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

tayto lover

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I didn't say that taxpayer wasn't bailing out AIB. I said the HHC wasn't being used to bail out AIB.

If it goes into a central pot then it's fairly obvious it does.

Chips Lovell

tayto lover wrote: »

If it goes into a central pot then it's fairly obvious it does.

A. How can money collected after the bailout be used to finance the bailout? B. How can you deny that local authorities aren't receiving HHC money?

bgrizzley

Ghandee wrote: »

'it's only €100' they say.

Tell that to these folk.

Householders opting to have power cut off By Seán McCárthaigh Thursday, November 22, 2012 Householders with large arrears on electricity bills are opting to be dis-connected rather than have pre-paid meters installed. The chairman of the Commission for Energy Regulation, Dermot Nolan, said he was surprised that threequarters of those in serious arrears were opting to be switched off rather than falling into further debt.

He told the Oireachtas Committee on Transport and Communications that 5,000 residential electricity customers had been disconnected in the first quarter of 2012, and 1,600 customers had their gas supply cut off.

However, Mr Nolan said the number of disconnections would fall during the second quarter of 2012.

He said about 10% of all electricity and gas customers were struggling to pay utility bills, representing approximately 200,000 electricity customers and 62,800 gas customers.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/householders-opting-to-have-power-cut-off-214727.html

As long as bankers pensions/TD's salaries and PS overspending isnt affected, it's all ok though.

Well Ghandee, they say you have to be cruel to be kind...

http://www.esb.ie/main/press/pressreleaseWS.jsp?id=2394

https://www.facebook.com/ElectricIreland



(Welcome back Gerry!)

Chips Lovell

Bullseye1 wrote: »

You believe the property tax will be €100 next year? Good luck with that.

Didn't say that. It's not like people are saying "I'll pay €100 but not more", is it? They're refusing to pay even €100.

bgrizzley

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Didn't say that. It's not like people are saying "I'll pay €100 but not more", is it? They're refusing to pay even €100.

Vlad, would you sign a lifetime contract with a company to, (for example) service your car for E100 this year when you know they will charge you E500 next year for the same service. (and god knows how much in year 3)

Hijpo

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Didn't say that. It's not like people are saying "I'll pay €100 but not more", is it? They're refusing to pay even €100.

Because in order to pay the €100 you have to register your address, if you register your address they tax that address for alot more than €100

tayto lover

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

A. How can money collected after the bailout be used to finance the bailout? B. How can you deny that local authorities aren't receiving HHC money?

There is still money being paid over to Bankers and bondholders. Another 3.1 billion in March I believe.
LA's might get some but it is still coming, we are told, from a central fund of taxes.

bgrizzley

tayto lover wrote: »

There is still money being paid over to Bankers and bondholders. Another 3.1 billion in March I believe.
LA's might get some but it is still coming, we are told, from a central fund of taxes.

and that money is the very same taxes we currently pay for our services. the HCC is a scam to replace that tax. smoke and mirrors....

Chips Lovell

bgrizzley wrote: »

Vlad, would you sign a lifetime contract with a company to, (for example) service your car for E100 this year when you know they will charge you E500 next year for the same service. (and god knows how much in year 3)

Except they aren't comparable. A tax liability isn't a contract. It's not something you opt into.

tayto lover wrote: »

There is still money being paid over to Bankers and bondholders. Another 3.1 billion in March I believe.
LA's might get some but it is still coming, we are told, from a central fund of taxes.

I think you've misunderstood how the bank bailout is structured. A lot of people seem to think the government is writing a cheque every time a bond repayment is due. Instead, it's coming from the banks themselves, who after recapitalisation, have the funds necessary to repay their debt obligations. None of the tax money collected this year is going to the banks.

Bullseye1

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Didn't say that. It's not like people are saying "I'll pay €100 but not more", is it? They're refusing to pay even €100.

One is related to the other. Those who haven't paid have done so knowing that it will be much more next year.

bgrizzley

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Except they aren't comparable. A tax liability isn't a contract. It's not something you opt into.

not comparable in your opinion.
But in one way you are correct, at least a garage would do the service you are paying them for...:p

tayto lover

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Except they aren't comparable. A tax liability isn't a contract. It's not something you opt into.



I think you've misunderstood how the bank bailout is structured. A lot of people seem to think the government is writing a cheque every time a bond repayment is due. Instead, it's coming from the banks themselves, who after recapitalisation, have the funds necessary to repay their debt obligations. None of the tax money collected this year is going to the banks.

