Water Tax Strike.

Paddy Fields

I am seeking to strike against this law to the death. I.e, not drinking any fluids until death to bring down this government.

I am looking for serious replies only and would appreciate the support of the moderators in keeping it as such.

meglome

ah good ****ing grief. I do in many ways admire your determination but this is way over the top for the issue in hand.

I'd ask you...

1. Why is it normal in other countries to pay for water but you see fit to go on some sort of hunger strike for it here?
2. If we don't pay for water by usage where do you think the money will come from instead?
3. Why is it when water (and property) taxes are seen across the world as 'left wing' taxes on wealth that we should be somehow different?
4. If the government falls who do you expect them to be replaced with? And will that change be for the better? The idea that change will automatically be better is a very dangerous one.

shedweller

Do other countries pay for their water through taxation and then pay for it again through charges?

Paddy Fields

Paddy Fields wrote: »

I am seeking to strike against this law to the death. I.e, not drinking any fluids until death to bring down this government.

I am looking for serious replies only and would appreciate the support of the moderators in keeping it as such.

Sorry. What you're suggesting is wrong on so many fronts that I believe you're not serious. Life is too precious. What do you expect people to say? "Go ahead"? Even if you ARE serious and DO end up taking your own life, it won't/can't bring down a democratically elected Government.

Paddy Fields

meglome wrote: »

ah good ****ing grief. I do in many ways admire your determination but this is way over the top for the issue in hand.

I'd ask you...

1. Why is it normal in other countries to pay for water but you see fit to go on some sort of hunger strike for it here?
2. If we don't pay for water by usage where do you think the money will come from instead?
3. Why is it when water (and property) taxes are seen across the world as 'left wing' taxes on wealth that we should be somehow different?
4. If the government falls who do you expect them to be replaced with? And will that change be for the better? The idea that change will automatically be better is a very dangerous one.

Explain to me the Universal Social Charge?

ReefBreak

shedweller wrote: »

Do other countries pay for their water through taxation and then pay for it again through charges?

Anti-Water Charges Myth #214: We've not being paying for water charges through taxation, or at least: we haven't been paying enough. If we had, we would have a working water supply system, and we wouldn't need such a huge investment in infrastructure right now.

BoJack Horseman

Paddy Fields wrote: »

Explain to me the Universal Social Charge?

Its a tax on income.
(Thought that was obvious).

Answer the gents queries whenever you can.

BoJack Horseman

shedweller wrote: »

Do other countries pay for their water through taxation and then pay for it again through charges?

Yes, almost all.

Looking at charges on the continent, (which are cheaper per ltr than IW), they don't go near paying the full cost of water treatment & investment.

meglome

shedweller wrote: »

Do other countries pay for their water through taxation and then pay for it again through charges?

Why oh why do people persist with this nonsense. The only people in Ireland since 2008-2009 who have really paid for water at all are the roughly 500,000 households who have private water schemes. We've a government debt of 150 billion which has nothing to do with bailing out banks. Massive borrowing is not 'paying for it'.

Paddy Fields wrote: »

Explain to me the Universal Social Charge?

A typical Irish fudge so that we didn't have to raise income tax. I noticed for for a man so passionate about his cause you failed to answer even basic questions about it. Not that any of that takes away from the fact we borrowed 11.5 billion in the last year and will borrow 8 billion in the next year even with new charges.

cerastes

ReefBreak wrote: »

Anti-Water Charges Myth #214: We've not being paying for water charges through taxation, or at least: we haven't been paying enough. If we had, we would have a working water supply system, and we wouldn't need such a huge investment in infrastructure right now.

We dont have a working system because it was neglected by people when we had money to spend on it, that was wasted, not because we havent thrown enough money at tax, look at the HSE, throwing money at something doesnt mean its works.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Its a tax on income.

(Thought that was obvious).

Answer the gents queries whenever you can.

Isnt there income tax for that? its like saying add on another tax applied from zero and allow no allowance on it.

ardmacha

shedweller wrote: »

Do other countries pay for their water through taxation and then pay for it again through charges?

Any country which has charges partly subsidised by the government does this.

NIMAN

If the Gov did away with the Water Charge and put 1%/2% on Income Tax would that make the people happy?

Timberrrrrrrr

NIMAN wrote: »

If the Gov did away with the Water Charge and put 1%/2% on Income Tax would that make the people happy?

