protest water charges but not property charges??

listermint

seamus wrote: »

I didn't say we shouldn't.
And while plenty of people are incensed about that, the majority are protesting water charges because they don't want to pay. I don't see anybody specifically protesting about how IW was set up, just protesting because it was set up.

You are wrong, plenty wrong. Many have pointed to those specific reasons for their protest at paying and to be quite frank anyone i have talked to on the subject point to those specific reasons. But it is alot easier for you and fellow pro charges folks to point to the looney left and the 'dole' classes as being unreasonable in the whole matter.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

Is this the Same NRA that presided over the building of a Toll Bridge which cost an absolute 'fraction' of what we could have built it for ourselves. and sold it off to a PPP. the same bridge which was obsolete within a few years and then required a secondary bridge to be built again at farcical contract terms.

The same bridge which caused toll gate backlogs for years and was finally fitted with an open toll gantry system. and the same NRA who are still paying that same owners money back on the sale.

that NRA ?

Or is it some other NRA ? unsure..

We talking about the m50 toll bridge? That was built initially before the nra existed. A partnership between DCC and ntr (a PPP). I agree though the government at the time could have got a better deal on the concession when it came up for sale.

listermint

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Why don't you post a coherent alternative plan for raising the €1.77 billion required to repair a chronically underfunded and antqiquated system. While you're at it, the further several billion required to fund the system for future expansion beyond 2016.

If you do so you'll be the first anti-water charge protestor to do so - all others I've engaged with on social media have failed to do so.

Yes Pinch Flat, it was my assertion that the 1.77 Billion that was effectively siphoned off from the National Pension reserve fund should have gone into repairing the infrastructure (directly) , Not buying meters, not paying site serve or GMC to install metering. Actually creating IRISH jobs with IRISH national pension reserve fund.

Once that part was done or at least heavily progressed setup a fixed charge.


Is that not a legitmate response? would that not have given some good optics for a FG government. Are they all idiots ? I believe they are.

ThisRegard

listermint wrote: »

fellow pro charges folks to point to the looney left and the 'dole' classes as being unreasonable in the whole matter.

There's a big difference between "pro charge folks" and folks that understand why there's a need for them. Of course I'd rather they didn't have to exist, but I completely understand why they were brought in.

listermint

While i am at it, I think the only think the government can do at this stage is remove anyone attached to the project that is a shining example of all FG said they would not do when in government.

They have very poor PR advise and really really poor decision makers. I mean its just scandal after weekly scandal with them. And the media dont even have to look too deep for a fresh case of nepotism, croynism, bad appointments or suspect questions.

seamus

listermint wrote: »

You are wrong, plenty wrong. Many have pointed to those specific reasons for their protest at paying

And as I point out, that makes no logical sense.

If you want to protest about how Irish Water was set up, then you hit the politicians in the voting booth. Withholding payment is basically saying, "I'm protesting about how much money was wasted, by wasting even more money".

If you want to protest about having to pay water charges, then by all means withhold payment.

But don't conflate the two, they're separate issues.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

Yes Pinch Flat, it was my assertion that the 1.77 Billion that was effectively siphoned off from the National Pension reserve fund should have gone into repairing the infrastructure (directly) , Not buying meters, not paying site serve or GMC to install metering. Actually creating IRISH jobs with IRISH national pension reserve fund.

Once that part was done or at least heavily progressed setup a fixed charge.


Is that not a legitmate response? would that not have given some good optics for a FG government. Are they all idiots ? I believe they are.

the problem is funding or sources of it more importantly. Irish water have already been provided with a €0.5 billion fund in the form of a bridging loan until the additional funding and revenue stream (ie metering) comes on line. Just like any other start up utility company. Can you imagine the state of our www tribal and Gas infrastructure if it relies on piece meal and chronically underfunded sources?

Additional funding is also been provided by the European investment bank. The sums are huge to repair the system and expand it for future growth.

