Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 2] *Poll Reset*

KeithM89_old

Mod
kr7 and alastair, do not post in this thread again. Your petty bickering is pathetic.

phil1nj

alastair wrote: »

It's a rent - that goes to the local authority. The housing is a service that the local authority .

like I said, that service is something that I don't avail of nor am
I likely to. But one other question that has to be asked regarding payments to LA. I wonder how much of the overpriced house payments went to LAs around the country during the boom years? I'm thinking it was multiples of the 5 grand figure you mentioned for LA tenants. In some cases it was significant multiples of 5 grand. Eaten bread is soon forgotten I suppose.

golden lane

phil1nj wrote: »

like I said, that service is something that I don't avail of nor am
I likely to. But one other question that has to be asked regarding payments to LA. I wonder how much of the overpriced house payments went to LAs around the country during the boom years? I'm thinking it was multiples of the 5 grand figure you mentioned for LA tenants. In some cases it was significant multiples of 5 grand. Eaten bread is soon forgotten I suppose.

ordinary working people who bought their own house...are the backbone of the economy.......they are being punished by this tax...imo

dvpower

golden lane wrote: »

ordinary working people who bought their own house...are the backbone of the economy.......they are being punished by this tax...imo

That may be, but I don't think you could say that people who evade their lawful taxes, especially at a time of emergency, are the backbone of the economy.

golden lane

dvpower wrote: »

That may be, but I don't think you could say that people who evade their lawful taxes, especially at a time of emergency, are the backbone of the economy.

i would say, that because it is a punishment tax....it is unlawfull.

dvpower

golden lane wrote: »

i would say, that because it is a punishment tax....it is unlawfull.

It is most certainly not unlawful.

golden lane

dvpower wrote: »

It is most certainly not unlawful.

i would let the constitution decide that.....i would believe that punishing people is not lawfull under the constitution....

tayto lover

dvpower wrote: »

It is most certainly not unlawful.

It must be unlawful to charge someone for a service that's not provided.
Bin charges, street cleaning and drain cleaning are part of this charge but not provided.

mikom

dvpower wrote: »

That may be, but I don't think you could say that people who evade their lawful taxes, especially at a time of emergency, are the backbone of the economy.

The "patriotic duty" line folks.
You know things are getting desperate when that is being trundled out.

dvpower

golden lane wrote: »

i would let the constitution decide that.....i would believe that punishing people is not lawfull under the constitution....

I await the failed constitutional challange.

Whose bringing it btw? The CAWHT have already ruled legal challenges out.

Hijpo

That bridge will be crossed if we get to it. The challenge has nothing to do with you so dont worry your head about where its coming from.

Izzy Skint

alastair wrote: »

No - Dan O'Brien does not say that cuts alone are more effective than cuts and taxation increases. But here he is on that subject elsewhere:

and the source of the quote please ...?

the quote you posted has actually backed up my claim that we need to cut and cut again, read the quote again but this time think about what he is saying...especially the highlighted part.. "Those who declare with infinite certainty that spending cuts and tax increases cannot work, or that there is no example of an economy cutting its way out of recession should take a closer look at the Baltics."

thanks Al, you have just reinforced all that I have been saying....

dvpower

Hijpo wrote: »

That bridge will be crossed if we get to it. The challenge has nothing to do with you so dont worry your head about where its coming from.

I won't worry about it. The idea of a constitutional challange is only a wet dream of some on the anti charge side.
Its never going to happen - even the most delusional wouldn't put their money onto it.

jimbob 101

hmmmmmm paying the household tax for the bins im paying 120 per year for water i provide myself and the essential services i don't receive hmmm yeah il pay that when i get what im supposedly getting ..... dont register dont pay

Izzy Skint

dvpower wrote: »

Dizzy believes that the government forced the trioka to put the property tax in the MOU.
I know, it's crazy, isn't it?

VD DV, please show me where in any of my posts that I have said the govt. 'forced' the troika to put the prop. tax in the mou ?
What I said is that I am convinced the govt. negotiated with the troika over many issues, it was the govt. who gave a commitment to introduce the prop. tax.....they could just as easily have said 'no, no property tax but we will cut spending by a further x billion euro' and the imf would have been happy with that...the IMF do not care how the deficit is closed, in fact they would prefer if the deficit was cut entirely through govt. spending cuts..

Here is a challenge for you, prove to me that this is not the case....you can't because there isn't any !....but try anyway.....we have only the governments 'word' and that is not worth a sh!te at the moment.
Please don't tell me that you believe what the govt. says....or that it is written in black and white somewhere so it must be true,how many promises have the govt. broken, how many commitments have they failed to deliver on....they sold the tax payer out and are lying to us again.

eth0

When it suits the pro-property tax crowd the government had no choice and the tax was foisted upon us by outsiders but also when it suits them it's a legal tax imposed by our own government that must be paid to help them out in their time of need.

Izzy Skint

alastair wrote: »

Just a guess: He's got a job to do that involves a completely changed economic reality since he made those comments on property taxes? FF were opposed to property taxes too - but introduced this property tax as part of the bailout.

I've no idea what Enda's moral views on gay marriage or abortion are, but he's certainly keeping quiet about the gay marriage issue, and he's offloaded the abortion legislation question to a committee.

You honestly look to Enda to decide how to engage with the world?

if its morally wrong 15 years ago, it's still morally wrong today.....time does not change the issue of morality.

golden lane

dvpower wrote: »

I await the failed constitutional challange.

