Turfcutters to run in elections

MadsL

Sponge Bob wrote: »

They are evictions....or had you not noticed when flying past?

The state has chosen to raise a large carbon tax...which can easily fund purchase at market prices. I value my Blanket bog at €25k an acre so a raised bog would easily be worth twice that.

Fortunately the money is there....the greens insisted on carbon tax and sure it can be put to use buying carbon sinks.

All about the money eh? Pretty transparent aren't you.

Evictions, lol.

OpenYourEyes

In fairness to him, at least he's saying its all about the money for him. The people I really can't stand are the ones who pretend its about anything but money, but who's actions and responses then make it very clear that its all about the money!

Scofflaw

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Avoidance of freezing thanks to all those green party carbon taxes is a far more tangible 'environmental benefit' to my mind. Those taxes can be used to buy bogland at market value in order to effect preservation if required of course....instead of this ludicrous ban. After all they pull in well north of €100m a year.

You are aware that the turfcutter candidates WILL be elected.

Er, all what "green party carbon taxes"? Do you mean the single excise rise of about 3-4c which, despite being exactly the same size as virtually every other excise rise, was rather ludicrously painted as a "carbon tax"?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sponge Bob

It is the simplest maths. The government has chosen to tax carbon and now has a carbon sequestration funding pot as a consequence. Therefore they have pushed up the price of all fuel classes and with it the value of my bog.

They now have the damnable cheek to try to evict people off their bogs, with inadequate compensation, after taxing everybody with this carbon tax. The Greens (Gormley I believe it was as Minister for the Environment) originally proposed to buy raised bog held in full and in fee simple for just under €4k an acre and no more.

I understand that Gormleys department bought all of 3 acres of raised bog nationwide under this scheme and at that price. People burst themselves laughing at the idiocy of that stunt....and ignored it.

Needless to say the offer has improved since.

They can buy my bog off me with these carbon tax funds they have for carbon sequestration and sinking and trapping and trading and other carbony sheeut. They need but offer me the right price for the bog.

We are all carbon traders now you see.

MadsL

Sponge Bob wrote: »

It is the simplest maths. The government has chosen to tax carbon and now has a carbon sequestration funding pot as a consequence. Therefore they have pushed up the price of all fuel classes and with it the value of my bog.

They now have the damnable cheek to try to evict people off their bogs, with inadequate compensation, after taxing everybody with this carbon tax. The Greens (Gormley I believe it was as Minister for the Environment) originally proposed to buy raised bog held in full and in fee simple for just under €4k an acre and no more.

I understand that Gormleys department bought all of 3 acres of raised bog nationwide under this scheme and at that price. People burst themselves laughing at the idiocy of that stunt....and ignored it.

Needless to say the offer has improved since.

They can buy my bog off me with these carbon tax funds they have for carbon sequestration and sinking and trapping and trading and other carbony sheeut. They need but offer me the right price for the bog.

We are all carbon traders now you see.

Explain to me how turbary rights are the same as ownership?

Sponge Bob

I explained that at length in another thread in this forum....reread it carefully. Also check out Estovers while you are at it.

Uriel.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

.

Where do you get this bull**** from?
You lie and bluff your way through absolutely every interaction you have in relation to this issue, and you can never find/provide anything to back up your ridiculous claims

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The Greens (Gormley I believe it was as Minister for the Environment) originally proposed to buy raised bog held in full and in fee simple for just under €4k an acre and no more.

I understand that Gormleys department bought all of 3 acres of raised bog nationwide under this scheme and at that price. People burst themselves laughing at the idiocy of that stunt....and ignored it.

The bog Purchase Scheme was first introduced in 1999 by then (Fianna Fail) Minister for Arts,Heritage, Gaeltacht & the Island - Sile deValera and later upgraded by the Minister for Environment, Heritage and Local Government in 2004, (Martin Cullen - also Fianna Fail)

During the operation of the Scheme the State completed purchases from over 1,000 applicants at a total tune of €26m

Irish Examiner ( http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/farming/end-of-year-deadline-for-bog-compensation-177981.html

* A voluntary bog purchase scheme operated by the Department resulted in €26 million of purchases from more than 1,050 applicants, from 1999 until the scheme closed in May 2010 to new applicants. The department will write to all remaining bog purchase scheme applicants in the coming weeks to outline their options in light of availability of alternative compensation arrangements.