And the taxpayer is saddled with the lot. It's like musical chairs in so far as everything is moving to the same music.

Ghandee

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Except they aren't comparable. A tax liability isn't a contract. It's not something you opt into.



I think you've misunderstood how the bank bailout is structured. A lot of people seem to think the government is writing a cheque every time a bond repayment is due. Instead, it's coming from the banks themselves, who after recapitalisation, have the funds necessary to repay their debt obligations. None of the tax money collected this year is going to the banks.

Vlad, the govt (we) own the banks.
Each time the bank write a cheque, it's on the govts behalf.

Chips Lovell

Bullseye1 wrote: »

One is related to the other. Those who haven't paid have done so knowing that it will be much more next year.

Yes, but if they thought it was reasonable, they could have paid this year and refused to next year, no?

Ghandee wrote: »

Vlad, the govt (we) own the banks.
Each time the bank write a cheque, it's on the govts behalf.

Nobody's disputing we own the banks. What I'm saying is that HHC money isn't going to the banks.

Buford Tannen

Reloc8 wrote: »

Why does anyone think not paying the HHC will actually change anything ?

That's your protest ?

Yikes. The establishment must be quaking in their boots.

(for the record, I paid it. I'm lucky enough that I could afford it, and its the law, so there you go).

So you've signed up to have your property devalued by thousands,and paid a 100 euro for the privilege

Well done

Ghandee

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Nobody's disputing we own the banks. What I'm saying is that HHC money isn't going to the banks.

A group of ten are in the pub, two in the group detest each other.
The group decide to have a kitty.

Out of that kitty, ten rounds of drink have been paid for.

The two guys that hate each other, have at some point in the evening bought each other a drink whether they like it or not.

See any similarity with tax payers money/central fund/where it goes?

Chips Lovell

Ghandee wrote: »

See any similarity with tax payers money/central fund/where it goes?

When have the banks received state money since the HHC was introduced?

Ghandee

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

When have the banks received state money since the HHC was introduced?

Are you being difficult now for the craic?

Who is repaying the money the banks got (via the state)?

Tax payers is it not?

Hijpo

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Yes, but if they thought it was reasonable, they could have paid this year and refused to next year, no?

What good would refusal do when they have your details? how would we go about refusing it?

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Nobody's disputing we own the banks. What I'm saying is that HHC money isn't going to the banks.

Is the property tax filling a void in the coffers that is caused when money is taken from the coffers and given to banks?
Tax has not decreased, and if it has then some charge, levie or increase in another tax has been implemented that off sets the decrease. the cost of living in ireland has not decreased. The only thing that has increased is PS and governmental wages, allowances, benefits, and whatever else.
Some people are infact "indirectly" getting way more money than they deserve.

Define necessity, then take all the perks given to the PS fat cats and politicians and weigh them up against education, health, policing etc
How many could you strike off the list to save money?

Buford Tannen

gurramok wrote: »

If your staff rent, nice of you to support the passing of the forthcoming property tax onto the tenants, rather than the owners making a stand against the tax. A bit of mé féin right there.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81807039&postcount=105

Nice of you to suport a tax that you as a renter are exempt from,mé féin is right

bgrizzley

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

When have the banks received state money since the HHC was introduced?

Chips Lovell

Ghandee wrote: »

Are you being difficult now for the craic?

Who is repaying the money the banks got (via the state)?

Tax payers is it not?

Indeed, but that wasn't the question, was it?

Hijpo wrote: »

What good would refusal do when they have your details? how would we go about refusing it?

Are you trying to avoid the tax or not pay it as a point of principle? If it's the latter, surely you shouldn't care if they have your details?

Hijpo

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Indeed, but that wasn't the question, was it?



Are you trying to avoid the tax or not pay it as a point of principle? If it's the latter, surely you shouldn't care if they have your details?

Iv already stated why im not paying the tax, Donal will fill you in he thanked my post.

Not giving them my details helps when it comes to having money to put back into the economy by being a consumer instead of squandering it on a broken system.

lugha

Hijpo wrote: »

But you said
Which would be classed as a generalisation covering everyone against the HHC. So if you can find one post from everyone against the HHC that states "i dont get paid enough....." your credibility might go up a notch to 0.01

This particular sub-discussion was about austerity and not the HHC in particular. And I asked the question of those who support this campaign against austerity on Saturday, where would we get the 13 billion a year we need if we decide not to pursue spending cuts or raise taxes.