Whose bringing it btw? The CAWHT have already ruled legal challenges out.

you don't have to challenge thje constitution....you just have to challenge who wants to punish you.......

you cannot be punished for being punished.......

Izzy Skint

bgrizzley wrote: »

lol that would be the best session ever.
HALF PINTS ALL AROUND ON ME.............:p

ok, mine's a whiskey !

Hijpo

dvpower wrote: »

I won't worry about it. The idea of a constitutional challange is only a wet dream of some on the anti charge side.
Its never going to happen - even the most delusional wouldn't put their money onto it.

Well if your not worried about it drop the topic

TheTurk1972

This tax should be like the council tax in the UK.
Everybody who lives in a property must pay local tax.
This way the people consuming the services in an area pay for them. Not just the one who bought the property.

Much easier to implement and much fairer.

Izzy Skint

alastair wrote: »

Sorry - by any measure 5 grand is a greater amount than your property tax. They're also paying income tax etc - so the differential is down to the amount of that property tax compared to their rent.

LA tenants paying 5k a year rent?.....where the hell are the LA houses, on Shrewsbury road ?....you're definitely on something mate....seek medical help

dvpower

eth0 wrote: »

When it suits the pro-property tax crowd the government had no choice and the tax was foisted upon us by outsiders but also when it suits them it's a legal tax imposed by our own government that must be paid to help them out in their time of need.

The idea being put forward by dizzy that the government really wanted to bring in a property tax, and they brought the idea to the table is laughable.
One might have expected if it was a government idea that they would at least have chosen a timescale that allowed them to go straight to the main course and skip the HHC starter.

The idea that the troika have no opinion on how we close the deficit is equally laughable (anyone looking at previous IMF programmes could see this). Only last week the IMF were providing their opinion on the rate of property tax we should introduce.

Izzy Skint

dvpower wrote: »

It is most certainly not unlawful.

it is in my eyes and that's all that matters, so I am not paying...

dvpower

Hijpo wrote: »

Well if your not worried about it drop the topic

I didn't raise the topic.

dvpower

Izzy Skint wrote: »

it is in my eyes and that's all that matters, so I am not paying...

Well then you don't understand what the term 'lawful' means.


This doesn't surprise me.

golden lane

Izzy Skint wrote: »

it is in my eyes and that's all that matters, so I am not paying...

you are so right......this tax is a abomination....

it goes agains the principal of a fair and just society.....it is the idea of a complete and utter lunatic.....

Izzy Skint

dvpower wrote: »

The idea being put forward by dizzy that the government really wanted to bring in a property tax, and they brought the idea to the table is laughable.
One might have expected if it was a government idea that they would at least have chosen a timescale that allowed them to go straight to the main course and skip the HHC starter.

The idea that the troika have no opinion on how we close the deficit is equally laughable (anyone looking at previous IMF programmes could see this). Only last week the IMF were providing their opinion on the rate of property tax we should introduce.

DV, can you prove I am wrong ?

When the news broke of our bailout and the IMF arrived in Dublin, I was actually relieved and happy they had arrived, in fact many people were. I listened to many people on the radio expressing their outrage at what our useless govt. had brought on the country but at the same time they were delighted that serious changes would now be on the way, badly needed changes in govt policy and wasteful spending.......how wrong we were !!
"Thank God the IMF are here" I thought, they don't not mess around, they will sort out the crap going on in the country, they will cut and burn their way through our excessive public sector sector pay and pensions, social welfare expenditure etc.......and what have we got ?.... 2 years later and f-all has been cut from the very areas where it should have been !!!....it all points to underhand deal brokering between govt. and troika to minimise cuts to the ps and most vulnerable....the govt. have no guts, they are LIARS.

How do you know what is being discussed behind closed doors between the govt. and troika ?

Izzy Skint

dvpower wrote: »

Well then you don't understand what the term 'lawful' means.


This doesn't surprise me.

just because something is lawful does not mean it is right....there is good and bad law....perhaps that is why we have a law reform commission ?

Hijpo

Izzy Skint wrote: »

dvpower wrote: »

The idea being put forward by dizzy that the government really wanted to bring in a property tax, and they brought the idea to the table is laughable.
One might have expected if it was a government idea that they would at least have chosen a timescale that allowed them to go straight to the main course and skip the HHC starter.

The idea that the troika have no opinion on how we close the deficit is equally laughable (anyone looking at previous IMF programmes could see this). Only last week the IMF were providing their opinion on the rate of property tax we should introduce.

DV, can you prove I am wrong ?

When the news broke of our bailout and the IMF arrived in Dublin, I was actually relieved and happy they had arrived, in fact many people were. I listened to many people on the radio expressing their outrage at what our useless govt. had brought on the country but at the same time they were delighted that serious changes would now be on the way, badly needed changes in govt policy and wasteful spending.......how wrong we were !!
"Thank God the IMF are here" I thought, they don't not mess around, they will sort out the crap going on in the country, they will cut and burn their way through our excessive public sector sector pay and pensions, social welfare expenditure etc.......and what have we got ?.... 2 years later and f-all has been cut from the very areas where it should have been !!!....it all points to underhand deal brokering between govt. and troika to minimise cuts to the ps and most vulnerable....the govt. have no guts, they are LIARS.

How do you know what is being discussed behind closed doors between the govt. and troika ?

have to second you on that, i though the exact same thing when i heard the IMF were in town to grab the government by the reigns.