Irish water truth

joe swanson

Don't worry. Eh it actually benefits you not to use as much water because you wont be brainwashed as much by the fluoride in it that the banksters put there to keep the sheep quiet.

Or something like that.

Maybe. That's it isn't it?

folan

joe swanson wrote: »

Don't worry. Eh it actually benefits you not to use as much water because you wont be brainwashed as much by the fluoride in it that the banksters put there to keep the sheep quiet.

Or something like that.

Maybe. That's it isn't it?

its sheeple. but otherwise, spot on.

Davarus Walrus

VinLieger wrote: »

The Elite? Oh lol

Yes. The elite. A shadowy group of people who happen to make more money than the deluded cranks who spend their days giving out about everything on the Internet.

folan

Davarus Walrus wrote: »

Yes. The elite. A shadowy group of people who happen to make more money than the deluded cranks who spend their days giving out about everything on the Internet.

shadowy? they just happen to make more money? deluded cranks? Internet?

good lord, why have I never seen this before! My eyes are open!

Satriale

Davarus Walrus wrote: »

Yes. The elite. A shadowy group of people who happen to make more money than the deluded cranks who spend their days giving out about everything on the Internet.

the delicious irony...:p

Guy:Incognito

petronius wrote: »

It would have been cheaper to have a flat fee for water and not have to install meters.

So people can use as much as possible to "get their monies worth"? Counter productive, no?

folan

a fee based on what i use as opposed to a flat fee irrespective of use seems reasonable to me.

Foxhound38

sligoface wrote: »

When our water get privatized and the price skyrockets we'll really wish we made more of a stand on this. TV license/broadcast charge, bin charges, water charges, property tax, we just bend over and take it all. They made this tax up and put in meters to justify it.

Summary: I don't want to have to pay for public services anymore

Buzz Killington the third

Foxhound38 wrote: »

Summary: I don't want to have to pay for public services anymore

Nope, Summary: For years we've been told our taxes our paying for this, now they've privatised it and we'll have to pay again. All because the governments of past and present can't keep a hold of their expenditure.

Banjo String

folan wrote: »

a fee based on what i use as opposed to a flat fee irrespective of use seems reasonable to me.

More will have flat fees than meters installed (much more) by roll out time. So I'm guessing you'll think that's pretty unreasonable so.

AwayWithFaries

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

dont fiddle with the manhole

Yeah , I hate when people fiddle with my man hole.

geeksauce

Banjo String wrote: »

More will have flat fees than meters installed (much more) by roll out time. So I'm guessing you'll think that's pretty unreasonable so.

Of course its unreasonable as I could pay more if I am metered than someone on a flat fee even if I use less water than them. So paying more for less would be deemed unreasonable.

folan

Banjo String wrote: »

More will have flat fees than meters installed (much more) by roll out time. So I'm guessing you'll think that's pretty unreasonable so.

yep, i think they should hold off until all metering can be completed and all metering should be started from a common time

petronius

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

So people can use as much as possible to "get their monies worth"? Counter productive, no?

well if water meters is to get funding so as we improve our service, fix leaks, more capacity as population increases

rather than the users be seen as a sorce of income, being more efficent with transporting water fixing leaks etc should be their goal.

Have Irish water been set targets to meet such as reducing the number/volume of leaks? Increasing resevoir capacity

Dare i say it even look at water recycling?

petronius

I see they are expanding capacity at Leixlip Water Treatment plant...
what % of the increased capacity will leak out?
Is increasing capacity by fixing leaks not better money spent long term

Nemeses

petronius wrote: »

Dare i say it even look at water recycling?

I don't want to drink yellow water...

Drakares

Drakares wrote: »

Just pay the water charges and stop being a complete idiot.

Already am paying water taxes, sheep .

sligoface

Foxhound38 wrote: »

Summary: I don't want to have to pay for public services anymore

No. I can't afford a new bill for something that I already pay for. Is my water going to get better now since they're charging me more? Tell me how, and I'll let you know if it ever happens but I won't hold my breath.

Rte takes the tv license money and still has ads and I don't even want or need it.

New by-laws for bins mean I am forced to sign up for a service to a private waste company and they can hit me with whatever standing charge they pluck out of the air instead of pay as you go tags. Another forced ripoff.

What do people get for the property tax here? Nothing. In the US it pays for your refuse at least, besides funding schools and other things. And if you told someone you needed a license for a tv you'd be laughed at.

