***ALL THINGS IRISH WATER/WATER CHARGE RELATED POST HERE***

yipeeeee

Wombatman wrote: »

For those cynics asking have they reduced the water charges yet as a result of the demo on Saturday........ the answer is YES. Well done guys.



http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/water-tax-cuts-in-pipeline-for-low-earners-291033.html

Wasn't that decided last week?

Banjo String

yipeeeee wrote: »

Wasn't that decided last week?

Yeah, when it became clear FG didn't have a chance in the bye elections.

Opposition to the charge helped Socialist Paul Murphy win enough transfers to beat the favourite, Sinn Féin’s Cathal King, in Dublin South-West.

The former MEP wants households not to pay, and says he will help restore supplies if homes are cut off.

knarkypants

Banjo String wrote: »

Not good enough.

Divide and conquer at work again. The middle earner will once again pick up the slack.

It's a step in the right direction and shows the impact a protest can have. Although I see they are denying it was anything to do with the protest. :rolleyes:

yipeeeee

Once again you get punished more for been employed.

Wonder will there be as many at the next protest since this has come to light.

Streetwalker

Banjo String wrote: »

Not good enough.

Divide and conquer at work again. The middle earner will once again pick up the slack.

Then more middle earners should be out protesting. They are an easy target because they just keep their heads down. That "what would the neighbours think" attitude means the government target middle Ireland again and again.

homerjay2005

while i can understand people dont want to pay the charges, but i dont understand the sudden need to protest 2 weeks after it is introduced. why wait this long? why not do it 2 years ago when it was first muted?

and all utility bills (elec, gas, insurance etc etc) have risen by atronmical levels in recent years, along with petrol and road tax yet i didnt see much protesting about those.

we are a strange bunch of people - ive no problem paying for water - its a good service but its a costly one and its infrastructure needs improving.

Streetwalker

homerjay2005 wrote: »

while i can understand people dont want to pay the charges, but i dont understand the sudden need to protest 2 weeks after it is introduced. why wait this long? why not do it 2 years ago when it was first muted?

and all utility bills (elec, gas, insurance etc etc) have risen by atronmical levels in recent years, along with petrol and road tax yet i didnt see much protesting about those.

we are a strange bunch of people - ive no problem paying for water - its a good service but its a costly one and its infrastructure needs improving.

We already pay for water.

Cantona's Collars

homerjay2005 wrote: »

while i can understand people dont want to pay the charges, but i dont understand the sudden need to protest 2 weeks after it is introduced. why wait this long? why not do it 2 years ago when it was first muted?

and all utility bills (elec, gas, insurance etc etc) have risen by atronmical levels in recent years, along with petrol and road tax yet i didnt see much protesting about those.

we are a strange bunch of people - ive no problem paying for water - its a good service but its a costly one and its infrastructure needs improving.

Electricity & gas received big investment during the boom,massive money was spent on the infrastructure.Water provision was left as the runt of the litter.
People are only protesting now as this extra tax is seen as the straw that breaks the camels back.

Rightwing

Everyone agrees we should pay for water, but that's precisely where our high tax goes. These new charges are for bonuses. Give the public sector workers 70 days off if need be, but don't give them bonuses.

Streetwalker

Rightwing wrote: »

Everyone agrees we should pay for water, but that's precisely where our high tax goes. These new charges are for bonuses. Give the public sector workers 70 days off if need be, but don't give them bonuses.

Again, we already pay for water.

Streetwalker

Rightwing wrote: »

Everyone agrees we should pay for water, but that's precisely where our high tax goes. These new charges are for bonuses. Give the public sector workers 70 days off if need be, but don't give them bonuses.

Again, we already pay for water so I agree why are we paying twice?

Leslie91

Streetwalker wrote: »

We already pay for water.

That's the point, we already pay...

And now they want us to pay more...

To what (is/will be) a private company set up for the benefit of vested interests including politicians and the bonuses brigade.

Middle Ireland needs to take a stand on this one. I walked in my first march saturday and I was proud to do so.