Only if they take the same % away from the all pensions and welfare payments.

Valetta

It would certainly make anyone who doesn't pay income tax happy.

NIMAN

Didn't the Government announce recently that if they were to do away with the WC then they would have to reverse the concessions made in the last Budget?

Now considering no-one earned too much out of the last Budget, I say 'go for it' and keep everyone happy.

barneystinson

NIMAN wrote: »

If the Gov did away with the Water Charge and put 1%/2% on Income Tax would that make the people happy?

No it wouldn't make me happy, as there'd be no guarantee of expenditure on the infrastructure. At least by creating a standalone entity like IW the responsibility for operating and developing the infrastructure clearly resides somewhere.

BoJack Horseman

NIMAN wrote: »

If the Gov did away with the Water Charge and put 1%/2% on Income Tax would that make the people happy?

Protests would disappear.

NIMAN

Its a slightly worrying world when people are talking about hunger strikes, the country is a mess with protests and Gardai are standing over meter holes instead of doing their real jobs, when people see no problem paying €500 - €1000 per year for Sky TV but think its the end of the world that they are being asked to pay for and fund the protection of a very scarce natural resource for a fraction of the price.

Godge

Paddy Fields wrote: »

I am seeking to strike against this law to the death. I.e, not drinking any fluids until death to bring down this government.

I am looking for serious replies only and would appreciate the support of the moderators in keeping it as such.

Why? Why are you doing this?

chopper6

NIMAN wrote: »

fund the protection of a very scarce natural result for a fraction of the price.

Very scarce? In Ireland?

Really.

meglome

chopper6 wrote: »

Very scarce? In Ireland?

Really.

I assume he meant clean drinkable water as opposed to water lying in puddles.

hidinginthebush

Paddy Fields wrote: »

I am seeking to strike against this law to the death. I.e, not drinking any fluids until death to bring down this government.

I am looking for serious replies only and would appreciate the support of the moderators in keeping it as such.

Would you not be better off striking against the usc or household charges? Both cost considerably more than the water charges.

andrew

Paddy Fields wrote: »

I am seeking to strike against this law to the death. I.e, not drinking any fluids until death to bring down this government.

I am looking for serious replies only and would appreciate the support of the moderators in keeping it as such.

Don't you think killing yourself is just a little disproportionate?

Guffy

Paddy Fields wrote: »

I am seeking to strike against this law to the death. I.e, not drinking any fluids until death to bring down this government.

I am looking for serious replies only and would appreciate the support of the moderators in keeping it as such.

At least it will be over in a couple of days

BoJack Horseman

I'm going to go on hunger strike to bring down this government for not adjusting tax bands in line with inflation over the past few years.

This has cost people far more than IW ever will, so my cause is more just.

Give me index linking of tax bands with the CPI..... Or give me death!!!

tipptom

NIMAN wrote: »

Its a slightly worrying world when people are talking about hunger strikes, the country is a mess with protests and Gardai are standing over meter holes instead of doing their real jobs, when people see no problem paying €500 - €1000 per year for Sky TV but think its the end of the world that they are being asked to pay for and fund the protection of a very scarce natural result for a fraction of the price.

Well said Joan and don't forget about the camera phones all them plebs are running around with as well.

Timberrrrrrrr

Didn't a lad in Cork do this recently and fail?





Probably not the best idea to base himself outside of supermacs i suppose.

antoobrien

Paddy Fields wrote: »

I am seeking to strike against this law to the death. I.e, not drinking any fluids until death to bring down this government.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

I'm going to go on hunger strike to bring down this government for not adjusting tax bands in line with inflation over the past few years.

And the joint-first prize for the <year of death> Darwin Awards goes to.....

Idbatterim

If the Gov did away with the Water Charge and put 1%/2% on Income Tax would that make the people happy?

not a chance, as timberrr says, if they do that, they can take half the cost from welfare, the pensioners have gotten away nearly scott free, they can take half it from welfare and half from income taxes. Kenny mentioned if it werent for IW the alternative is hiking income tax by 4%, even they wouldnt be stupid enough to do that, and this is the crowd who brought us the IW debacle!

I have said it before for over a year now on boards, anyone who thinks anything here is done on the basis of "fairness" is off their rocker... The governments base their "fairness" on how many votes can be won / lost on a sort of cost / benefit analysis...

Rightwing

There's no doubt we are being overcharged in this country for everything. Get very little back in return, but I suppose the ministers do need large pensions.