You say 3acres were purchased nationwide?? LOL when you say crap like that it's clear you are a joke. You don't even know the Government, political party or the Minister involved when the Schemes came into operation. The Greens have had nothing to do with the imposition of the Directive.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

They now have the damnable cheek to try to evict people off their bogs, with inadequate compensation, after taxing everybody with this carbon tax.

Almost 1,500 people have been paid compensation so far under the new Schemes and more applications are being assessed

Department Press Release - October 2012To date, 1,461 compensation payments have been made. 58 deliveries of turf have also been made, with a further 146 turf deliveries approved by the Department. This brings total expenditure on the compensation scheme to €2.28 million and total delivered and approved turf for delivery to 3,060 tonnes.

http://www.merrionstreet.ie/index.php/2012/10/deenihan-updates-dail-eireann-on-turf-issues-and-compensation-payments/

That seems like an awful lot of people in 53 bogs, the vast majority I would say, and if the majority are signing up I fail to see your logic that the compensation is inadequate. In fact if you take that the average size of a bog plot is one acre or less, €23,000 is a colossal price tax free and index linked

Sponge Bob

Uriel. wrote: »

€23,000 is a colossal price tax free and index linked

Try a Hedonic Regression pricing method so and leave out indexing.

As to the rest of your post I will ignore the offensive remarks and suggest that you are perhaps conflating two separate schemes.

1. The recent "Cessation of Turf Cutting Compensation Scheme"

and

2. The 'Bog Purchase Scheme('s) ...there were some iterations thereof but I won't bore anyone who might be reading up on Turbary and Estovers with the details save to say that 2 not equal 1 and 1 not equal 2.

Uriel.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Try a Hedonic Regression pricing method so and leave out indexing.

As to the rest of your post I will ignore the offensive remarks and suggest that you are perhaps conflating two separate schemes.

1. The recent "Cessation of Turf Cutting Compensation Scheme"

and

2. The 'Bog Purchase Scheme('s) ...there were some iterations thereof but I won't bore anyone who might be reading up on Turbary and Estovers with the details save to say that 2 not equal 1 and 1 not equal 2.

Not conflating anything.
Under bog Purchase scheme operated from 1999 to 2010 the State spent €26m on raised bog purchases from over 1,000 individuals. Now you said that the Greens introduced this and the Scheme was so crap that only 3 acres of bog were purchased. so 1,000 applicants and €26m equals 3 acres of bog???;) Sure buddy. sure. oh yes and as I pointed out, the Greens weren't even in Government when those Schemes were introduced

The Cessation of Turf cutting Scheme introduced in 2011 is the current Scheme and as the figures show, take up has been huge, which doesn't help your unsubstantiated argument (like everything you say) that the compo is inadequate.

For months now, various posters provide you with all the evidence and references to show you were your ill thought out lies fall. You never provide a shred of reference or evidence.

Scofflaw

Sponge Bob wrote: »

It is the simplest maths. The government has chosen to tax carbon and now has a carbon sequestration funding pot as a consequence. Therefore they have pushed up the price of all fuel classes and with it the value of my bog.

They now have the damnable cheek to try to evict people off their bogs, with inadequate compensation, after taxing everybody with this carbon tax. The Greens (Gormley I believe it was as Minister for the Environment) originally proposed to buy raised bog held in full and in fee simple for just under €4k an acre and no more.

I understand that Gormleys department bought all of 3 acres of raised bog nationwide under this scheme and at that price. People burst themselves laughing at the idiocy of that stunt....and ignored it.

Needless to say the offer has improved since.

They can buy my bog off me with these carbon tax funds they have for carbon sequestration and sinking and trapping and trading and other carbony sheeut. They need but offer me the right price for the bog.

We are all carbon traders now you see.

Again, what "carbon funds"? And how, in your mind, are "carbon taxes" on fuel different from the excise duty which makes up much of fuel prices?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sponge Bob

Scofflaw wrote: »

Again, what "carbon funds"? And how, in your mind, are "carbon taxes" on fuel different from the excise duty which makes up much of fuel prices?

Because they are different, see the net of and grossed up rates post carbon tax here. They are collected through the excise mechanism but are accounted for separately.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/about/foi/s16/excise/budget-2012-excise-rates.pdf

But like I said we are all carbon traders now.

