored emails and TD visits. This is ignoring the people.

    If you call them on it and you are ignored then whether or not there was a general election does not mean the people are not being ignored. They are happy to listen to the people until they get to power.

    The thread is on why there is poor turn out at protests, in my opinion this is why. I will not waste my time protesting when my opinion is ignored.

    If the PS were not protected there would be mass protests. Wait till 2014, or even sooner when we reject the referendum and nobody will give us money to fund our little island.


  • Options
    #144
    WolfgangWeisen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 238 ✭✭WolfgangWeisen


    The turnout at the protest was pathetic and comprised of the same crowds that turn up at every protest. I very much doubt a majority in that crowd were even liable for the charge they were there to protest against.

    The message I took from the low turnout was that although the average Irish householder might be discontent with the charge they're being presented with, they're not willing to stand side-by-side with organisations like Sinn Fein, the United Left Alliance and Eirigi.

    These organisations always claim to have mass support, they did so when the first Lisbon referendum was shot down and they were claiming similar up until the protest last week. Indeed, they're still claiming the remaining unpaid households as their brethren despite the predominant message from the poor turnout being "we might agree on this matter, for whatever our individual reasons, but we are in no way your allies".

    This is without even breaching the topic of the behaviour displayed by those who attended the protest. It is safe to say that the protest, and its poor turnout, was a major victory for those who actively oppose the organisations I mentioned above.


Advertisement