There's no work in the west of Ireland so I cannot pay this new charge. But instead of wasting time sending out CV's every week maybe I'll just get the missus knocked up. We'll have more money and more water and I can make everyone walk in the street to avoid my massive pram. I'm already classed as a typical waster layabout by the likes of you due to being unemployed and unable to pay for the water charges, might as well completely fulfill the stereotype. Never mind that me being on the dole and the water charge being introduced are both due to a recession I had no part in causing.

Young college grads like me who can't get work and can't afford to emigrate are pretty fecked, and this is just another spoonful of misery can't take. So you can go and stick your summary.

Satriale

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/promised-childrens-free-water-allowance-to-be-cut-30391081.html

methinks they should have spent some of those 50 millions on some decent PR...

sligoface

Satriale wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/promised-childrens-free-water-allowance-to-be-cut-30391081.html

methinks they should have spent some of those 50 millions on some decent PR...

No surprise there, breaking promises once the elections are over. The gov are saying that it turns out children are using less water than they estimated. This is based on houses that were metered. Obviously they have no way of knowing how much water each specific family member used so is based on total usage for the house.

These households were metered, they conserved water, and now their free allowance will be cut. That's what will happen to all of us if we conserve water. Either that or increase the rates. The gov care nothing about conserving water and that was a complete lie. They are just trying to get money out of people's pockets and conserving water will not save anyone any money. Anyone who thinks so is being incredibly naive. If we all start using less water we will just get the allowance dropped or the rates raised on us. Especially since they need to make the profits attractive so they can privatize it.

If it turned out that those metered families used much more water than their allowance, do you think the allowance would be raised to accommodate that? Would they feck! It's a one way street in this country and all our money goes straight to the fat cats. We can't go disappointing them by conserving water to stay under the free allowance, they need those profits. I for one, will do my part and make sure to leave the tap running for a few hours each day just to make sure the poor dears at Irish Water don't go hungry.

Anyone who thinks this a good idea because people will stop wasting water in order to save money, get a clue. The less we use the more we'll end up paying, either due to cuts in the free allowance or a higher price per unit. The link satriale posted proves this. The precedent has been set, this is how Irish Water will operate.

But no, all of us opposed to the charge are rabble, troublemakers, freeloaders. Never mind the lies and profiteering right in front of our eyes. Never mind the morality of a government of a people who once had a quarter of it's population disappear due to lack of food now threatening to cut of people's water when many are still suffering greatly due to a crippling recession and have no jobs and no money to give.

As I said before, most people who support this charge are either naive as regards to the charge inspiring water conservation and water quality improvements, or more likely, simply the middle class people who can afford it, who look down on those cannot or will not pay as layabouts and parasites, thinking 'they're all on the dole stealing my tax', etc.

I look forward to the day when all the old codgers and gombeens who decimated the country and left nothing for fututre generations other than debt die off. The only ones left will be those who could not afford to emigrate and I hope that we remember what was done to us and can work together to achieve fairness for our own children and grandchildren. Unfortunately, many of our best and brightest young minds will be long gone never to return.

Reformed Character

sligoface wrote: »

No. I can't afford a new bill for something that I already pay for.

You don't already pay for it.
Next thing the "freeloader society" will be demanding is free electricity, free gas, and free shopping from Tesco!

KindOfIrish

Coat22 wrote: »

I’d be fairly sure, now that they have a meter at the point where the water turns into every home, that there will be some way of doing this.

Just pay for your bloody water like the rest of the civilised world.

The rest of civilised world has a normal water pressure at list. Water supply in Ireland is a joke. My piss pressure is higher
And I can guaranty that water charge will be the same as in England in no time. £600 - 1200 a year.

WilyCoyote

Free water for anyone that can piss. Give Dennis O B and the rest of these leeches the finger toe up the arse.

http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/waterday.jpg

sligoface

Reformed Character wrote: »

You don't already pay for it.
Next thing the "freeloader society" will be demanding is free electricity, free gas, and free shopping from Tesco!

I'm no freeloader. You can't even get a job flippin burgers in my county right now, so no matter how much I want to work and be able to pay for the cost of living, I can't. I also don't like being lied to and stolen from.

If I had come out and said 'Next thing they'll be taxing the air we breathe!', no doubt you'd have mocked me. But your statement is just as ridiculous. Did you read the link satriale posted which states that the childrens free allowance is to be cut because metered homes with children have used less water than they estimated. This just proves it's all about profits, not fairness or conservation.

