IW/Anything Water Related-Warning in OP

RobertKK

Pocoyo wrote: »

School in Tallaght asks parents to donate toilet roll and stationary!

http://www.herald.ie/news/school-asks-parents-to-donate-toilet-paper-in-bid-to-cut-costs-30800388.html

Im beginning to see why the people of tallaght are getting more and more angry.

This country is being destroyed for the likes of Denis O'Brien a man who is already a billionaire.

600 million in charity leaving the country and billions giving to EU nations yet we dont look after our own children and vulnerable members of society.

It calls into question the management of the school.

_Kaiser_

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

Possible cause of being unable to marshall your own thoughts to do so, is that the message is getting through and you are seeing that it is in fact, correct, and that having to acknowledge the change of mind is quite jarring.

If you genuinely believe the stuff you're posting in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary then you are clearly what is wrong with the electorate - that no matter what, you will vote for your chosen side anyway.

If you're doing it as a wind-up then you should just give it up at this stage because it's equally clear that no-one is buying.

But for the sake of argument (because it's a lazy Sunday morning), let's dissect your previous post then...

SaveOurLyric wrote:

It. doesn't prevent us doing the right thing though and implementing a water charge now. The exemption is an historical legacy from times of timid governments without the gumption to take on the topic. Now we have a government of action who is dealing with the issue responsibly despite the mud slinging from the delusional.

1. "It doesn't prevent us doing the right thing" - since when is supporting the creation of an expensive, incompetent, wasteful quango stuffed with the friends of TDs some sort of civic duty?


2. "A government of action" - oh right, the same government that has sat back and prayed for a recovery while blindly continuing the same policies of their FF predecessors?

Maybe you're talking about their action on Healthcare .. nope, that's worse than ever

Maybe you meant the housing crisis .. couldn't be, what with spiralling rents, increased homelessness and people dying on the street (though Enda appearing on the city's streets the other night was a cynical election stunt - even for FG!)

Could it be the debt situation you meant? - Nah, sure they've done nothing to address the mortgage arrears situation, many people are struggling to get by from week to week, and €8 a week (on average) more in their pocket from January won't mean feck all when the raft of indirect property and service charges are taken out


3. "Dealing with the issue responsibly" - Really? Wasting millions on consultants to setup an unnecessary quango that couldn't even get the simple message of its pricing structure out without making a balls of it. Appointing failed county managers to head up this farce? Agreeing to a bonus structure that gives increases to those who don't even hit their targets? That's responsible in your book eh?

4. "mud slinging from the delusional" - well, as I said above .. ironic statement is ironic!

AboutaWeekAgo

RobertKK wrote: »

This protest is anti-people who always paid, given the protesters want it to remain the way it has been, underfunded water services, with boil notices, not enough money to fix leaks, or do major infrastructure projects and to hell to the people who always had to pay and who would finally be getting a small amount of money towards the cost.

I hope there is no backing down on water charges, otherwise we will definitely be having TDs offering another TD piss water to drink again...

You're going on about not enough money to fix leaks but already this year local councils have paid half a billion to IW. That could have been spent to fix some things no?

Pocoyo

RobertKK wrote: »

It calls into question the management of the school.

....Says the man supporting irish water.

Streetwalker

I honestly think we will see at least 100k at the protest. IW and this corrupt government will not be able to spin a turn out like that in any positive way.

RobertKK

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

If you genuinely believe the stuff you're posting in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary then you are clearly what is wrong with the electorate - that no matter what, you will vote for your chosen side anyway.

If you're doing it as a wind-up then you should just give it up at this stage because it's equally clear that no-one is buying.

But for the sake of argument (because it's a lazy Sunday morning), let's dissect your previous post then...




1. "It doesn't prevent us doing the right thing" - since when is supporting the creation of an expensive, incompetent, wasteful quango stuffed with the friends of TDs some sort of civic duty?


2. "A government of action" - oh right, the same government that has sat back and prayed for a recovery while blindly continuing the same policies of their FF predecessors?

