IW/Anything Water Related-Warning in OP

AboutaWeekAgo

ChippingSodbury wrote: »

I will be paying for water when the bill comes because I think it's the right thing to do. Anything you get for nothing has no value. If water meters make people think about how they use water, then it can only be a good thing. How many people here brush their teeth and leave the tap running while brushing? If we're not metered, why would we bother turning off the tap?

But it's already been announced that it will be a flat fee for 3 years, you can let your taps run as long as you like and you'll still pay the same price. If they really went into this with water conservation in mind surely that wouldn't be the case?

Timberrrrrrrr

Stargate wrote: »

LoL Timberrrrrrrr i would have thought with your doorman skills and your soldier training you wouldn't need help in spotting " them " :P

You are the one making the shill accusations every day i thought maybe you would like to name and shame? I guess false accusations, conjecture and bringing up someones past work is the best you have.

Stargate

sjb25 wrote: »

Don't no how true it is but seen on the Dublin says no Facebook page some protestors are up for contempt of court today and are being sent to jail over it
Again don't no how true it is just seen it

Ha Ha freeeeedom .

the Law (The injunction allowing establishment of the 20-metre exclusion zone ) is a joke , Well done Dublin says no .

Dublin Says No
4 minutes ago

https://scontent-b-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/1004562_1004337446259429_7495887288604342635_n.jpg?oh=e8b3b9ab6691fa3fb8b6345c9a690e08&oe=54D1FF28

"We're on our way back to support our friends and our communities who have kept GMC SIERRA out of Donaghmede.

Well done everyone "

Caliden

wprathead wrote: »

Ahh thanks.. hmm feel iffy giving over my PPS number..

They're not doing PPS numbers anymore.

It's an 'honesty policy' now where each household tells IW how many adults/children are in the house and charges are applied accordingly.


As you can see, they're desperate now.

ChippingSodbury

AboutaWeekAgo wrote: »

But it's already been announced that it will be a flat fee for 3 years, you can let your taps run as long as you like and you'll still pay the same price. If they really went into this with water conservation in mind surely that wouldn't be the case?

I don't set the charges but I'd rather pay via metered amount that a flat rate.

Fuhrer

ChippingSodbury wrote: »

I don't set the charges but I'd rather pay via metered amount that a flat rate.

So, you're against the flat rate?

mariaalice

AboutaWeekAgo wrote: »

But it's already been announced that it will be a flat fee for 3 years, you can let your taps run as long as you like and you'll still pay the same price. If they really went into this with water conservation in mind surely that wouldn't be the case?

True but this thread if about those who are paying not about the right and wrong( of which there are many ) of Irish water.

Daith

AboutaWeekAgo wrote: »

But it's already been announced that it will be a flat fee for 3 years, you can let your taps run as long as you like and you'll still pay the same price. If they really went into this with water conservation in mind surely that wouldn't be the case?

If people's meters show they are under the cap they will get a rebate I thought?

Maximus Alexander

I have no problem with metered water. In fact I'm all for it in principle. As long as a) it's a public entity and b) they remove the existing water charges from our taxes before implementing it.

It's pretty simple to do it right, really.

gandalf

People like Paul Murphy and others have tagged themselves onto a grassroots campaign by people who have had enough for a wide variety of reasons. Some do not want to pay at any cost, others like me want to see the Government especially FG to start delivering on their promise to cut waste out in the PS first and to reduce the number of Quangos, which they are now increasing with the formation of Irish Water.

There is also the issue of protecting our Water in the constitution that has to be addressed (leaving a option for a Government in the future to have the ability to sell it off to a private entity has to be eliminated given the history of bad governance from all political parties who have been in Government).

Stargate

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You are the one making the shill accusations every day i thought maybe you would like to name and shame? I guess false accusations, conjecture and bringing up someones past work is the best you have.