It is either paid for by tax hikes or water charges - it is as simple as that I'm afraid.

listermint

Pinch Flat wrote: »

the problem is funding or sources of it more importantly. Irish water have already been provided with a €0.5 billion fund in the form of a bridging loan until the additional funding and revenue stream (ie metering) comes on line. Just like any other start up utility company. Can you imagine the state of our www tribal and Gas infrastructure if it relies on piece meal and chronically underfunded sources?

Additional funding is also been provided by the European investment bank. The sums are huge to repair the system and expand it for future growth.

It is either paid for by tax hikes or water charges - it is as simple as that I'm afraid.

Metering was never really required. It was a scam ultimately. And will be scam to raise the pricing down the road at shareholders behest.

I dont agree that we could not have fixed the infrastruture at least major parts of it with that funding and then continued with some fixed charge into the future.

In this way the actual people using it Me and You can see that we have got value for money.

Current is beyond arse about face, and to be quite frank id prefer if it brought the government down. At least a lesson of respect to the people who put them there would be implied with that.

seamus

listermint wrote: »

Current is beyond arse about face, and to be quite frank id prefer if it brought the government down. At least a lesson of respect to the people who put them there would be implied with that.

You mean the people who agreed with them to introduce water charges and voted them in with that in their manifesto...?

ThisRegard

listermint wrote: »

Metering was never really required. It was a scam ultimately. And will be scam to raise the pricing down the road at shareholders behest.

It's a scam to pay for what you use ?

listermint

ThisRegard wrote: »

It's a scam to pay for what you use ?

Its scam that it was about conservation and paying for what you use.

Yes that is my assertion.

ThisRegard

I don't know how anyone can agree with your assertion.

Should we also have a flat rate for electricity, gas and oil ?

listermint

seamus wrote: »

You mean the people who agreed with them to introduce water charges and voted them in with that in their manifesto...?

and you believe that the voters expected this ham fisted approach, is that really what you are implying ?

That we cannot expect a degree of standards and ethics applied to it. Of which we have seen frankly very little.

Ducking and Diving i would describe it as.

listermint

ThisRegard wrote: »

I don't know how anyone can agree with your assertion.

Should we also have a flat rate for electricity, gas and oil ?

That would infer that we have have been paying for electricity Gas and Oil via our general taxation (and advertised this as so in previous elections) . Would it not ?



Scam.

Yes.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

Metering was never really required. It was a scam ultimately. And will be scam to raise the pricing down the road at shareholders behest.

Have you thought about alerting every other eu and oecd country to this scam? I can see the headlines on Frankfurter Allgemeine already. "Irish solve world wide water crisis - stop charging for it". And yes iw will be bought and sold like other utility companies here and in other countries.

ThisRegard

listermint wrote: »

That would infer that we have have been paying for electricity Gas and Oil via our general taxation (and advertised this as so in previous elections) . Would it not ?



Scam.

Yes.

How have we being paying for our water through general taxation ?

listermint

ThisRegard wrote: »

How have we being paying for our water through general taxation ?

If i have to spell that out to you, you should ask your 'thanks' colleagues.

ThisRegard

listermint wrote: »

If i have to spell that out to you, you should ask your 'thanks' colleagues.

No, go ahead, don't back down and resort to childish name calling now.

Please explain how water has been paid for via general taxation.

listermint

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Have you thought about alerting every other eu and oecd country to this scam? I can see the headlines on Frankfurter Allgemeine already. "Irish solve world wide water crisis - stop charging for it". And yes iw will be bought and sold like other utility companies here and in other countries.

Why would i compare ourselves to some other countries in the world ? Can we not set our own social standards or is that something you have no interest in. It appears you are a free market addict, despite all the ills the free market affords to us where 'Social' matters are concerned. Would you not agree water infrastructure is something quite fundamental to the operation of our state.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

If i have to spell that out to you, you should ask your 'thanks' colleagues.

In fairness of the €1.2 billion spent on water annually (far below what is requires to maintain, repair and modernise the system), €200 m comes from direct taxation. The rest is from indirect taxes - motor tax, excise vat etc.