Maybe you're talking about their action on Healthcare .. nope, that's worse than ever

Maybe you meant the housing crisis .. couldn't be, what with spiralling rents, increased homelessness and people dying on the street (though Enda appearing on the city's streets the other night was a cynical election stunt - even for FG!)

Could it be the debt situation you meant? - Nah, sure they've done nothing to address the mortgage arrears situation, many people are struggling to get by from week to week, and €8 a week (on average) more in their pocket from January won't mean feck all when the raft of indirect property and service charges are taken out


3. "Dealing with the issue responsibly" - Really? Wasting millions on consultants to setup an unnecessary quango that couldn't even get the simple message of its pricing structure out without making a balls of it. Appointing failed county managers to head up this farce? Agreeing to a bonus structure that gives increases to those who don't even hit their targets? That's responsible in your book eh?

4. "mud slinging from the delusional" - well, as I said above .. ironic statement is ironic!

Highest economic growth in the EU. Bond rates at an all time low, the FF/Troika plan worked.
The ATM machines still give out money, employment numbers is rising, the budget deficit is under 3%.
Things are far from perfect, but the opposition to the troika plan is just stupid at this stage. It worked for Ireland.
One can argue over the bank debt, but most of the debt is not bank related and some argue as if all the debt is from bank debt. We had a yearly budget deficit of over €20 billion and this added up over the last number of years.

The state needs a wider tax base and water charges is one that is sensible, one can argue over how it is being implemented but paying directly for a service is the fairest. I shouldn't have to pay extra for someone else's water so they can continue to not pay directly, when I already pay directly for my own.
Plus we had to pay for our septic tanks, a charge, the water charge includes a cost for sewage, but no protesters when rural people were made pay for a service they provide themselves.

RobertKK

Pocoyo wrote: »

....Says the man supporting irish water.

Incorrect, supporting water charges.

Banjo String

RobertKK wrote: »

This protest is anti-people who always paid, given the protesters want it to remain the way it has been, underfunded water services, with boil notices, not enough money to fix leaks, or do major infrastructure projects and to hell to the people who always had to pay and who would finally be getting a small amount of money towards the cost.

I hope there is no backing down on water charges, otherwise we will definitely be having TDs offering another TD piss water to drink again...

You told me you were a farmer, or had a small farm (iirc) in a previous thread, and I asked you if you would support proposals to introduce a tax on farmland (as is implemented in "most other European countries") by the EU here.

Such a tax could generate billions here.

You never replied to me in the last thread, so I'm trying again.

If I'm confusing you with another poster, please forgive me.

yipeeeee

gladrags wrote: »

Meeting at 1pm at Dail



"The next major Right2Water event is a National Assembly outside the Dail on International Human Rights Day. This will take place on Wednesday, 10th December 2014 at 1pm. 

We will reaffirm our demand that water is recognised as a human right and that the Irish government abolish domestic water charges.

Please spread the word."

A human right??

Well then just take the water that falls from the sky and process it into your house and you will have no problems.

Unbelievable.

Green Fish

I would suggest people that cannot go to the protest on Wednesday send strongly worded emails about their feelings to their local TDs to keep the pressure up.

RobertKK

AboutaWeekAgo wrote: »

You're going on about not enough money to fix leaks but already this year local councils have paid half a billion to IW. That could have been spent to fix some things no?

A water company make sense, that doesn't mean Irish Water...

A company who can invest in the infrastructure and borrow against it's income to invest in projects.

Banjo String

yipeeeee wrote: »

A human right??

Well then just take the water that falls from the sky and process it into your house and you will have no problems.

Unbelievab.le

Morning Laura

Welcome to the thread.

shinzon

RobertKK wrote: »

Incorrect, supporting water charges.

Its one in the same in this instance, your not paying anyone else but Irish Water, you cant say your pro water charge then turn around and say your anti Irish Water

Your either fully for or fully against tbh

Shin

RobertKK

Banjo String wrote: »

You told me you were a farmer, or had a small farm (iirc) in a previous thread, and I asked you if you would support proposals to introduce a tax on farmland (as is implemented in "most other European countries") by the EU here.

