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

Le_Dieux

Ghandee wrote: »

Donal and DNC, it must be nice to be in the safely insulated position of being employed in the cs/ps were you are still receiving pay rises (aka increments) pensions, and jobs guaranteed for life.

Of course, our taxes pay for your salaries, so you guys advocating the rest of us to pay this charge is pretty much expected.

(I presume you're public/civil servants, right?)

And paid by whose money?

Le_Dieux

I have a question for the 'Pro' brigade:

After the decision yesterday in the Supreme Court, what's Your thoughts on the govt's attempt to make a complete dog's dinner over the referendum ( of which I will be boycotting as whatever the outcome, this will end up in the courts of appeal)?

Hijpo

lugha wrote: »

Well they are anonymous! But leaving that aside and lets suppose that some of these anonymous lads just happen to have a couple of pals at the cabinet table.

Do you suppose the rest of the cabinet would cheerfully agree to give them an almighty wallop of money, given the impact it would have on their future generations? Or if you want to be cynical, the impact it would have on their future electoral prospects?

And of course, there is an additional problem in that the previous FF led government would have done the very same thing, if they were in power.

So they have friends at the top of FG / Lab who would willingly compromise their career to dig them out? (And persuade their colleagues to cooperate!) And ditto friends in the ranks of FF!

Those bondholders must be seriously charming dudes if they can pull that one off! Or perhaps they have compromising photographs of them all after a raucous session in the Dail bar? :P

I’m going to have to say I don’t find the “buddies” explanation to be terribly convincing.

See, this is the problem when you think things out. Some explanation that you might wheel out at a whim may not be quite as believable when you take a closer look.

What do you expect when the people in power have all the power in the world to protect themselfs but no power at all to change the drains on the economy. They wouldnt be able to get away with it, the wouldnt be able to spin all the yarns, twist the figures, manipulate the likes of ye if they wernt already after thinking all these things through. Of course they are going to be 1 step ahead with cover ups.

So many questions, vague answers and faulty figures.

I pity the yes sides naivety, i really do.

What a ridiculous answer the anti side is becoming a joke at this stage with their refusals to answer even the most basic questions. What a joke the whole thing is, absolutely hilarious though.

And as for you, the fact that someone who wants to play golf sticks there name in on the time sheet beside you and your buddy, which ultimatley pisses you off because you and your buddy want to play alone at that time really sums up your mentality to anything that goes against what you want. Your like a toddler who doesnt want to share his toy.

Honestly the people on the yes side come across as completely arrogant, condescending with an extremely high estimation of themselfs.

Hijpo

Le_Dieux wrote: »

I have a question for the 'Pro' brigade:

After the decision yesterday ib the Supreme Court, what's Your thoughts on the govt's attempt to make a complete dog's dinner over the referendum ( of which I will be boycotting as whatever the outcome, this will end up in the courts of appeal)?

they wont answer that as they will deflect with "thats got nothing to do with the HHC"

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

Donal and DNC, it must be nice to be in the safely insulated position of being employed in the cs/ps were you are still receiving pay rises (aka increments) pensions, and jobs guaranteed for life.

Of course, our taxes pay for your salaries, so you guys advocating the rest of us to pay this charge is pretty much expected.

(I presume you're public/civil servants, right?)

You would presume wrong Ghandee although it must be nice for you to be in a position where you aren't even liable for the hhc.

tayto lover

Hijpo wrote: »

they wont answer that as they will deflect with "thats got nothing to do with the HHC"

What about our money being pumped into Anmglo and six of them on 500k a year ??
Especially after Noonan being caught out in the lie that only one person was on that money :mad:

How many more lies will they be caught out on?

donalg1

Hijpo wrote: »

What do you expect when the people in power have all the power in the world to protect themselfs but no power at all to change the drains on the economy. They wouldnt be able to get away with it, the wouldnt be able to spin all the yarns, twist the figures, manipulate the likes of ye if they wernt already after thinking all these things through. Of course they are going to be 1 step ahead with cover ups.

So many questions, vague answers and faulty figures.

I pity the yes sides naivety, i really do.



