Upcoming Irish property tax to cost 'on average' €1000 per house.(can you afford it?)

Ghandee

alastair wrote: »

You're/we're not even paying once at the moment - hence the deficit.

Your contradicting yourself here.

As previously you stated that we already paid for the services. Did you not?

alastair

Ghandee wrote: »

Your contradicting yourself here.

As previously you stated that we already paid for the services. Did you not?

We contribute taxation by multiple channels - sure.
We haven't paid for our services though (once - let alone twice) - we still rely on borrowing to cover them - hence the deficit.

Ghandee

alastair wrote: »

We contribute taxation by multiple channels - sure.
We haven't paid for our services though (once - let alone twice) - we still rely on borrowing to cover them - hence the deficit.

I've asked before.

Name a service I receive that I don't pay for?

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

You're/we're not even paying once at the moment - hence the deficit.

The mega-rich are not paying anything at all. Let the Govt target them if they want extra.
Do people who rent not use the roads either ?
You are starting to trip yourself up again and you know where that usually leads i.e. insults, cheek and the inevitable red card. Be careful as I like my entertainment.

alastair

Ghandee wrote: »

I've asked before.

Name a service I receive that I don't pay for?

Name a service that isn't currently heavily reliant on expensive borrowings that undermine any sort of recovery?

kr7

tayto lover wrote: »

My car uses their roads, my house does not use their roads and I don't have to put petrol into it either. It is stationary unlike my car.
And I won't pay this property tax.

It's the only argument they have tayto, comparing a house to a car!

How bad is that?

It just goes to show that there is no way to justify a tax that attacks one section of the population while another section gets off scott free.

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

Name a service that isn't currently heavily reliant on expensive borrowings that undermine any sort of recovery?

Ministers travelling to conferences supposedly on our behalf. Now that's one.

alastair

tayto lover wrote: »

The mega-rich are not paying anything at all. Let the Govt target them if they want extra.

Like JPMcManus? The tax exile. That'll work just fine.

tayto lover wrote: »

Do people who rent not use the roads either ?.

Sure - but they usually live in a house owned by a property owner - paying a property tax.

tayto lover wrote: »

You are starting to trip yourself up again and you know where that usually leads i.e. insults, cheek and the inevitable red card. Be careful as I like my entertainment.

I'm going nowhere - but you must be mistaking consistency for 'tripping up'?

Ghandee

alastair wrote: »

Name a service that isn't currently heavily reliant on expensive borrowings that undermine any sort of recovery?

Your refusal to answer me sums it up.

None.

alastair

tayto lover wrote: »

Ministers travelling to conferences supposedly on our behalf. Now that's one.

Nope - also reliant on those borrowings - ALL state expenditure is.

alastair

Ghandee wrote: »

Your refusal to answer me sums it up.

None.

I didn't catch an answer from you either - so just for you:

None.

dvpower

kr7 wrote: »

It's the kind of tripe that poster has been peddling here for a long time now.

Best off not feeding.....

Why do you always revert to calling people trolls as soon as they make a point you can't counter (which tends to be quite often)?

kr7

We can only assume that these pro-taxers fall into the second category I mentioned above.

Who in their right mind would spend so much of their lives actually campaigning for more taxes??

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

Like JPMcManus? The tax exile. That'll work just fine.

Sure - but they usually live in a house owned by a property owner - paying a property tax.

I'm going nowhere - but you must be mistaking consistency for 'tripping up'?

So people who live in Council houses and have cars also pay the Property Tax ?

alastair

dvpower wrote: »

Why do you always revert to calling people trolls as soon as they make a point you can't counter (which tends to be quite often)?

Because that's all she has - other than a litany of misinformation.

kr7

dvpower wrote: »

Why do you always revert to calling people trolls as soon as they make a point you can't counter (which tends to be quite often)?

Why can't you ever answer questions put to you?

Ghandee

alastair wrote: »

I didn't catch an answer from you either - so just for you:

None.

Here's one.

Education.

Here's another,

Refuse collection.

Here's another.

Roads, motor tax and tolls, tax on the fuel, vat on that.

Now, you name me what I get for free?

alastair

tayto lover wrote: »

So people who live in Council houses and have cars also pay the Property Tax ?

The property tax that goes to the local authority? Aren't they paying rent to the same local authority? Or do you want the owner (the local authority) to pay the tax to themselves?

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

The property tax that goes to the local authority? Aren't they paying rent to the same local authority? Or do you want the owner (the local authority) to pay the tax to themselves?

I'll make it easier then --

So an exempt person who also has a car is paying the Property Tax ?

alastair

Ghandee wrote: »

Here's one.

Education.

Here's another,

Refuse collection.