Such a tax could generate billions here.

You never replied to me in the last thread, so I'm trying again.

If I'm confusing you with another poster, please forgive me.

I think you are confusing me with someone else but I will answer.

What tax rate?
Per acre/Hectare?


Farm incomes are below the industrial wage.
Next year the average incomes per sector is as follows, figures from Farmers Journal.
Dairy/Cereals farms €30k
Beef €15
Sheep €11k

The state wants farmers to increase output by 50% by 2020, a farm land tax is not something that would aid this aim, the state will make far more money with Harvest 2020 plan rather than taxing the asset that will be used to drive Harvest 2020.

RobertKK

shinzon wrote: »

Its one in the same in this instance, your not paying anyone else but Irish Water, you cant say your pro water charge then turn around and say your anti Irish Water

Your either fully for or fully against tbh

Shin

Really?
One can support the principle but it doesn't mean one has to support the way the principle is implemented.

Satriale

RobertKK wrote: »

I think you are confusing me with someone else but I will answer.

What tax rate?
Per acre/Hectare?


Farm incomes are below the industrial wage.
Next year the average incomes per sector is as follows, figures from Farmers Journal.
Dairy/Cereals farms €30k
Beef €15
Sheep €11k

The state wants farmers to increase output by 50% by 2020, a farm land tax is not something that would aid this aim, the state will make far more money with Harvest 2020 plan rather than taxing the asset that will be used to drive Harvest 2020.

do you get any form of grant aid?

yipeeeee

Banjo String wrote: »

Morning Laura

Welcome to the thread.

Brilliant.

Banjo String

RobertKK wrote: »

I think you are confusing me with someone else but I will answer.

What tax rate?
Per acre/Hectare?


Farm incomes are below the industrial wage.
Next year the average incomes per sector is as follows, figures from Farmers Journal.
Dairy/Cereals farms €30k
Beef €15
Sheep €11k

The state wants farmers to increase output by 50% by 2020, a farm land tax is not something that would aid this aim, the state will make far more money with Harvest 2020 plan rather than taxing the asset that will be used to drive Harvest 2020.

Alright, wasn't one hundred percent sure if it was you or not but thanks for answering.

Tbh, there's a lot of similarities between your reasons for not supporting the introduction of a farmland tax, and many homeowners reasons for not supporting the property tax (falling incomes, negative equity, reduced services etc) or a water charge, (quality of water, reduced salaries, double taxation etc)

But I appreciate your honesty.

_Kaiser_

RobertKK wrote: »

Highest economic growth in the EU. Bond rates at an all time low, the FF/Troika plan worked.
The ATM machines still give out money, employment numbers is rising, the budget deficit is under 3%.
Things are far from perfect, but the opposition to the troika plan is just stupid at this stage. It worked for Ireland.
One can argue over the bank debt, but most of the debt is not bank related and some argue as if all the debt is from bank debt. We had a yearly budget deficit of over €20 billion and this added up over the last number of years.

So wait.. just so I'm clear then!

What you're saying is.... FG are no different to FF then? That the pre-election promises of a new approach to the crisis, transparent politics, "Labour's way" etc was actually just worthless?

That the entire FG manifesto which was to offer an alternative to FF's policies was just bull****?

Well hallelujah - if nothing else I'm glad to see people waking up to the reality that FF and FG are just two sides of the same coin!

As for the supposed recovery... well if the news from the ECB this week is anything to go by, FG/LAB may want to hold off on the champagne just yet. Don't suppose you have a breakdown handy of those employment/live register figures (how much is it skewed by jobbridge schemes, nonsense FAS/Solas courses etc - all designed to hide the true status)

I think if you asked most people they've yet to feel any hint of a "recovery" too

The state needs a wider tax base and water charges is one that is sensible, one can argue over how it is being implemented but paying directly for a service is the fairest. I shouldn't have to pay extra for someone else's water so they can continue to not pay directly, when I already pay directly for my own.
Plus we had to pay for our septic tanks, a charge, the water charge includes a cost for sewage, but no protesters when rural people were made pay for a service they provide themselves.