OP - Vote against the Govt is really your only option and/or don't pay the charge.

meglome

Paddy Fields wrote: »

I am seeking to strike against this law to the death. I.e, not drinking any fluids until death to bring down this government.

I am looking for serious replies only and would appreciate the support of the moderators in keeping it as such.

Meant to say earlier but you'll last weeks without food but only days without water.

Geuze

shedweller wrote: »

Do other countries pay for their water through taxation and then pay for it again through charges?

Why we won’t be paying twice for water

During 2013 the Govt collected €60,837m, or 61bn approx. During 2013 the Govt spent €70,804, or €71bn approx.

The general Govt deficit was €9,967 or nearly 10bn.

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/gfsa/governmentfinancestatisticsoctober2014/#.VGRt9PmsWSo


Currently the Central Govt pay grants to the local councils to run the 1000+ water and wastewater treatment plants.

The idea is that Govt grants to IW will fall, and be replaced by people paying water charges.

The costs to run the 1000+ plants shouldn’t change, but people will be paying for them directly, rather than then via Govt grants to councils.

So the Govt will spend less, and the fiscal deficit will fall, as it has to.

So nobody will be “paying twice”.

Yes, people will be paying a new tax/charge to help reduce the fiscal deficit.

So, to be clear, the LPT and water charges are new taxes/charges to help reduce public borrowing, and are part of the broadening of the tax base.

Of course, nobody likes new or higher taxes. An alternative to the LPT and water charges is higher consumption taxes or higher income taxes.

To people who say: “we already pay” – yes we already pay taxes, but they are not enough to cover public spending.

Geuze

People won't be paying twice for water.

Less of your taxes will be spent on water, as the central Govt cuts their spending on water.

That is replaced be people paying direct charges instead.

Again, to repeat, your direct water charges are replacing Govt spending, not in addition to Govt spending.


The lower Govt spending means a smaller fiscal deficit.

Geuze

meglome wrote: »

We've a government debt of 150 billion which has nothing to do with bailing out banks. Massive borrowing is not 'paying for it'.

The banking crisis did cost 64bn, compared to a net public debt of 161bn at end-2013.

So the costs of the banking crisis on the public finances were huge.

But yes, we have also borrowed heavily for non-banking reasons.

munchkin_utd

Rightwing wrote: »

There's no doubt we are being overcharged in this country for everything. Get very little back in return, but I suppose the ministers do need large pensions.

OP - Vote against the Govt is really your only option and/or don't pay the charge.

OVERCHARGED - in relation to taxes?

honestly, from my standpoint of paying german taxes + 15% statutory medical insurance + 9% pension levy + a few more % infrastructure levy/ old age care levy, plus REAL council/ water charges on top, I would take Irish taxes any day!

dharma200

Comparing Germany to Ireland is ridiculous.

Tinkersbell

ReefBreak wrote: »

Anti-Water Charges Myth #214: We've not being paying for water charges through taxation, or at least: we haven't been paying enough. If we had, we would have a working water supply system, and we wouldn't need such a huge investment in infrastructure right now.

Apparently we've been paying €1.2 billion a year for water through our taxes.
According to IW the cost of supply is going to be around €600-€650 million million PA.
Where's the other €600 million or so being going?

chopper6

meglome wrote: »

I assume he meant clean drinkable water as opposed to water lying in puddles.

Well if it falls into puddles it also falls into resevoirs.

Scare commodity my hoop...we're being had plain and simple.

murphaph

chopper6 wrote: »

Well if it falls into puddles it also falls into resevoirs.

Scare commodity my hoop...we're being had plain and simple.

The charge isn't just for drinking water (which does require major infrastructure to get it to the tap) it's also to cover the processing of waste water, which is arguably much more expensive.

At least with the water charges you can see what you're paying for, which is not often the case with the black hole that are the public finances.

fliball123

ReefBreak wrote: »

Anti-Water Charges Myth #214: We've not being paying for water charges through taxation, or at least: we haven't been paying enough. If we had, we would have a working water supply system, and we wouldn't need such a huge investment in infrastructure right now.

this is a lie there are lots of people who work and are paying a shed load in tax that would more than cover water and other services..the problem is how these taxes are spent..We pay too much in tax for the p1ss poor services we receive. So it is not a myth we are paying double and treble taxes. every citizen in this country should have the right to ask what do my taxes pay for ?

fliball123

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Its a tax on income.
(Thought that was obvious).

