Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 3] *Poll Reset*

darkhorse

K-9 wrote: »

Rather than getting too in depth on it, can you actually quote me a case that the freemen actually won?

I do not know anything whatsoever about freemen, so my answer to you is no I cant.

Am Chile

darkhorse wrote: »

Why do some people have a bad opinion of freemen, A.C.? Also, why would it make a difference if they were affiliated. The reason I ask this question is, because, if, just for example, the relevant articles were to be re-introduced into our constitution, would it not give power of referendum to the whole of the population of our country, (not just the freemen) and if it did, what would it matter whether we called ourselves freeman, or any other kind of men (if taxe's and charges keep going the way they're going, then the most appropriate name for a lot of us would be oppressed, imo).
Personally speaking, I wish that I understood the law of the land a bit more than I do, and if I did, and I seen anything that I thought was not in accordance with the law, I would advise people what was right and help them the best I could, just like Ben Gilroy is doing, (and being criticised for doing so in some circles). Finally, I would like to say, A.C., that whether ddi are involved with freemen or not, I think I would rather have them, or someone with their ideals, representing us from the start and dealing with the people who got us into the mess that we are in, that, incidentally 5 years on, no one has yet been held to account. I know it is a bit off topic, but I was just trying to answer a post.

I can,t speak for everyone who has negative opinions of the freemen,when they held public meetings under their own name (freemen on the land )

I attended one of the local freemen on the land public meetings to suss it out and hear what they had to say to the general public, they gave advice how to question a judge if the judge is carrying an official badge for proof they are a judge, a long lecture was given by another fellow on motor tax, some advice was given if someone is driving without motor tax if stopped by a gardai their advice was to ask the gardai for proof of a contract between two parties, I walked out half way during that meeting, I thought they were giving very dodgy misleading advice out to people, on a political level the freemen wouldn,t be for me

Chips Lovell

They have a rather odd interpretation of the law and seem to think that statute law is contractual and if you don't consent to the contract, it can't apply to you. And while it may sound appealing to people in financial and legal difficulties, their approach is probably going to do you more harm than good in the end.

They're kind of the lunatic fringe and any new party would need to consider the PR of associating with them.

DoesNotCompute

darkhorse wrote: »

incidentally 5 years on, no one has yet been held to account. I know it is a bit off topic, but I was just trying to answer a post.

3 of Anglo's directors have been formally charged and brought to court. Quinn and his family are also up in court. FF have paid the price of their gombeen politics politically by being wiped out in the most recent election.

It's a bit disingenuous to say that no-one's been held to account.

DoesNotCompute

Am Chile wrote: »

I thought they were giving very dodgy misleading advice out to people

Not too different from all the Working Group TDs advising people not to pay the HHC, then.

dvpower

DoesNotCompute wrote: »

Not too different from all the Working Group TDs advising people not to pay the HHC, then.

... or a lot of advise that was given out on this thread.

paddy147

DoesNotCompute wrote: »

3 of Anglo's directors have been formally charged and brought to court. Quinn and his family are also up in court. FF have paid the price of their gombeen politics politically by being wiped out in the most recent election.

It's a bit disingenuous to say that no-one's been held to account.

Yep Quinn and Fingers are having a very hard/rough time with the millions upon millions of euro sitting in various bank accounts allright...not to forgt all those lovely properties and cars in Ireland,and all around Europe and the wider world.

I really do feel sorry for Quinn and Fingers......



















NOT.

K-9

darkhorse wrote: »

I do not know anything whatsoever about freemen, so my answer to you is no I cant.

Exactly, nobody can quote one.

tayto lover

DoesNotCompute wrote: »

Not too different from all the Working Group TDs advising people not to pay the HHC, then.

Income tax, P.R.S.I., U.S.C. levies, education fees,mortgage, motor tax, motor insurance, health insurance, V.H.I., home insurance, t.v. licence, heating oil/gas, petrol, credit union repayments, tolls, school books, uniforms, electric bill, telephone bill, broadband charge. bin charge. There may be others.
All before a bit of food is put on the table of the average household.
No holiday.
No nights out.