Scofflaw

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Because they are different, see the net of and grossed up rates post carbon tax here. They are collected through the excise mechanism but are accounted for separately.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/about/foi/s16/excise/budget-2012-excise-rates.pdf

Unfortunately, all taxes go into a single pot - there is no "carbon fund" from which money can be given to you. And it is an excise imposition - it's one based on the carbon content of the fuel, but like the emission-based motor tax, it's an example of an agreed tax being imposed in such a way as to tilt the market away from undesirable activities/products, rather than something attached to a wider carbon trading scheme and imposed for those reasons. The tax itself is used for the same things all other taxes are used for.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

But like I said we are all carbon traders now.

Well, no, we're all polluters.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sponge Bob

Scofflaw wrote: »

Well, no, we're all polluters.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Speak for yourself. Incidentally I advise you not to eat Mung Beans, jeez I farted solidly for a whole day after eating them lads and they are not taxed at all. Methane is far worse than CO2 at doing very bad things to the plannit....tis said.

If the Carbon measure was supposed to be properly punitive it should not be a carbon tax 'bolted onto' the rest of the excise pot but a carbon levy instead. Nobody ever expects to see a penny from a levy.

Scofflaw

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Speak for yourself. Incidentally I advise you not to eat Mung Beans, jeez I farted solidly for a whole day after eating them lads and they are not taxed at all. Methane is far worse than CO2 at doing very bad things to the plannit....tis said.

If the Carbon measure was supposed to be properly punitive it should not be a carbon tax 'bolted onto' the rest of the excise pot but a carbon levy instead. Nobody ever expects to see a penny from a levy.

Heh. Well, it's a real pleasure to meet someone who never uses carbon-emitting fuels, and creates neither personal nor household waste. An impressive achievement, were it even slightly true.

amused,
Scofflaw

Sponge Bob

Scofflaw wrote: »

Heh. Well, it's a real pleasure to meet someone who never uses carbon-emitting fuels,

I use plenty of them Scofflaw...its just that I own a Carbon sink as well.....unlike most urban types who have no netting off strategies bar giving out about country people it seems.

I remain, of course, prepared to put the sink 'beyond use' in a vaguely peace processy sort of way.

You will be asking me if I care about Global Warming ( sorry Climate Change) next and I will merely point out that that pesky climate changes every day in the wesht. :cool:

We got a new ranger out my way recently, must train another one in when I show them the supersecret Corkcrakes next summer.

Sponge Bob

Large protest in Portumna County Galway where Am Taoiseach is opening something or other at present.

Godge

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Large protest in Portumna County Galway where Am Taoiseach is opening something or other at present.

So?

OpenYourEyes

The Taoiseach had been made aware of the protest before his arrival and had offered to meet with a small delegation to discuss their concerns. However, this offer was rejected by protesters.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/kenny-surrounded-by-200-bog-protesters-3296606.html

joela

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/kenny-surrounded-by-200-bog-protesters-3296606.html

Ah yes the reasonable turf cutting community eh? Funny how the truth always differs to their emotive spin :-)

Uriel.

joela wrote: »

Ah yes the reasonable turf cutting community eh? Funny how the truth always differs to their emotive spin :-)

Offered a meeting with the head of the country, and refuse same? Shows they have no interest in solutions and just want to break the law.

It's Telling that it's a minority of people involved, you'd have to wonder given the small numbers in protest, in comparison to the large number of applicants for compensation that the 200 or so present last night were only there because a) they have no right to be turf cutting in the first place b) there's a political agenda and/or c) they have been carrying out illegal activity all along I. E. Commercial operations masked as domestic cutting.

joela

Uriel. wrote: »

Offered a meeting with the head of the country, and refuse same? Shows they have no interest in solutions and just want to break the law.

It's Telling that it's a minority of people involved, you'd have to wonder given the small numbers in protest, in comparison to the large number of applicants for compensation that the 200 or so present last night were only there because a) they have no right to be turf cutting in the first place b) there's a political agenda and/or c) they have been carrying out illegal activity all along I. E. Commercial operations masked as domestic cutting.

Spot on Uriel, add into that mix the fact that contractors who gain financially from cutting the turf for others are involved and that these people also gain from cutting and selling turf from banks unclaimed/uncut for some years. There are also many stories of contractors bullying turbary owners and cutting additional amounts without permission which they then sell. Imagine how many people are being intimidated by these groups??