Answer the gents queries whenever you can.

The question is what value do you get for this tax?

fliball123

NIMAN wrote: »

If the Gov did away with the Water Charge and put 1%/2% on Income Tax would that make the people happy?

No do away with it and stop borrowing billions and take it out of spending .spending has not come down at all in this country over the last decade. We pay more than enough in taxes when both direct and indirect taxation is taken into account. Time for tax payers to get bang for their buck.

Lu Tze

chopper6 wrote: »

Well if it falls into puddles it also falls into resevoirs.

Scare commodity my hoop...we're being had plain and simple.

This very true. So contact irish water, ask them to disconnect you from the mains, buy some land, build a reservoir, capture all the water you want. Then treat it. Then get your bucket, and bring it home.

Sure you would be a fool not to

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

Why we won’t be paying twice for water

During 2013 the Govt collected €60,837m, or 61bn approx. During 2013 the Govt spent €70,804, or €71bn approx.

The general Govt deficit was €9,967 or nearly 10bn.

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/gfsa/governmentfinancestatisticsoctober2014/#.VGRt9PmsWSo


Currently the Central Govt pay grants to the local councils to run the 1000+ water and wastewater treatment plants.

The idea is that Govt grants to IW will fall, and be replaced by people paying water charges.

The costs to run the 1000+ plants shouldn’t change, but people will be paying for them directly, rather than then via Govt grants to councils.

So the Govt will spend less, and the fiscal deficit will fall, as it has to.

So nobody will be “paying twice”.

Yes, people will be paying a new tax/charge to help reduce the fiscal deficit.

So, to be clear, the LPT and water charges are new taxes/charges to help reduce public borrowing, and are part of the broadening of the tax base.

Of course, nobody likes new or higher taxes. An alternative to the LPT and water charges is higher consumption taxes or higher income taxes.

To people who say: “we already pay” – yes we already pay taxes, but they are not enough to cover public spending.

So are you trying to say if you go out and pay 2 euro for a loaf of bread and because the supermarket dicide that 50 Cent will go out of this to pay for employees wage, another Euro will go for paying for all employees who couldnt get a job in the supermarket, another 50 cent goes to covering debts of a different supermarket that went bust and also you will need to pay another 20 cent to cover pensions of the supermarket employees that no longer work there. Now in case your math is off thats 2:20 you have only paid 2 Euro so the supermarket have conveniently borrowed that 20 cent for you which you will have to pay back with interest.

Now is this the analogy you are putting forward that even do we paid more than enough for this bread that we have not paid for it. The fact is we have more than paid for the phucking bread the problem is the decisions being made by the people receiving the money are not going on your bread but feather nesting peoples pockets and paying for feckups that have nothing to do with your loaf of bread..Some perspective please

FreudianSlippers

Lu Tze wrote: »

This very true. So contact irish water, ask them to disconnect you from the mains, buy some land, build a reservoir, capture all the water you want. Then treat it. Then get your bucket, and bring it home.

Sure you would be a fool not to

You're wasting your time on using sarcasm with someone who doesn't understand the difference between potable and non-potable water.

Geuze

fliball123 wrote: »

this is a lie there are lots of people who work and are paying a shed load in tax that would more than cover water and other services..the problem is how these taxes are spent..We pay too much in tax for the p1ss poor services we receive. So it is not a myth we are paying double and treble taxes. every citizen in this country should have the right to ask what do my taxes pay for ?

My parents pay under 10% income tax on 50,000 gross.

They get:
2 med cards
2 travel passes
free TV licence
subsidised electricity
and in 2015, subsidised water charges

That is a very generous system, with really low direct income taxes on many people.

ardmacha

The usual immature nonsense about water "being already paid for" is still surfacing here.
Nothing in 2015 is already paid for, government services will be paid from taxes and charges collected in 2015.
As Geuze pointed out above, in 2013 government revenue was significantly less than expenditure. This gap cannot continue, some of it may be reduced by better economic conditions but some extra taxes or charges are needed and the government has proposed that those who use water pay some part of its cost.

This is a change from funding from something with borrowing to paying for it, nothing at all to do with paying twice or similar poppycock.

dharma200 wrote:

Comparing Germany to Ireland is ridiculous.