Property Tax and Water charges to come.

Just a question for you people in favour of all these new taxes to come --
Where do you think people will get the money to pay these ?

Doctors reporting a rise in depression and suicides.
Charities reporting a drop in donations and a rise in the numbers going hungry.

Again to you, where are the people to get the money for these new charges and taxes being lumped on them by a totally uncaring Government ?

Bruthal

tayto lover wrote: »

Just a question for you people in favour of all these new taxes to come --
Where do you think people will get the money to pay these ?

You would wonder would they have any limit to which they would unquestioningly pay more and more tax, or would they start to oppose it, once they had to give up the items they tell others to in this thread.

Of course, the answer to that is obvious, but they will tell us they would pay all they are asked, no matter how difficult it becomes for them, because they assume it will never bring hardship to them.

by a totally uncaring Government

And exactly the same applies to them. The similarities are never ending.

darkhorse

DoesNotCompute wrote: »

Concessions announced for some groups:

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/government-confirms-property-tax-concessions-584639.html[/QUOTE]

I know who I'm voting for next time.

Berlusconi: Vote for me and I'll refund your property tax ...

darkhorse

Robbo wrote: »

Ben Gilroy would be a common figurehead for the Freemen and DDI.

Is this a 100% fact.

darkhorse

DoesNotCompute wrote: »

3 of Anglo's directors have been formally charged and brought to court. Quinn and his family are also up in court. FF have paid the price of their gombeen politics politically by being wiped out in the most recent election.

It's a bit disingenuous to say that no-one's been held to account.

We seem to have different views on what being held accountable means. Because someone is formally charged and brought to court does not mean that they are being held accountable. However, if the people that you mention above ever go to trial and are found guilty and punished, then they are being held accountable. Unless and until such circumstances come to pass, we can safely assume that no-one has been held to account.

darkhorse

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

They have a rather odd interpretation of the law and seem to think that statute law is contractual and if you don't consent to the contract, it can't apply to you. And while it may sound appealing to people in financial and legal difficulties, their approach is probably going to do you more harm than good in the end.

They're kind of the lunatic fringe and any new party would need to consider the PR of associating with them.

I don't know who you are talking about here, as you don't quote any post, Vlad, but with all the talk of ddi and freemen, I am presuming you are talking about both, as some posters say they are affiliated, so just could you explain to me what are they saying here, that is actually wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=4lHUWzDryRY

Chips Lovell

I was talking about freemen on the land.

darkhorse

DoesNotCompute wrote: »

Not too different from all the Working Group TDs advising people not to pay the HHC, then.

dvpower wrote: »

... or a lot of advise that was given out on this thread.

I am really of the opinion that, had you both been there, that you would have tried to talk Michael Collins out of taking part in the Easter Rebellion.

darkhorse

K-9 wrote: »

Exactly, nobody can quote one.

How can ya quote something about somebody that ya never heard about.

darkhorse

tayto lover wrote: »

Income tax, P.R.S.I., U.S.C. levies, education fees,mortgage, motor tax, motor insurance, health insurance, V.H.I., home insurance, t.v. licence, heating oil/gas, petrol, credit union repayments, tolls, school books, uniforms, electric bill, telephone bill, broadband charge. bin charge. There may be others.
All before a bit of food is put on the table of the average household.
No holiday.
No nights out.

Property Tax and Water charges to come.

Just a question for you people in favour of all these new taxes to come --
Where do you think people will get the money to pay these ?

Doctors reporting a rise in depression and suicides.
Charities reporting a drop in donations and a rise in the numbers going hungry.

Again to you, where are the people to get the money for these new charges and taxes being lumped on them by a totally uncaring Government ?

Good luck waiting for an answer to that one, tayto. I have asked that question on this thread several times.

Geuze

Short answer - there will be less consumer spending and saving in the economy.

Tax payments will rise somewhat, households will spend and save less, but the Govt will borrow less.


