IW/Anything Water Related-Warning in OP

BoatMad

TheChizler wrote: »

Oh! Well that's good so. The way I was hearing "complete u-turn" for the most recent announcement I was under the impression that they had all but scrapped the meters until 2019.

they have 50% installed and have contracts with 8 regional installers, I suspect even if they wanted to, they couldn't back out of that

shinzon

BoatMad wrote: »

I don't see a Gov running scared, if they were doing that they would have dismantled the whole edifice, They make some compromises. reasonable ones. I don't see anything running scared ( ps back benchers are always scared)

I think the 10th will achieve nothing extra.

Well see then wont we

Plates

shinzon wrote: »

way to twist what I said under a progressive taxation system everyone pays something the further up the food chain you go the more you pay the vulnerable don't not pay they pay what they can afford which is the way it should be

Shin

Which is the way it is today, right? The more you get paid the higher tax band you're in and the more you pay in USC.

BoatMad

And ill repeat it againAnd ill repeat it again we do not get water for free we pay through taxation, a progressive taxation system would more then cover the cost of the infrastructure if implemented correctly and everyone pays something , a progressive taxation system would more then cover the cost of the infrastructure if implemented correctly and everyone pays something

Ireland has factually one of the most progressive taxation systems of similar countries. We have an obvious gap, for obvious reasons in corporate taxation.

We still have a current budget deficit. hence " we do not get water for free we pay through taxation," is not correct, we merely pay for "some" of the costs. now well pay about €100 million directly and the tax will pay €800 million, still not the right balance of course

ThunbergsAreGo

shinzon wrote: »

Or just not pay the charge let them lien it against the property and still have the water, swings and roundabouts tbh, most people cant afford to move anyways so not going to make much difference if they do.

And ill repeat it again we do not get water for free we pay through taxation, a progressive taxation system would more then cover the cost of the infrastructure if implemented correctly and everyone pays something

Shin

What about those that dont pay any tax?

Larbre34

BoatMad wrote: »

I don't see a Gov running scared, if they were doing that they would have dismantled the whole edifice, They make some compromises. reasonable ones. I don't see anything running scared ( ps back benchers are always scared)

I think the 10th will achieve nothing extra.

Of course they wouldnt, they might as well have surrendered the keys on Thursday if they had done so. They need to back peddle, and fudge and spin and fiddle and generally bungle around incompetently, doing their best (worst) not to raise eyebrows in Europe.

By leaving a shell of IW in place over a General Election, it becomes a nice land mine for the next crowd to have to deal with, which in turn becomes a brick bat for Fine Gael to begin building towards the election after that.

Ive put a few quid on an election before Paddys Day, and I fully expect to collect.

BoatMad

naughtb4 wrote: »

What about those that dont pay any tax?

thats a tiny minority. Most don't even live here. even if you taxed them, all you would do is make a few lefties feel good, it wouldn't solve any problem.

IN every western society the greatest tax payers, are the middle classes, cause (a) theres a lot of them and (b) they can actually manage to pay the tax.

The poor pay little ( in net terms) the rich , well those that are actually in the jurisdiction, are a small number, I would classify that as any couple earning over 150k). Ireland actually taxes rich people quite hard on their income tax.

gladrags

BoatMad wrote: »

funnily 50% are already installed, i saw loads go in in greystones recently. Sure a couple in Tallaght and Driminagh might take a while to install. so what.

Water meters will be installed , thats clear.

One year down the road,that is certainly not clear.

If it was,there would have been no climbdown.

ThunbergsAreGo

BoatMad wrote: »

thats a tiny minority. Most don't even live here. even if you taxed them, all you would do is make a few lefties feel good, it wouldn't solve any problem.

IN every western society the greatest tax payers, are the middle classes, cause (a) theres a lot of them and (b) they can actually manage to pay the tax.

The poor pay little ( in net terms) the rich , well those that are actually in the jurisdiction, are a small number, I would classify that as any couple earning over 150k). Ireland actually taxes rich people quite hard on their income tax.

No it was mentioned by the previous poster that in a progressive tax system everyone would pay something to provide water?
There are 11.4% of people unemployed in this country, what will they pay?

BoatMad

Of course they wouldnt, they might as well have surrendered the keys on Thursday if they had done so. They need to back peddle, and fudge and spin and fiddle and generally bungle around incompetently, doing their best (worst) not to raise eyebrows in Europe.

I like bungling governments, history has shown us that those that got convinced of their importance and believed they were always correct, tended to start world wars.

I want back peddling(= i.e. they listened) , fudge ( another name for compromise)

I think we elect those Gov time and time again and I see no political party that will do anything different.

Stargate

BoatMad wrote: »

I don't see a Gov running scared, if they were doing that they would have dismantled the whole edifice, They make some compromises. reasonable ones. I don't see anything running scared ( ps back benchers are always scared)

I think the 10th will achieve nothing extra.

Huh ? Guess your like Enda Kenny then. Head firmly stuck in the sand .
Might help somewhat if you took time to look up take in what is really happening in the country.

BoatMad

gladrags wrote: »

One year down the road,that is certainly not clear.