Here's another.

Roads, motor tax and tolls, tax on the fuel, vat on that.

Now, you name me what I get for free?

What are you on about? All of those services are currently reliant on borrowings. You never get any state/LA services for free - it's all supported by either taxation, or borrowings which will themselves have to be paid back through taxation. That's never going to change.

All education - private or otherwise is subsidised by the state, roads are either the responsibility of the LA's or NRA - both funded by the state. Motor tax goes into the general taxation pot - it's not earmarked for roads - just as VAT on fuel isn't.

alastair

tayto lover wrote: »

I'll make it easier then --

So an exempt person who also has a car is paying the Property Tax ?

If they're exempt - obviously not - car or not.

Yitzhak Rabin

Ghandee wrote: »

Your refusal to answer me sums it up.

None.

Everything is taxed. Everyone has to pay tax. If you can afford a house, then you can afford this tax. Its a fair way of taxing those people who have assets. I've to pay tax on my investments, despite it not requiring any services from the government.

Get over yourself. The very fact that you live in a rural area means you're already being subsidised by people who live in urban areas. :rolleyes:

Dude111

Ghandee wrote:

Just read this article online, and tbh its quite disturbing reading.

Yes i read some of it and i hope you people WILL STAND UP TO THIS and try to get it reversed.....

Ghandee

alastair wrote: »

What are you on about? All of those services are currently reliant on borrowings. You never get any state/LA services for free - it's all supported by either taxation, or borrowings which will themselves have to be paid back through taxation. That's never going to change.

We borrow for our roads, yet we have along the highest motoring costs on Europe?
We borrow for refuse collection, yet we pay Thorntons/oxygen/aes/greyhound ourselves?

Education is free now too?

kr7

yekahS wrote: »

If you can afford a house, then you can afford this tax.

What if your in negative equity and unable to afford your mortgage because of unemployment?

Should people sell at a loss, have the banks chase them for the rest and go live in a LA provided house?

Most people in rural areas have to provide their own sewage treatment plants at enormous cost to themselves on an ongoing basis.

How much do you pay for treating your sewage?

We are subsidising people in urban areas.

tayto lover

yekahS wrote: »

Everything is taxed. Everyone has to pay tax. If you can afford a house, then you can afford this tax. Its a fair way of taxing those people who have assets. I've to pay tax on my investments, despite it not requiring any services from the government.

Get over yourself. The very fact that you live in a rural area means you're already being subsidised by people who live in urban areas. :rolleyes:

It is not obvious at all that if someone can afford a house then they can afford this Tax. There are people genuinely struggling in this country and that is just a flippant statement and also rubbing it in a bit that they are unable to pay.
You might need to get over yourself.

Yitzhak Rabin

kr7 wrote: »

What if your in negative equity and unable to afford your mortgage because of unemployment?

Should people sell at a loss, have the banks chase them for the rest and go live in a LA provided house?

If you can't afford to pay for something, then yes, you should give up ownership.

Ghandee

yekahS wrote: »

Everything is taxed. Everyone has to pay tax. If you can afford a house, then you can afford this tax. Its a fair way of taxing those people who have assets. I've to pay tax on my investments, despite it not requiring any services from the government.

Get over yourself. The very fact that you live in a rural area means you're already being subsidised by people who live in urban areas. :rolleyes:

I don't dispute everyone must pay tax, I just refuse to pay a tax for the pleasure of living in my house.

Introduce rates (I've repeatedly said this) which I'll gladly pay for, I will not (and by the looks of this poll, yes camp outnumbered 3-1) neither will the majority of this country pay a tax towards 'services' they already pay for.

Btw, who said I'm rural

tayto lover

yekahS wrote: »

If you can't afford to pay for something, then yes, you should give up ownership.

Absolute rubbish.
If people can't afford to eat properly because they are trying to pay their bills then they should give up living ?? Very arrogant of you.

lugha

Dub XV wrote: »

I haven't a notion but I understand why you ask it.

Thankfully for us all I am not charged with solving the Country's deficit.

On the flip side there is no harm in me opposing such taxes. Fair play to people who are willing to bend over and accept everyting that comes to them. Without opposition democracy doesn't work?

Certainly “bending over and accepting it” is the colloquial way some around here would put it . Some of us would use the rather less amusing, prosaic phrase of “having to deal with reality".

And you certainly are free to simply oppose things for the sake of opposing them. But if you don’t have an alternative solution then your credibility is rather undermined wouldn’t you say? Surely the logical extension of your position would be to oppose ALL state imposed taxes/charges/fees (presumably you would rather not pay them?) and simply say you “haven’t a clue” how the state provided services like education, health, policing etc are to be funded?