It's the same answer to any tax rise, except that a property tax is less hurtful to employment than other taxes.

darkhorse

Geuze wrote: »

Short answer - there will be less consumer spending in the economy.

Hello, an economy needs consumer spending to thrive.:rolleyes:

Robbo

darkhorse wrote: »

Is this a 100% fact.

Here's some source material which should be a good start for your homework.

paddy147

Blackmarket economy will rise too.

Bruthal

Geuze wrote: »

Tax payments will rise somewhat, households will spend and save less, but the Govt will borrow less.

A great many households are spending less than is required already to keep up with bills/mortgages. What happens to a minus figure when you take more away from it?

except that a property tax is less hurtful to employment than other taxes.

Property tax is simply an easy target on people providing themselves with a home, no more thought goes into it than that. Every other tax that can be thought of is there already.

Look at petrol, out of €1.61 a litre, €0.90 is tax, or 55%. Then the motor tax itself, slaughtered we are, and a certainty to get far worse.

Property tax and water charges will do the exact same. Sacrifice the people in difficulty, to prop up those that are not. Its as simple as that imo, and is clearly evidenced in this very thread.

crusher000

The Government now want purchasers of houses to shop on the people they are buying the house of to revenue if the have under valued their homes for property tax reasons but sell it at a higher rate, if they don't the buyer could be held for the outstanding tax.

What a great system and how if you buy a house can you follow up with the seller if the deal has been done and dusted ?. This Government really really don't have a clue and are treating the Irish people like school kids. Come tell us if you see anyone acting naughtie ?

Also if you over value your home and pay too much tax there is no way to seek money over paid back.

crusher000

except that a property tax is less hurtful to employment than other taxes.

This is the line the government are trying to sell us. But if a house hold has to cut back on weekly shopping and spending in other areas this will effect the retail sector. Decrease in spending , less money for retailers people laid off. These are jobs lost or do the government think that this doesn't effect employment. They may need to go back to the think tank.

Bruthal

crusher000 wrote: »

This Government really really don't have a clue and are treating the Irish people like school kids..

That`s because our governments, while on the tv looking for votes tell us that the electorate are intelligent, in reality they believe, possibly correctly, that we are a nation of fuckin idiots who put up with their hypocrisy and self serving.

crusher000

Bruthal wrote: »

That`s because our governments, while on the tv looking for votes tell us that the electorate are intelligent, in reality they believe, possibly correctly, that we are a nation of fuckin idiots who put up with their hypocrisy and self serving.

Your right, when did we lose the will to stand up and fight for ourselves ? I remember being in Dublin in the late 80's at marches, the top of the march would be over by Trininty and people at the back of the march still at the Garden of Remebrance.

golfball37

I really don't think its been explained how taxing income at a higher level is bad for jobs and I keep hearing govt spokespeople saying it would be . It costs the employer the same either way does it not?

There's a contanst soundbyte trotted out "detrimental to tax employment". Taking an additional couple of k from incomes over 100k is not only prudent but fair. The people in average wages cannot take much more in regressive tax measures.

Taking 2k extra of high earners is an inconvenicance not a matter of life or death. Still we're worse to take it.

dvpower

darkhorse wrote: »

I am really of the opinion that, had you both been there, that you would have tried to talk Michael Collins out of taking part in the Easter Rebellion.

I lol at your attempt at casting common tax evaders as revolutionaries.

Chips Lovell

Pretty much any new tax or tax increase potentially has an effect on retail spending and thus on jobs in retail.

However, this isn't being what is being referred to when its said that raising income taxes can impact on employment. Instead, its the impact of income tax rates on the incentive to either find employment or get a better job. The higher the rate of tax, the lower the incentive to earn more, since more goes to the exchequer.

For example, say hypothetically the top rate of tax is 90 per cent. Pretty much nobody would take a job that put them on to the top rate since there is little incentive to do so. In that situation, there is little point in having a top rate on that, since the revenue raised from it would likely be much smaller than the take from a lower top rate. If the top rate is 80 per cent, maybe more people would take jobs on that rate, but perhaps not as much as 60 per cent, and so on...