That said it is still way short of the money required to provide modern drinking water and sewage facilities (the charges are about water in and water out, so to speak)

listermint

ThisRegard wrote: »

No, go ahead, don't back down and resort to childish name calling now.

Please explain how water has been paid for via general taxation.

I did not call anyone any names!? weird one that.

Ask your buddy Simon Coveney about it. I am not doing your research for you. When you know all the answers already and are just beating around bush.

renegademaster

seamus wrote: »

And as I point out, that makes no logical sense.

If you want to protest about how Irish Water was set up, then you hit the politicians in the voting booth. Withholding payment is basically saying, "I'm protesting about how much money was wasted, by wasting even more money".

If you want to protest about having to pay water charges, then by all means withhold payment.

But don't conflate the two, they're separate issues.

by voting them out after a full term so they ride off into the sunset with full pensions? that'll learn them alright :rolleyes:

listermint

Pinch Flat wrote: »

In fairness of the €1.2 billion spent on water annually (far below what is requires to maintain, repair and modernise the system), €200 m comes from direct taxation. The rest is from indirect taxes - motor tax, excise vat etc.

That said it is still way short of the money required to provide modern drinking water and sewage facilities (the charges are about water in and water out, so to speak)

ive addressed that already, no need to recycle it again.

ThisRegard

listermint wrote: »

I did not call anyone any names!? weird one that.

Ask your buddy Simon Coveney about it. I am not doing your research for you. When you know all the answers already and are just beating around bush.

"Thanks buddies".

Again, stop avoiding the question, you said water was already paid for by general taxation on this thread, not Simon Coveny or anyone else.

It's the basis of an argument you're trying to make, so stand by it and back up what you said.

listermint

renegademaster wrote: »

by voting them out after a full term so they ride off into the sunset with full pensions? that'll learn them alright :rolleyes:

See Seamus and the lads above love our system here where we vote the same edgits from the same parish and same inner circle and same familes over and over again. and get the same poxy results.

Sure thats the norm, that is the way it always has been. And Seamus is cool with that. We should not expect standards, ethics professionalism in office here. Its run of the mill. And sure lets compare ourselves to alot of other countries who managed to get it wrong too.

Same mistakes different suits.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

Would you not agree water infrastructure is something quite fundamental to the operation of our state.

Yes, I do. But it needs to be funded and paid for - properly. Other countries got their heads around this years ago. Hence they can use their beaches. Avoid boil notices and provide a supply that is free if cryptosporidium.

If you feel we can provide a world class infrastructure that is some how cost neutral and self financing, and also encourages water conservation in line with the eu directives, then go for it - other countries would love to hear from you.

listermint

ThisRegard wrote: »

"Thanks buddies".

Again, stop avoiding the question, you said water was already paid for by general taxation on this thread, not Simon Coveny or anyone else.

It's the basis of an argument you're trying to make, so stand by it and back up what you said.

Its hilarious that you cannot read what has been written before this post. but sure 'Disregard' it . It seem you have no regard for reading.

listermint

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Yes, I do. But it needs to be funded and paid for - properly. Other countries got their heads around this years ago. Hence they can use their beaches. Avoid boil notices and provide a supply that is free if cryptosporidium.

If you feel we can provide a world class infrastructure that is some how cost neutral and self financing, and also encourages water conservation in line with the eu directives, then go for it - other countries would love to hear from you.

You ignored my two responses to you on this. And again you are recycling youre same tired response. Please stop ignoring something i have already answered it just makes you look like you are not paying attention.

ThisRegard

listermint wrote: »

Its hilarious that you cannot read what has been written before this post. but sure 'Disregard' it . It seem you have no regard for reading.

This is worse than the time Jeremy Paxman tried to get an answer out of Michael Howard.

So you're unwilling to stand by your argument with facts ?

listermint

Anyway, tbh this thread i think has been answered and it being dragged way off the OP post.

OP i think people are miffed at a new additional charge and its the straw that pushed it over the edge.