If it was,there would have been no climbdown.

The installations proceed a pace, most places have no protests. There are 8 regional contractors and IW have entered binding supply contracts.

I think thats clear.

The climbdown is on pricing thats all.

( climbdown is a funny term, the Gov listened and compromised)

BoatMad

Stargate wrote: »

Huh ? Guess your like Enda Kenny then. Head firmly stuck in the sand .
Might help somewhat if you took time to look up take in what is really happening in the country.

No I don't personally like Enda, Id be a supporter of Leo.

I certainly don't want to hand the country to a rag tag bunch of looney leftists, who's only policy is what they heard on the radio today.

Whats happening in the country, I see a country that is great. It took on a heavy burden , one it shouldn't have had to bear all alone ( I didnt support blanket banks guarantees) I see a country growing again, providing jobs again and beginning to more forward.

Was the water charges a mess, of course, primarily it was all rushed, but that was a situation FF left us in. In my view FF should be dismantled and never be allowed to form as a political party. They never had the interest of the state ( one they fought against) in their mind, merely the interest of FF, The damage was done through all theses years of FF majority governments.

Fuhrer

BoatMad wrote: »

Was the water charges a mess, of course, primarily it was all rushed, but that was a situation FF left us in.

If only Fine Gael were in some sort of opposition when FF were doing those terrible things to stop them or at least warn people...

BoatMad

naughtb4 wrote: »

No it was mentioned by the previous poster that in a progressive tax system everyone would pay something to provide water?
There are 11.4% of people unemployed in this country, what will they pay?

The most progressive tax is the USC, everyone pays something almost without exception,

Yet everyone hates it. Irish people don't like progressive taxes, they just want " the other rich guy" to pay, but not "me".

BoatMad

Fuhrer wrote: »

If only Fine Gael were in some sort of opposition when FF were doing those terrible things to stop them or at least warn people...

Your right, everyone, lefties, righties,we all queued up at the bar, accepted the free drink until we puked.

Im not denying that.

But FG were repeatedly denied majority governments, and even when they were in power they usually tried to raise taxation ( remember children's shoes) and got booted out at the next election by FF promising all sorts of sweets and candies.

The warning were there, but when you gulping down all that free drink , the guy handing out AA leaflets gets laughed at.

shinzon

Plates wrote: »

Which is the way it is today, right? The more you get paid the higher tax band you're in and the more you pay in USC.

Yes the usc could be called a form of a progressive taxation system except those that have been taken out of the taxation system under that regime would be brought back in and pay a nominal fee so that everyone pays what they can afford

Shin

Fuhrer

BoatMad wrote: »

Your right, everyone, lefties, righties,we all queued up at the bar, accepted the free drink until we puked.

Im not denying that.

But FG were repeatedly denied majority governments, and even when they were in power they usually tried to raise taxation ( remember children's shoes) and got booted out at the next election by FF promising all sorts of sweets and candies.

The warning were there, but when you gulping down all that free drink , the guy handing out AA leaflets gets laughed at.

In this confusing metaphor, Fine Gael were handing out AA leaflets?

Or were they just getting drunk like everyone else, and blaming the hangover on what they went along with?

BoatMad

Fuhrer wrote: »

In this confusing metaphor, Fine Gael were handing out AA leaflets?

Or were they just getting drunk like everyone else, and blaming the hangover on what they went along with?

No all political parties , just like their electorate were at the bar unfortunately, political parties tend to be mirrors of their supporters. i don't absolve FG, but I blame FF ( for about 30 years of mis-management )

Somecrimesitry

I spotted this glitch in the Matrix as it happened live yesterday:)

1) Type Varadkar into Google.
2) Click the link: Varadkar says Govt must charge strategy to be re-elected
3) Its a dead link on RTE from yesterday morning: .rte.ie/news/2014/1123/661812-varadkar/
4) So what? There are lots of dead links on RTE but not like this one.

The Tale Of The Disappearing Leo by Mr Sinister Fringe.

I got up early yesterday and clicked onto RTE. There was a headline story featuring a big cheesy picture of Leo including quotes from a Sunday Independent interview. It was his response to yesterday's Sunday Business Post/Red C poll. The Sunday Independent buried the interview details in this article:

.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/a-political-earthquake-30766626.html

"Last night, Health Minister Leo Varadkar conceded that the Coalition had lost the confidence of the public and would not be re-elected unless it changed its political strategy.

He said economic success alone would not secure the second term for the Coalition: "From now on we will pay much more attention to public confidence and trust.''

Remember that word...trust.

RTE published Leo's quotes in a headline story and let's face it there politically naive at best or even damaging at worst coming out of a current minister in the present climate..."lost the confidence of the public and would not be re-elected unless it changed its political strategy". Again so what? Well RTE published those quotes Sunday morning, then they deleted the entire article, replacing it with another headline Maria Cahill story, before adding a new article with the Chief Whip Paul Kehoes response to the same Red C poll. Why was Leo's article deleted rather than just moved down the index list like all the other stories? By the way this all happened over a two hour window early on a Sunday morning. Leo's article has never re-appeared on RTE but is still cached on Google and I presume the Chief Whip just happened to phone RTE first thing on a Sunday morning with some much more upbeat quotes to replace Leo's honest but somewhat downtrodden ones? .rte.ie/news/2014/1123/661842-water-concessions/

Trust is in very short supply throughout this land.