Here we go again...

If you want to live in a field in the middle of nowhere then that's your choice for sure, but the notion of entitlement to the same level of services as your urban counterparts is just not logical - go look up "economies of scale". Would you like a LUAS line outside your gate too?

Still, it's not all bad.. while you may pay for your septic tank/well, your house cost you a lot less than your urban neighbours, probably a lot bigger too and maybe even on a plot of land as opposed to shoehorned into housing estates, quieter roads and neighbourhoods.

TL;DR: Reduced service/amenities and some! higher costs (as in general the cost of living in the country is cheaper) is the price you pay for your big house and peace and quiet.

shinzon

RobertKK wrote: »

Really?
One can support the principle but it doesn't mean one has to support the way the principle is implemented.

so your happy to pay the water charge yet not happy with the company your going to pay the charge to, how in the name of god does that make any sense at all

Isnt that just being pig headed about wanting to pay for water, honestly im interested in your argument here please tell me how you can separate the 2 entities. how you can still pay money to a company that you don't agree with its implementation

Shin

yipeeeee

shinzon wrote: »

so your happy to pay the water charge yet not happy with the company your going to pay the charge to, how in the name of god does that make any sense at all

Isnt that just being pig headed about wanting to pay for water, honestly im interested in your argument here please tell me how you can separate the 2 entities. how you can still pay money to a company that you don't agree with its implementation

Shin

Shin, I must say you are very dedicated to your beliefs about this issue, if not for you on this thread it would be dead.

Wish I had the time to put so such into my beliefs.

RobertKK

Satriale wrote: »

do you get any form of grant aid?

I don't get grant aid, unless the state has a grant scheme for capital projects, ad there is some investment I need.
Last grant scheme I used was in 2007 which the state had so farmers could meet the nitrates directive as set down by the EU.

I get a SFP funded by the EU to pay for the costs they add through regulations, and which is part of a food security policy by the EU.
I receive a payment for farming in a mountainous region and the added costs this brings.
This keeps me in business which helps keep the following people employed and think of this with other farmers included - it keeps the following people employed - vets, haulage people, agri businesses, the milk lorry driver, farm advisors, people who repair things, farm relief service, accountant, department of agriculture staff, AI companies, farm construction workers, people in dairy and meat factories, local shops as it brings money into rural towns and villages.
Farmers through their own self employment keep a total over a quarter of a million people in work.
I will be working Christmas day, it is not money for nothing so one can sit down and twiddle their thumbs, which some like to think it is.

SaveOurLyric

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

FG are no different to FF then?

Correct.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

That the pre-election promises of a new approach to the crisis, transparent politics, "Labour's way" etc was actually just worthless?

Not quite. Worthless in there being any real difference. But very useful in that it gives the voters the illusion (which they want, and buy into wholeheartedly every time), that they have a choice to make. They dont really want a choice - they want what FG/FF both offer them. But having two parties offering them what they want allows the electorate to indulge themselves in an X-factor, personality style, game. And they are entertained by that - drama and pageantry of the vote counting included.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

That the entire FG manifesto which was to offer an alternative to FF's policies was just bull****?

Yes. See above.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Well hallelujah - if nothing else I'm glad to see people waking up to the reality that FF and FG are just two sides of the same coin!

Or is it just yourself waking up late in the day ?

LostinKildare

Seen this? Story in the IT here: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/irish-water-protest-song-released-by-galway-musicians-1.2028938

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfEOLXR1gcA

RobertKK

shinzon wrote: »

so your happy to pay the water charge yet not happy with the company your going to pay the charge to, how in the name of god does that make any sense at all

Isnt that just being pig headed about wanting to pay for water, honestly im interested in your argument here please tell me how you can separate the 2 entities. how you can still pay money to a company that you don't agree with its implementation

Shin

Easy, it could be like, you agree with the idea of 'family', but you might not necessarily like your own family.
You can't change who your family is but that is the family you belong to.