There is my answer, i wont be back to respond as it will get dragged further off into the distance. (probably belongs on the other central thread tbh)

listermint

ThisRegard wrote: »

This is worse than the time Jeremy Paxman tried to get an answer out of Michael Howard.

So you're unwilling to stand by your argument with facts ?

knock yourself out beautiful

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92606182&postcount=71


Im out.

ThisRegard

listermint wrote: »

i wont be back to respond as it will get dragged further off into the distance. (probably belongs on the other central thread tbh)

So no answer then, just sound bites thrown about with nothing to back them up.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

Why would i compare ourselves to some other countries in the world ?.

.

Good question. I'm assuming we use water just like every other country that charges for it?

listermint wrote: »

Can we not set our own social standards or is that something you have no interest in. It appears you are a free market addict, despite all the ills the free market affords to us where 'Social' matters are concerned. Would you not agree water infrastructure is something quite fundamental to the operation of our state.

social standards? You mean one that discourages wastage and instills the 'polluter pays' principle? Maybe everyone else is doing it wrong and we Irish have a better way.

Again if you have a way of self financing the system and discouraging over use, please let us know

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

Anyway, tbh this thread i think has been answered and it being dragged way off the OP post.

OP i think people are miffed at a new additional charge and its the straw that pushed it over the edge.


There is my answer, i wont be back to respond as it will get dragged further off into the distance. (probably belongs on the other central thread tbh)

See the thing is I fundamentally disagree with other charges levied on the country. So property tax, usc and cuts in welfare, education and healthcare. I took a stand on my own property tax demand but was threatened with court action and additional fines, some of which I paid. I didn't have the appetite for hiring a senior counsel at a few grand a day to argue a point on my behalf in the high court.

On water, I have no fundamental issue paying for it. It was the case when I lived in the uk and Germany. So no big deal for me personally. Sometimes you'll come across someone who has a different opinion.

Rubberchikken

these charges seem to mbe standard in other countries, and germany is powerful enough to make little enda bend down and take the beating.
we can't say no to europe. we don't have any power whatsoever,.

against these charges. water charge/irish water - totally ill thought out.
a property charge on a house that we borrowed for and completely paid back - beyond unfair.

i'm glad i wasn't able to vote when this country decided to join europe.

Pinch Flat

Rubberchikken wrote: »

these charges seem to mbe standard in other countries, and germany is powerful enough to make little enda bend down and take the beating.
we can't say no to europe. we don't have any power whatsoever,.

against these charges. water charge/irish water - totally ill thought out.
a property charge on a house that we borrowed for and completely paid back - beyond unfair.

i'm glad i wasn't able to vote when this country decided to join europe.

What intrigues me is that there have been very little protest against down right unfair and perhaps immoral burdens places on the country.

When Europeans see protesting against water charges which exist in every other eu and oecd country I'm not sue what message that portrays? We're happy enough to be shafted by bond holders but cry foul when asked to pay for water.

Pinch Flat

listermint wrote: »

ive addressed that already, no need to recycle it again.

No you haven't. You indicated the €1.77 billion should come from the pension reserve - €0.5billion came in the form of a loan.

You failed to provide a plan for coming up with the rest of this funding required for current repairs and beyond 2016 to expand the system.

The whole point of iw is to take the funding "off balance sheet".

renegademaster

Pinch Flat wrote: »

What intrigues me is that there have been very little protest against down right unfair and perhaps immoral burdens places on the country.