I've no issue paying a fair amount for a fair service set up for the benefit of the people of Ireland only and proper water conservation and treatment.

Streetwalker

Leslie91 wrote: »

That's the point, we already pay...

And now they want us to pay more...

To what (is/will be) a private company set up for the benefit of vested interests including politicians and the bonuses brigade.

Middle Ireland needs to take a stand on this one. I walked in my first march saturday and I was proud to do so.

I've no issue paying a fair amount for a fair service set up for the benefit of the people of Ireland only and proper water conservation and treatment.

I'd consider myself working class but I work hard and long hours for low pay but because of that I don't think im due a discount on an IW bill (which I won't be paying anyway). It's absolutely drives me mad that people on social welfare will be getting a discount on their bill just because they don't have a job?? I mean wtf. Already I say to myself at times why do I bother.

Working people are screwed over again and again and the ironic thing is they are the ones who need to be protesting but couldn't be arsed or don't have the time.

yipeeeee

Kind of makes sense now why they wanted pps numbers.

It would be a total mess with people claiming their unemployed etc.

Lemlin

Banjo String wrote: »

It just made front page news on almost every newspaper this morning.

I reckon plenty of fooks have been given.

I must have missed where it changed anything.

The charges are already in place and have been agreed. It's a bit late for a mass protest now.

Streetwalker wrote: »

Again, we already pay for water.

We don't pay enough. Otherwise the country wouldn't be running with a deficit.

yipeeeee

Leslie91 wrote: »

That's the point, we already pay...

And now they want us to pay more...

To what (is/will be) a private company set up for the benefit of vested interests including politicians and the bonuses brigade.

Middle Ireland needs to take a stand on this one. I walked in my first march saturday and I was proud to do so.

I've no issue paying a fair amount for a fair service set up for the benefit of the people of Ireland only and proper water conservation and treatment.

That's really not true though.

We are paying out more than we are taking in with a third of expenditure goingon social welfare.

We need to pay back the loans whether we agree or not.

Its the governments job to pay this back, they are responsible.

Maybe they should cut the welfare to 100 euro a week, to be in line with the UK.

Rightwing

Streetwalker wrote: »

Again, we already pay for water so I agree why are we paying twice?

The reason we are paying twice is simple. Very simple. = Bonuses.

Streetwalker

Streetwalker wrote: »

I'd consider myself working class but I work hard and long hours for low pay but because of that I don't think im due a discount on an IW bill (which I won't be paying anyway). It's absolutely drives me mad that people on social welfare will be getting a discount on their bill just because they don't have a job?? I mean wtf. Already I say to myself at times why do I bother.

Working people are screwed over again and again and the ironic thing is they are the ones who need to be protesting but couldn't be arsed or don't have the time.

"Taxpayers will be able to claim tax relief from their water charges worth up to €100 a year at the lower income tax rate of 20pc. The bill for a family of two adults and two children is estimated at €278, meaning tax relief of €55.60." http://www.independent.ie/business/budget/new-relief-measures-in-budget-to-cut-water-bills-by-up-to-100-30658686.html

gladrags

homerjay2005 wrote: »

while i can understand people dont want to pay the charges, but i dont understand the sudden need to protest 2 weeks after it is introduced. why wait this long? why not do it 2 years ago when it was first muted?

and all utility bills (elec, gas, insurance etc etc) have risen by atronmical levels in recent years, along with petrol and road tax yet i didnt see much protesting about those.

we are a strange bunch of people - ive no problem paying for water - its a good service but its a costly one and its infrastructure needs improving.

There is no simple answer to the first part of your post.

There were many reasons why so many protested saturday.

One of those reasons is the mounting bills and taxes already in place,utility bills etc.

The consequenes of th water charges,were not immeadiately evident.

The protests have made a difference,both online and on the streets.

Look at the results of the bi-election.

Protest vote?

Lemlin

Rightwing wrote: »

The reason we are paying twice is simple. Very simple. = Bonuses.

Have you any figures to back up the above opinion that all water charges paid will go towards bonuses?