And as for you, the fact that someone who wants to play golf sticks there name in on the time sheet beside you and your buddy, which ultimatley pisses you off because you and your buddy want to play alone at that time really sums up your mentality to anything that goes against what you want. Your like a toddler who doesnt want to share his toy.

Honestly the people on the yes side come across as completely arrogant, condescending with an extremely high estimation of themselfs.

And insulting them means you come acrosshow exactly. If you want to discuss tee times I suggest you go to the golf forum and stop trying to drag this off topic.I think its against the charter to do this also.

Hijpo

donalg1 wrote: »

And insulting them means you come acrosshow exactly. If you want to discuss tee times I suggest you go to the golf forum and stop trying to drag this off topic.I think its against the charter to do this also.

just giving my opinion. Im not discussing tee times im discussing your mentality, the tee time was simply an example. Seen as examples/proof are so important to the yes side i took it upon myself to provide you with one.

donalg1

Hijpo wrote: »

just giving my opinion. Im not discussing tee times im discussing your mentality, the tee time was simply an example. Seen as examples/proof are so important to the yes side i took it upon myself to provide you with one.

No you talked about something that is in no way related to the hhc. If you want to talk about golf head to the golf forum where I believe I gave my reasons for saying what I said which you chose to ignore. I think you need to grow up somewhat.

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

You would presume wrong Ghandee although it must be nice for you to be in a position where you aren't even liable for the hhc.

As it stands, I've not, nor will I ever be 'registering for a waiver' so, (and according to DV) I am indeed liable Donal.

Regardless, you may recall, way back in Dec last year, I was one of the first posters to strongly oppose the charge, and urge existence to it.
I later found out my estate was exempt, but would have to apply for the exemption.

I firstly, told all on the thread that I had learned of my estates 'exemption' (I was open about that from the start)

I stuck to my principles throughout though, and am still sticking to them to this day.

Your principles on the other hand, shaky at the start to say the least.........

Ghandee

Donal, why do I think your a public servant would you think?

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

Donal, why do I think your a public servant would you think?

Whi knows ghandee is it because I paid the hhc maybe. You accused me of being a member or supporter of fg before too and how wrong you were then.

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

As it stands, I've not, nor will I ever be 'registering for a waiver' so, (and according to DV) I am indeed liable Donal.

Regardless, you may recall, way back in Dec last year, I was one of the first posters to strongly oppose the charge, and urge existence to it.
I later found out my estate was exempt, but would have to apply for the exemption.

I firstly, told all on the thread that I had learned of my estates 'exemption' (I was open about that from the start)

I stuck to my principles throughout though, and am still sticking to them to this day.

Your principles on the other hand, shaky at the start to say the least.........

Ha ha ha ha pmsl my principles are shaky hahaha brilliant mine have always been the same unlike the whole of the anti sides who's principles change as often as the weather. Cheers for the laugh though hahaha

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

Whi knows ghandee is it because I paid the hhc maybe. You accused me of being a member or supporter of fg before too and how wrong you were then.

Sigh..... I thought this accusation had been recertified last week :rolleyes: No, no I never Donal.

You tried that line last week, I think a mod actually had to pull you up on that.

Think harder Donal.


Why might some here think (righty or wrongly) you're in the ps/cs.

tayto lover

donalg1 wrote: »

Ha ha ha ha pmsl my principles are shaky hahaha brilliant mine have always been the same unlike the whole of the anti sides who's principles change as often as the weather. Cheers for the laugh though hahaha

Did you stop anywhere on the way home Donal? A wee bit tipsy tonight?

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

Sigh..... I thought this accusation had been recertified last week :rolleyes:No, no I never Donal.

You tried that line last week, I think a mod actually had to pull you up on that.

Think harder Donal.


Why might some here think (righty or wrongly) you're in the ps/cs.

Ha you ran to the mod you mean because you had no answers and needed them to dig you outta the hole you dug for yourself. Your refusal to answer my questions ghandee said it all and we both know it.

donalg1

tayto lover wrote: »

Did you stop anywhere on the way home Donal? A wee bit tipsy tonight?

Nah havent been anywhere today although might go to the pub in a bit for a couple tayto.

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

Ha you ran to the mod you mean because you had no answers and needed them to dig you outta the hole you dug for yourself. Your refusal to answer my questions ghandee said it all and we both know it.