When Europeans see protesting against water charges which exist in every other eu and oecd country I'm not sue what message that portrays? We're happy enough to be shafted by bond holders but cry foul when asked to pay for water.

well ya see it's not just about the water, sure people are protesting against the water charges but believe me it's a combination of every unfair decision take for the Irish people that has united people now

crannglas

Wasn't there protests against property charges over half country wouldn't pay, and they robbed it from their wages etc..

yourdeadwright

Im another who can't work out why so many people complain about water charges, but getting charged for property you have already paid thousands for is ok

renegademaster

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Im another who can't work out why so many people complain about water charges, but getting charged for property you have already paid thousands for is ok

the people protesting last saturday were giving out about many issues from the last few years, lots more than just irish water

crannglas wrote: »

Wasn't there protests against property charges over half country wouldn't pay, and they robbed it from their wages etc..

true

nxbyveromdwjpg

renegademaster wrote: »

you are correct about the timing, but i will say that everyone i spoke to on Sat were there for the water tax but also you'd hear from everyone about every other little thing that brought them to where they are today, financially broken, come and join the protest even if it's the USC you feel should have brought us on the streets, dont sit on the sideline watching just cos it's water and you're not that bothered about that

But it is about water, thats the thing. I'm happy to pay for a good water service so i wont be protesting, there are other more worthy things to protest if i was going to.

Essentially you're saying protest the water charges even if I don't mind them, due to the timing. I'm not going to do that.

nxbyveromdwjpg

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Im another who can't work out why so many people complain about water charges, but getting charged for property you have already paid thousands for is ok

Yes. Stamp duty paid and then a property tax on top of that.

Illegal tax in Europe of VRT on every vehicle.

and on and on. We get nothing for those. At least for water charges, we get water service.

patnor1011

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

That's right. We should elect a range of independent crack pots at the next election. Maybe that will be better.


Or maybe not.

Well, they are more "connected" with the people compared to the rest who play for their party and do not give fluck about people apart from when they are canvassing.

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Really?

http://www.water.ie/news/proposed-capital-investme/

Do you realize that it will take many price increases to fund this development?
And at the end, it will be just privatised.

Alun

nm wrote: »

Illegal tax in Europe of VRT on every vehicle.

Same in both Denmark and the Netherlands, and at a higher rate than here too.

renegademaster

nm wrote: »

But it is about water, thats the thing. I'm happy to pay for a good water service so i wont be protesting, there are other more worthy things to protest if i was going to.

Essentially you're saying protest the water charges even if I don't mind them, due to the timing. I'm not going to do that.

no, what i'm saying is people are protesting about the water, they cannot afford to pay this double tax and know well that the bills will keep increasing and it will be sold on. this is it for the protestors, they're not taking it and even though they are now on the streets over the water everything else that's been suppressed the last few years has come bubbling up and people are also out there now over every unfair decision made for us by corrupt politicians.

sin_city

Alun wrote: »

Same in both Denmark and the Netherlands, and at a higher rate than here too.

Ah well, that's alright then.

denhaagenite

Really glad to see so many people here speaking sense.

I think the people who weren't previously liable for property tax and USC (because they don't own property and don't earn anything) finally have to pay for something and they're the mob, dragging everyone else along with them.

It's a joke that this is only being done now. In this day in age, water really is a privilege and we need to start conserving. People are freaking out thinking they won't be able to shower or flush the toilet but ffs, there are so many ways to recycle water that their outrage is laughable.

Not always doable but start planning ahead:

- Get rid of your power shower
- Turn off the tap when brushing your teeth (don't know if anyone does this but wtf would you do it anyway??)
- Replace your flush system with one that allows you to use less per flush. Think it might even be possible to adjust the one you have so it uses less
- When the dryer needs to be replaced, get a condenser and reuse the water from the clothes to flush
- Stick a bucket outside and use collected rain water to put in dogs bowl, water the garden
- Baths don't get you clean, they're a luxury. Re- use bath water to wash dog

That's all completely off the top of my head.

While I do agree that the setting up of IW was done in the spirit of true Cronyism, welcome to the 21st century folks. Metering is the best and fairest way to implement this charge and it is absolutely necessary. They're not even going to charge for children!!!! You can complain about German bullying all you like but why would Ireland be the only country in the civilised continent to not have it??

I would like to see them do away with the USC as a gesture to those working and having so much taken away, however other Member States are also paying a solidarity charge so I think it will be a while yet. Not to mention the Irish rate of tax is still less than it's European counterparts and there's the lower tax rate to entice multinationals still in place...