Pocoyo

yipeeeee wrote: »

Shin, I must say you are very dedicated to your beliefs about this issue, if not for you on this thread it would be dead.

Wish I had the time to put so such into my beliefs.

If you go back and look over the thread you will see that on week days before 6pm this thread tends to 50/50 on the issue,After 7pm when the workers come home the thread dramatically becomes anti IW.

The people supporting IW tend to be doing so out of spite,Its either 'xbox warriors' or old out of touch sorts that seem to be advocating for the return of the blue shirts.

RobertKK

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

So wait.. just so I'm clear then!

What you're saying is.... FG are no different to FF then? That the pre-election promises of a new approach to the crisis, transparent politics, "Labour's way" etc was actually just worthless?

That the entire FG manifesto which was to offer an alternative to FF's policies was just bull****?

Well hallelujah - if nothing else I'm glad to see people waking up to the reality that FF and FG are just two sides of the same coin!

As for the supposed recovery... well if the news from the ECB this week is anything to go by, FG/LAB may want to hold off on the champagne just yet. Don't suppose you have a breakdown handy of those employment/live register figures (how much is it skewed by jobbridge schemes, nonsense FAS/Solas courses etc - all designed to hide the true status)

I think if you asked most people they've yet to feel any hint of a "recovery" too



Here we go again...

If you want to live in a field in the middle of nowhere then that's your choice for sure, but the notion of entitlement to the same level of services as your urban counterparts is just not logical - go look up "economies of scale". Would you like a LUAS line outside your gate too?

Still, it's not all bad.. while you may pay for your septic tank/well, your house cost you a lot less than your urban neighbours, probably a lot bigger too and maybe even on a plot of land as opposed to shoehorned into housing estates, quieter roads and neighbourhoods.

TL;DR: Reduced service/amenities and some! higher costs (as in general the cost of living in the country is cheaper) is the price you pay for your big house and peace and quiet.

There was no choice for anyone.

It is easy to be SF or the socialists or people on the sidelines and oppose everything while having no valid alternative to fix the economy.

I still not have heard a valid alternative, apart from 'we won't have to pay for this or that, that the rich will be made pay'.
That is just ignorant economic policy.
We live in a free society where the highest paid, do pay the most of our taxes, in what is deemed the most progressive tax system in the OECD.

I pay for what i get. With you, it is 'I live in an urban area and I shouldn't have to pay'.

Satriale

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't get grant aid, unless the state has a grant scheme for capital projects, ad there is some investment I need.
Last grant scheme I used was in 2007 which the state had so farmers could meet the nitrates directive as set down by the EU.

I get a SFP funded by the EU to pay for the costs they add through regulations, and which is part of a food security policy by the EU.
I receive a payment for farming in a mountainous region and the added costs this brings.
This keeps me in business which helps keep the following people employed and think of this with other farmers included - it keeps the following people employed - vets, haulage people, agri businesses, the milk lorry driver, farm advisors, people who repair things, farm relief service, accountant, department of agriculture staff, AI companies, farm construction workers, people in dairy and meat factories, local shops as it brings money into rural towns and villages.
Farmers through their own self employment keep a total over a quarter of a million people in work.
I will be working Christmas day, it is not money for nothing so one can sit down and twiddle their thumbs, which some like to think it is.

As banjo said i admire your honesty and i appreciate all the employment farmers create in this country plus i know that this country would sink without farmers spending that money in their local communities, but you have to admit its a bit rich you coming on this thread and telling me to pay this tax when the high cost of my business (and everybody elses) is to supplement yours.

I dont get one brass red cent from the government for being self employed.

falan

See you all on the 10th.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=399283923580962&set=vb.100004980738264&type=2&theater

Green Fish

It's clear to me that the days of the established parties are coming to an end. Their brands are too toxic now. The big question is what replaces them. I don't mind filling the Dáil with a load of Independents until we/they figure it out.