Ghandee responded by saying he wasn’t get paid enough (in other words, he doesn’t know). Nobody else answered, which is itself an answer.
Several posters did offer opinions on how austerity does not work. Which is super! But alas has no bearing on the question asked. So once again lads, here in its splendid simplicity is the question.

If we abandon austere measures, who will lend us the 13 billion a year?

Any takers?

bgrizzley

lugha wrote: »

This particular sub-discussion was about austerity and not the HHC in particular. And I asked the question of those who support this campaign against austerity on Saturday, where would we get the 13 billion a year we need if we decide not to pursue spending cuts or raise taxes.

Ghandee responded by saying he wasn’t get paid enough (in other words, he doesn’t know). Nobody else answered, which is itself an answer.
Several posters did offer opinions on how austerity does not work. Which is super! But alas has no bearing on the question asked. So once again lads, here in its splendid simplicity is the question.

If we abandon austere measures, who will lend us the 13 billion a year?

Any takers?

im sure there are some of us not answering because we are not against austerity per se, just against this tax.
let me ask you one. how is 160 million euros going to help with the 13 billion pa.
its just over 1% of that amount. its like p1ssing in the Atlantic and saying the sea is rising...

lugha

bgrizzley wrote: »

im sure there are some of us not answering because we are not against austerity per se, just against this tax.

But some were at pains to point out that the campaign on Saturday is against austerity in general, and not the HHC in particular. (This was an attempt to distance themselves from the supporters of Sean Quinn who have also decided to pick and choose which laws they will obey)

bgrizzley wrote: »

let me ask you one. how is 160 million euros going to help with the 13 billion pa.

It won’t make much of a difference. But those that argue against austerity (i.e. this Saturday gang) oppose any such measure and not just this one in particular.
We might make some progress in addressing our deficit without a property tax. We definitely will not if we rule out all taxes and all spending cuts.

bgrizzley

lugha wrote: »

But some were at pains to point out that the campaign on Saturday is against austerity in general, and not the HHC in particular. (This was an attempt to distance themselves from the supporters of Sean Quinn who have also decided to pick and choose which laws they will obey)

It won’t make much of a difference. But those that argue against austerity (i.e. this Saturday gang) oppose any such measure and not just this one in particular.
We might make some progress in addressing our deficit without a property tax. We definitely will not if we rule out all taxes and all spending cuts.

Well, if it doesnt make much difference its just an excerise in futility.

And its been said by the pro side here that all these tiny protest marches are laughable and dont amount to anything. whats wrong with amalgamating them? its the Govs own fault for not listening to the people.
its about fcuking time everyone stood together...

lugha

bgrizzley wrote: »

Well, if it doesnt make much difference its just an excerise in futility.

There is no single measure that the government could take that alone would have much impact on our deficit. But cumulatively, they do have an effect. And the property tax will be bringing in quite a bit more that 160 million.

bgrizzley wrote: »

its about fcuking time everyone stood together...

I would say it is about time everyone faced reality. And the reality is that it makes almost no difference who is in government. There is little sense in complaining about how the government is tackling our problems unless you can propose a better way. And apart from minor tweaking of detail, there isn’t really an alternative that avoids the need for austere measures.

tayto lover

lugha wrote: »

There is no single measure that the government could take that alone would have much impact on our deficit. But cumulatively, they do have an effect. And the property tax will be bringing in quite a bit more that 160 million.
I would say it is about time everyone faced reality. And the reality is that it makes almost no difference who is in government. There is little sense in complaining about how the government is tackling our problems unless you can propose a better way. And apart from minor tweaking of detail, there isn’t really an alternative that avoids the need for austere measures.

Is this where all our money and taxes are going --

http://vimeo.com/15759511

Hijpo

lugha wrote: »

This particular sub-discussion was about austerity and not the HHC in particular. And I asked the question of those who support this campaign against austerity on Saturday, where would we get the 13 billion a year we need if we decide not to pursue spending cuts or raise taxes.

Ghandee responded by saying he wasn’t get paid enough (in other words, he doesn’t know). Nobody else answered, which is itself an answer.
Several posters did offer opinions on how austerity does not work. Which is super! But alas has no bearing on the question asked. So once again lads, here in its splendid simplicity is the question.

If we abandon austere measures, who will lend us the 13 billion a year?

Any takers?

what has spending increased on since 2005? Is it all down to health, education and tax reductions?