Not ridiculous, both are prosperous West European countries.
The compression is not intrinsically ridiculous, although all comparisons must be nuanced ones, but nuance seems to be beyond many posters here or commentators in the country generally.

FreudianSlippers

fliball123 wrote: »

So are you trying to say if you go out and pay 2 euro for a loaf of bread and because the supermarket dicide that 50 Cent will go out of this to pay for employees wage, another Euro will go for paying for all employees who couldnt get a job in the supermarket, another 50 cent goes to covering debts of a different supermarket that went bust and also you will need to pay another 20 cent to cover pensions of the supermarket employees that no longer work there. Now in case your math is off thats 2:20 you have only paid 2 Euro so the supermarket have conveniently borrowed that 20 cent for you which you will have to pay back with interest.

Now is this the analogy you are putting forward that even do we paid more than enough for this bread that we have not paid for it. The fact is we have more than paid for the phucking bread the problem is the decisions being made by the people receiving the money are not going on your bread but feather nesting peoples pockets and paying for feckups that have nothing to do with your loaf of bread..Some perspective please

Your analogy is pretty bad, but to stick with the concept:

Say bread = water in this scenario.

Bread should cost €2.46 (€2 + 23% VAT). However, the government subsidises bread (and most other 'staple' food items) by applying VAT obtained elsewhere to cover off the cost of zero-rating certain foods.

So, although bread only costs you €2 in the shop, the €0.46 'loss' to VAT receipts is made up elsewhere.

It's the same with water/waste - 1 adult should pay €322.08/year, but the government subsidises this using tax receipts to ensure that that person only pays €175.68/year. The 'loss' of €146.40/year has to be covered by the government and they do this by allocating tax receipts and/or borrowing.

chopper6

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

You're wasting your time on using sarcasm with someone who doesn't understand the difference between potable and non-potable water.

Oh i understand very well and your condesnding tone hasnt been lost on me either.

I ask why are we being charged for water now when "difference between potable and non-potable water" has always been the same?


Nobody gave a hoot about where the water was coming from ten years ago and now suddenly we're being told that "billions" are being lost every year through dodgy pipes and suddenly we've got to pay for it.


No,i rephrase that,suddenly the supply AND control of our water is in danger of being privatised and nobody smells a rat...handing over a monopoly to a (soon to be) private company.


This is a sell-off of the family silver so the Govt can continue to pay lavish rates of welfare and overseas aid and anybody who thinks it's for the actual good of the country is deluding themselves.

fliball123

Geuze wrote: »

My parents pay under 10% income tax on 50,000 gross.

They get:
2 med cards
2 travel passes
free TV licence
subsidised electricity
and in 2015, subsidised water charges

That is a very generous system, with really low direct income taxes on many people.

How much are they paying with indirect taxation
VAT, DIRT, Carbon Tax, Road tax. How much have the paid in income tax in the duration of their lifes? How much have the paid for other one off things such asstamp duty for their house.

I would hazard a guess that if you put all it together over their lifetime and take into acount the services that they have availed of, then they will have well paid for water, throughout their lives. I could be wrong,

By the way how are they only payin 10% on income tax? Are you including PRSI and USC in this

fliball123

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Your analogy is pretty bad, but to stick with the concept:

Say bread = water in this scenario.

Bread should cost €2.46 (€2 + 23% VAT). However, the government subsidises bread (and most other 'staple' food items) by applying VAT obtained elsewhere to cover off the cost of zero-rating certain foods.

So, although bread only costs you €2 in the shop, the €0.46 'loss' to VAT receipts is made up elsewhere.

It's the same with water/waste - 1 adult should pay €322.08/year, but the government subsidises this using tax receipts to ensure that that person only pays €175.68/year. The 'loss' of €146.40/year has to be covered by the government and they do this by allocating tax receipts and/or borrowing.

Why should it cost 2.46 ? Why should we pay VAT on water when most food that is consumable in the supermarket is at 0% VAT? So your analogy fails at the start.

You also fail to realise that the tax receipts and borrowing is not magic, its paid for by the tax payers who you are asking to pay again for the water charges..Double taxation

Anyone working and paying tax should be exempt from paying water charges, simple as this they are already paying for it.

Why not cut the costs to the supermarket and use that to subsidise water.

So ask yourself this question what exactly does my or anyone elses Income tax and USC cover, what do I get for it?

As I ask myself this question and quite honestly I dont get anything for it