Cantona's Collars

Leslie91 wrote: »

I've no issue paying a fair amount for a fair service set up for the benefit of the people of Ireland only and proper water conservation and treatment.

You are already paying for those services,getting them is a whole other matter.

gladrags

gladrags wrote: »

There is no simple answer to the first part of your post.
There were many reasons why so many protested saturday.
One of those reasons is the mounting bills and taxes already in place,utility bills etc.
The consequenes of th water charges,were not immeadiately evident.
The protests have made a difference,both online and on the streets.
Look at the results of the bi-election.
Protest vote?

Was it a co incidence that the protest was the same day as the count in the by election? The protests are just a canvessing ploy by AAA and the Socialists for the General Election.

Rightwing

Lemlin wrote: »

Have you any figures to back up the above opinion that all water charges paid will go towards bonuses?

Have you any figures to back up that I said all.

Hope this helps.

listermint

Deleted User wrote: »

Was it a co incidence that the protest was the same day as the count in the by election? The protests are just a canvessing ploy by AAA and the Socialists for the General Election.

That has the be the most 'out there' hilarious utter tripe i have read in a while.
a good while.

Leslie91

yipeeeee wrote: »

That's really not true though.

We are paying out more than we are taking in with a third of expenditure goingon social welfare.

We need to pay back the loans whether we agree or not.

Its the governments job to pay this back, they are responsible.

Maybe they should cut the welfare to 100 euro a week, to be in line with the UK.

What's not true?

Are you saying because we are paying out (as a state) more than we are taking in, water charges should be charged, even though supposedly the cost of providing water is/has been paid for by/included in what the State has been taking in to date?

The dogs in the street know we are running a deficit but hammering those with jobs again and again is not the answer.

Instead begin to control/reduce expenditure, this includes Social welfare, public service salary/bonuses, waste etc.

Like I said we should pay for water, but not in this way. Already 'the boys' have pocketed €200m or so for a new logo and company. Supposedly IT systems etc have cost alot of this and yet some people have got no application packs, some have got 2 or more. And yet it is incumbent on the person to come forth with PPS numbers etc.

yipeeeee

Leslie91 wrote: »

What's not true?

Are you saying because we are paying out (as a state) more than we are taking in, water charges should be charged, even though supposedly the cost of providing water is/has been paid for by/included in what the State has been taking in to date?

The dogs in the street know we are running a deficit but hammering those with jobs again and again is not the answer.

Instead begin to control/reduce expenditure, this includes Social welfare, public service salary/bonuses, waste etc.

Like I said we should pay for water, but not in this way. Already 'the boys' have pocketed €200m or so for a new logo and company. Supposedly IT systems etc have cost alot of this and yet some people have got no application packs, some have got 2 or more. And yet it is incumbent on the person to come forth with PPS numbers etc.

Im all for reducing social welfare.

But can you imagine the uproar?

It will never happen and I cant see anyone attending a march calling for it.

the groutch

Streetwalker wrote: »

Then more middle earners should be out protesting. They are an easy target because they just keep their heads down. That "what would the neighbours think" attitude means the government target middle Ireland again and again.

they would be protesting but they're too busy working, keeping the country going.

ohohseven

Just pay moaning bunch of scrounging *****. Marching for nothing I hope you are all so defiant when you can't wash because the water pressure is ****

Banjo String

Deleted User wrote: »

Was it a co incidence that the protest was the same day as the count in the by election? The protests are just a canvessing ploy by AAA and the Socialists for the General Election.

Yeah and the crafty bastards have organised the next one to coincide with all saints day and after hours beer night. :pac:

Lemlin

Rightwing wrote: »

Have you any figures to back up that I said all.

Hope this helps.

Here is your equation again:

Rightwing wrote: »

The reason we are paying twice is simple. Very simple. = Bonuses.

In the above, to me anyway, you are putting the entire reason for water charges down to bonuses. Would you not agree reading the above?

The key parts are "reason we are paying twice" "=Bonuses". No mention of any other costs or charges.