TheChizler

shinzon wrote: »

And ill repeat it again we do not get water for free we pay through taxation, a progressive taxation system would more then cover the cost of the infrastructure if implemented correctly and everyone pays something

But wouldn't the proposed system ensure that everybody pays something? And you know exactly what you're paying so you can demand you get what you're paying for? Taxation removes the payment for a service indirectly away from the consumer so there's less responsibility on the part of the provider to ensure certain standards to individual customers.

I worked it out recently (very rough back of the envelope calculation) that the average worker pays on average €77 towards water per year through PRSI, PAYE, VAT etc. The rest comes from other state income; corporation tax etc. Say for a household that's €154. Under the proposed system the same household would be paying €160 after grants etc. for now. If this increased slightly, or arguably even doubled, it's not a huge difference. Why manipulate the tax system to collect money that's not even guaranteed to go towards water (allocation depends on the mood of the gov), when we can pay directly, create accountability for our supply, and have an element of control over our bill?

gladrags

BoatMad wrote: »

The installations proceed a pace, most places have no protests. There are 8 regional contractors and IW have entered binding supply contracts.

I think thats clear.

The climbdown is on pricing thats all.

( climbdown is a funny term, the Gov listened and compromised)

Wishful thinking,they were compelled to act in the interests of the electorate.

And there is every reason to believe that the majority of the electorate,have lost trust.

72% against,according to the latest poll,and increasing.

28% in support of Gov,and dropping.

Thats is the trend,and more critical issues,on the horizon.

BoatMad

gladrags wrote: »

Wishful thinking,they were compelled to act in the interests of the electorate.

And there is every reason to believe that the majority of the electorate,have lost trust.

72% against,according to the latest poll,and increasing.

28% in support of Gov,and dropping.

Thats is the trend,and more critical issues,on the horizon.

That the Gov support is falling , true, GEs are somewhat different to polls though , because often the disaffected don't vote while the bulk of the middle classes do. equally when people come to who might govern, they tend to be conservative and choose the middle ground.

gandalf

BoatMad wrote: »

That the Gov support is falling , true, GEs are somewhat different to polls though , because often the disaffected don't vote while the bulk of the middle classes do. equally when people come to who might govern, they tend to be conservative and choose the middle ground.

Don't forget the percentage that SF get in any poll is skewed because they are more transfer toxic than other parties so unless they get voted in on the first vote they tend to lose out in the subsequent rounds like they did in Dublin SW when Murphy pipped Cathal King despite King being nearly 800 votes ahead of Murphy after the first count.

BoatMad

72% against,according to the latest poll,and increasing.

28% in support of Gov,and dropping.

Thats is the trend,and more critical issues,on the horizon.

The biggest rise was people supporting "no party" , however they tend not to vote , so electorally they make no difference

Streetwalker

Anyone left supporting IW at this stage must have a vested interest. Even my well off lifelong FG supporting friend say's he's done with them and has decided to send them f uck all back.

My name is URL

ThinkAboutIt wrote: »

The anti water charges leader gets paid quite a large amount

http://www.independent.ie/news/paul-murphy-td-an-apology-30765893.html

They removed the article. Perhaps they're not willing to stand over it?

gandalf wrote: »

LOL now we have become a Lawless Utopia

http://www.thejournal.ie/labour-senator-lawless-utopia-1796003-Nov2014/

She does realise what she has said is an oxymoron ?

Another prime example on why the country should have voted for the abolishment of the Senate.

Is that the same woman that cried and complained about online bullying during the local elections while at the same time was engaged in a continuous and vile bullying campaign against Ming Flanagan?

Silly bint. She's not even liked within her own party apparently. A career politician that has never known success!

BoatMad

Streetwalker wrote: »

Anyone left supporting IW at this stage must have a vested interest. Even my well off lifelong FG supporting friend say's he's done with them and has decided to send them f uck all back.

I suspect thats not a person in ireland thats supporting IW, I hate the way the were set up by feather bedding unions and the LA's.

But Im not sure at this stage they will be dismantled. Lots of court cases would follow.

Will they be changed, maybe once the dust has settled,

But I notice the unions have already rejected the removal of bonuses, I see a few strikes there yet.

gladrags

BoatMad wrote: »

That the Gov support is falling , true, GEs are somewhat different to polls though , because often the disaffected don't vote while the bulk of the middle classes do. equally when people come to who might govern, they tend to be conservative and choose the middle ground.

The trend was backed up in the local elections,with an historicl collapse of the FG vote...

and the all but extinct Labour vote.

Which,by the way,is now reminiscent of the smaller independent parties,you keep dismissing,and Labour has become!!!

It's a question of when,not if.

TheChizler

Streetwalker wrote: »

Anyone left supporting IW at this stage must have a vested interest.

Excellent argument; all those who disagree with my opinion have vested interests.

Using ad hominem arguments isn't a classy debating style.