People rabbiting on about a freeloader society, why do they never look at our vastly overpaid, middle age retiring, spectacularly failing government officials as freeloaders? Or the overpaid consultants and CEO's? Or the bondholders who we are being taxed to repay? Why do you assume these people in government have your best interests at heart and know better than you and are happy to accept every tax they dream up? Do you consider OAP's freeloaders? Are you aware that they are the largest expenditure by the dept of social welfare? Does the business you are in refuse to accept money from those on the dole because they are freeloaders? If the dole was abolished, do you think your businesses profits would increase or decrease? And if it was decreased, do you think the gov would lower taxes by such an amount that would make up the difference or would they just waste it on something else or keep it for themselves nd their cronies?

I got laid off last year. I am a college grad. I send out CV's as much as possible and cannot get hired. There aren't even jobs to apply for most weeks, especially since (no exaggeration) half of them are internships, ofwhich I've already done one. So how am I a freeloader?

I currently pay my rent, electricity, heating, and food (from Aldi or Lidl only, never Tesco) from 188 a week. No rent allowance or fuel allowance due to unrealistic rent limits for RA and not being unemployed long enough for FA. I don't have money left over to pay the water charge. If I did, I certainly wouldn't be paying the water charge with it. I'd be squirrelling it away so I could get out of this country which has no opportunities for the likes of me, is ruled by a corrupt government and full of numptys who do whatever they say and pay every charge they come up with, and class those of us who can't or won't as freeloaders.

If you post a response, please include answers to the questions I posed in mine. Otherwise I'm not really interested and it will just confirm my current view that you are a small minded person who gets immense satisfaction of classing the struggling people around you as freeloaders. Being judgemental of others who you've never met works both ways.

Reformed Character

Reformed Character wrote: »

You don't already pay for it.
Next thing the "freeloader society" will be demanding is free electricity, free gas, and free shopping from Tesco!

Not a freeloader society just a society that would like to see a return for the high taxes they are already paying.

The Dagda

Reformed Character wrote: »

You don't already pay for it.

Who pays for it so?

aloyisious

How many agree with the reported plan of Irish Water to ask householders for their Bank Account details, along with the PPS numbers of ALL the people living in the house?

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/irish-water-seeks-pps-numbers-of-householders-and-children-1.1865234

Caliden

In that article it mentions the free allowance but shows it as a yearly figure but last week we were told it's going to be a daily allowance that can't be carried over. Why bother listing it as a yearly figure in the first place then??


I'm also extremely apprehensive of sending both my bank details and PPS number via post.

I can't recall the last time I've written down both of those on the same form.

sonya7

folan wrote: »

water has always been a free resource?

what about the pipes to get it around? irrigation? so on and so on.

the truth of the matter is, water charges are another tax on irish people because the government cant balance its book and irish people neither want to lose services or pay for them. Water charge or another rise in VAT or USC or anything else, it doesnt matter. its a tax.

at least this tax will have something do with consumption of these "free" resources.

The government can't balance the books yet it can give higher earners a tax cut? It can choose not to means test everything? And on and on. Odd that isn't it?

Water has never been free, it has always been paid for. For decades it has been paid for through general taxation. Water charges are regressive not progressive. All flat taxes are regressive. Water is not a commodity, it is not a luxury - it is a basic human right. Access to which should be based on need not bank balance.

The simple fact is many will not register and many even if they do register
will not pay. And others simply will be unable to pay. That will be the reality of this neoliberal experiment which seeks to pave the way for water privatisation.

sonya7

Reformed Character wrote: »

You don't already pay for it.
Next thing the "freeloader society" will be demanding is free electricity, free gas, and free shopping from Tesco!

So since the '70's how have we had water services if we didn't pay for it through taxation? Was it the tooth fairy who gave it for free? Fact is: we do pay for water. It has never been free. Another fact: we will not pay twice.

Roger Hassenforder

sonya7 wrote: »

So since the '70's how have we had water services if we didn't pay for it through taxation? Was it the tooth fairy who gave it for free? Fact is: we do pay for water. It has never been free. Another fact: we will not pay twice.

we're paying for it, but we're not paying enough.

Guy:Incognito

I predict the imminent bumping of many dead water related threads.........

Banjo String

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

we're paying for it, but we're not paying enough.

how is it, that its 'water' we're not paying enough for?

Any source that it's water (specially) the deficit isn't covering?

Pappacharlie

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Yeah, the citizens of no other country would accept water charges. Why should we?

PLEASE LIST THE COUNTRIES WHERE THERE ARE NO WATER CHARGES???