Wrong again Donal.

Time for you to put up or shut up.

Please, copy and paste the text were I 'accuse you of being a supporter or a member of FG.
Then, post the link to the post.

We'll resolve this amicably tonight, once/if you post link I'll unreservedly apologise.

If you can't, let's not mention it again please. Eh?

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

Wrong again Donal.

Time for you to put up or shut up.

Please, copy and paste the text were I 'accuse you of being a supporter or a member of FG.
Then, post the link to the post.

We'll resolve this amicably tonight, once/if you post link I'll unreservedly apologise.

If you can't, let's not mention it again please. Eh?

I posted it already ghandee its the one where you referred vlad to one of my posts.

Why did you refer him to it.

And who were you referring to if it wasn't me.

I know you won't answer those two questions as I have asked you a million times now. So can you put up or shut up please

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

I posted it already ghandee its the one where you referred vlad to one of my posts.

You'll have no problem posting it again then so.

Ah go on. Need the laugh.

MOH

Hijpo wrote: »

jesus christ donal they have 2 houses. the people with one mortgage have that house as there home. the people who gambled for greed and got bitten in the arse should sell the property that is dragging them down. Sell it to the bank, sell it to the council, lower the price to sell it. If they didnt have people in that house its still costing them money. Why jump into the deep end clutching onto a concrete block that you can let go of if you really wanted to.

There seems to be the assumption everywhere that anyone with a second house is some greedy property developer that contributed to the ruin of the country. As opposed to, say, someone with their own mortgage who inherited a family home after a bereavement.

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

You'll have no problem posting it again then so.

Ah go on. Need the laugh.

Ah whatever that's what I thought you would avoid the questions. So predictable.

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

Ah whatever that's what I thought you would avoid the questions. So predictable.

Can't post a link eh?

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

Can't post a link eh?

Already did.

Can't answer my questions eh.

lugha

Hijpo wrote: »

What do you expect when the people in power have all the power in the world to protect themselfs but no power at all to change the drains on the economy. They wouldnt be able to get away with it, the wouldnt be able to spin all the yarns, twist the figures, manipulate the likes of ye if they wernt already after thinking all these things through. Of course they are going to be 1 step ahead with cover ups.

So many questions, vague answers and faulty figures.

I pity the yes sides naivety, i really do.

I’m sorry but that is simply gibberish. Can you confirm, in plain English, it if is your view that the reason that the present government has opted to pay the unsecured bondholders is because said bondholders are all mates with a significant number of the head honchos in the said government?

Ghandee wrote: »

Donal, why do I think your a public servant would you think?

I’m perplexed as to why you would think so (or at least I would be if I felt you thought your opinions out fully! )
If the property tax debate has evolved into a more taxes V spending cuts debate then I could certainly see why you might imagine that there might be a disproportionate number of public sector workers on the pro side,

But it hasn’t. Only Izzy Skint on the no side, as far as I can recall, has argued for spending cuts only as opposed to higher taxes. Many of the others (apart from the completely deluded, who think neither taxes nor spending cuts are necessary!) have argued for adjustments to income tax bands / credits rather than a property tax. Thus why you think the yes / no divide on property tax coincides with public sector / private sector is not at all clear to me?

Or do you suspect those on the no side who call for income tax adjustments (aren’t you one of them?) are also public sector?

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

Already did.

Can't answer my questions eh.

Why might I think you're actually a civil/public servant Donal?

Vizzy

Ghandee wrote: »

Why might I think you're actually a civil/public servant Donal?

Jesus Ghandee the suspense is killin me !

Put me out of my misery and tell me(and everyone else) why you thought he is a civil/public servant.

tayto lover

Vizzy wrote: »

Jesus Ghandee the suspense is killin me !

Put me out of my misery and tell me(and everyone else) why you thought he is a civil/public servant.

Me too.

donalg1

Vizzy wrote: »

Jesus Ghandee the suspense is killin me !

Put me out of my misery and tell me(and everyone else) why you thought he is a civil/public servant.

Jeez don't ask him a question he can't handle them

Ghandee

I find it kinda odd that someone not employed in that sector knows so much about council entitlements, etc.

He's well informed for a non employee....