Roger Hassenforder

Banjo String wrote: »

how is it, that its 'water' we're not paying enough for?

Any source that it's water (specially) the deficit isn't covering?

not sure what the question is...

sonya7

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

we're paying for it, but we're not paying enough.

Is that why we are able to reduce tax for higher earners because we don't pay enough for water? We do pay enough. Our water services are provided from general taxation: income tax, motor tax, LPT, VAT.

Many of those who support direct water charges and speak of conserving a precious resource (and fluffy terms like that) ignore the fact that IW will increase the price it charges for water if we do conserve water and use less than we would normally. This is because it has to turn a profit, it has to pay salaries, bonuses, car allowances and other perks and whatever else to its overstaffed organisation.

It will also have to ensure the system functions and it will also have to repair leaking pipes etc. So there less water people use, the higher the bills will be. And from the money it would collect, it wouldn't be leaking pipes (from where up to something like 40% or even 50% of water is lost) which would be addressed first - it would their own salaries and perks and then it's profit margin to ultimately attract a private buyer. No thanks. We won't be registering and we won't be paying - and there are many, many others who will do likewise.

Banjo String

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

not sure what the question is...

I think you actually do.

You said were not paying enough. Well, water is paid (currently til now) from a central pot.


Any source that it's specifically water that we're not paying enough for?

Roger Hassenforder

Pappacharlie wrote: »

PLEASE LIST THE COUNTRIES WHERE THERE ARE NO WATER CHARGES???

Burkino Faso
East Timor
North Korea
Haiti
Rwanda etc.


and other such prosperous nations spring to mind.

Vatican doesn't pay but they have cash

Guy:Incognito

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Vatican doesn't pay but they have cash

I hear molten gold comes from the taps in Vatican city

Roger Hassenforder

Banjo String wrote: »

I think you actually do.

You said were not paying enough. Well, water is paid (currently til now) from a central pot.


Any source that it's specifically water that we're not paying enough for?

still not sure, but I'll hazard a guess.
Currently paying 1.2billion for provision of water services.
with up to 40% of the water produced leaking back into the aquifers, its estimated ~0.5b/year/annually is required just for for mains maintenance. add to that the % of the national supply contaminated with Pb, E.Coli and crytpo.
on top of that add the 42 wwtps that still dont meet the UWWD 13 years after the regs.

So yes, we're not paying enough to comply with what we're supposed to be complying with.
And our tax base is too narrow.
but thats another days work.

evolving_doors

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

still not sure, but I'll hazard a guess.
Currently paying 1.2billion for provision of water services.
with up to 40% of the water produced leaking back into the aquifers, its estimated ~0.5b/year/annually is required just for for mains maintenance. add to that the % of the national supply contaminated with Pb, E.Coli and crytpo.
on top of that add the 42 wwtps that still dont meet the UWWD 13 years after the regs.

So yes, we're not paying enough to comply with what we're supposed to be complying with.
And our tax base is too narrow.
but thats another days work.

Sooo when the leaks are all fixed our bills come down ya!
.. and the company goes back to the state..eh
And the corporate structure that was set up wiil be wound down, ya!

Roger Hassenforder

Armelodie wrote: »

Sooo when the leaks are all fixed our bills come down ya!
.. and the company goes back to the state..eh
And the corporate structure that was set up wiil be wound down, ya!

What do you think?

sonya7

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

still not sure, but I'll hazard a guess.
Currently paying 1.2billion for provision of water services.
with up to 40% of the water produced leaking back into the aquifers, its estimated ~0.5b/year/annually is required just for for mains maintenance. add to that the % of the national supply contaminated with Pb, E.Coli and crytpo.
on top of that add the 42 wwtps that still dont meet the UWWD 13 years after the regs.

So yes, we're not paying enough to comply with what we're supposed to be complying with.
And our tax base is too narrow.
but thats another days work.

If there is such a problem and there is, then why doesn't this government invest in fixing the problem rather than investing tens, if not hundreds, of millions in Irish Water? Do tax cuts for higher earners, and moola for horses and greyhounds, take precedence over ensuring a functioning water system? Fact is: you don't need a company such as Irish Water to fix the problems in the water infrastructure system. You just need the political will to use existing revenue responsibly.

Irish Water has been a pet project of FG's under their "New Era" project since 2009, before it was even elected to office. Being the Thatcherite party it is, FG favours the ultimate privatisation of Irish Water. Many would disagree, as FG and Labour will, and have, come to see.