Thanks for keeping me in mind , must be a slow day for you ?
You keep fishing lol

Grayson

Fuhrer wrote: »

Can I get cash back for all that Tax that went on healthcare and education last year?


I wasnt sick and ive finished education!

depends. when you were in education did you receive less learning than the other people in your class? (HINT: I think you might have)

Fuhrer

Grayson wrote: »

depends. when you were in education did you receive less learning than the other people in your class? (HINT: I think you might have)

You don't seem particularly bright, you really shouldn't be throwing around accusations about lack of education.

Banjo String

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

From the leader of the party who rammed the bank guarantee through, Seriously? You're quoting him? :rolleyes:

No, I'm merely quoting what was written in the Irish Times.

I posted a link to the article and everything.

Cantona's Collars

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I have no problem with metered water. In fact I'm all for it in principle. As long as a) it's a public entity and b) they remove the existing water charges from our taxes before implementing it.

It's pretty simple to do it right, really.

But if they do it right,how will friends of politicians get high paid jobs and perks to go along with it?
We all know that in Ireland,the government won't set up a body in the interests of the people,no matter how much they proclaim it is,they set up quango after quango to look after themselves & their buddies.

coffee_cake

wprathead wrote: »

Thought this was that thread?

it's been merged now

Fuhrer

wprathead wrote: »

Thought this was that thread?

Its been merged

humanji

MOD: Jaysus guys, give the bickering a rest. You're not children.

wprathead wrote: »

Thought this was that thread?

MOD: And you, pointing out a mods stupidity is a paddling offence!

LostinKildare

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And you think i would have an issue with this?

Glad you don't. In general, though, it does seem that Doherty has escaped the attention and vitriol that is aimed at Wallace.

Leroy42 wrote: »

But does that not fall onto voters? We elect a TD based on promises. Next election they should be held accountable or not voted for. If TD A says they will fight against water charges and then votes for them due to the whip system, why would we trust them again?

But look a the amount of reserving members of the dail, the number of TD's whose main point is that their father was a TD or other nonesense.

What Howlin (or was it Rabitte?) said was right, you say things in an election campaign, youy don't need to actually stick to them. Until voters actually pay attention to what their local TDs are voting for and hold them to account why would they bother to change

Yes, it does fall on the voters, but in fairness, there has to be an EFFECTIVE system in place that supports the execution of the people's wishes. The party whip system prevents this.

"If TD A says they will fight against water charges and then votes for them due to the whip system, why would we trust them again?" --- The thing is, NO party candidates can be trusted as long as they submit to, and hide behind, the party whip.

If I give my vote to the Labour candidate because he said he'd vote against water charges, and once in power he votes in water charges because his Labour party membership requires it, he then justifies it by saying that with my vote I supported the Labour party, and entrusted the party to do what they think best. Unfortunately, a political party will always act in the political party's interests over the constituents' interests.

The system is rigged so that when you vote in an election you are voting for a party, not for policy. You must trust the party to do what you want, but if you are aware of and accept the whip system, you cannot really hold an individual representative accountable for his/her votes.

You can say that come the next election you will not again vote for that person, but discarding that possibility, how do you choose among the other candidates, all of whom are doing the same --- making promises that they will not/cannot keep because their party will forbid it?

Unless you vote for an Independent. They are the only representatives truly accountable to the voters. The Irish public seem to be catching on to this.

Timberrrrrrrr

Stargate wrote: »

Thanks for keeping me in mind , must be a slow day for you ?
You keep fishing lol

As slow as yours i reckon.

BBJBIG

GENERAL ELECTION .... *** NOW *** .... PLEASE .... !!! !!! !!!

Time to get these Fooooookin Liars OUT NOW !!! !!! !!

Timberrrrrrrr

Banjo String wrote: »

No, I'm merely quoting what was written in the Irish Times.

I posted a link to the article and everything.

You didn't quote him but chose to highlight his quote :rolleyes:

Why, wondered the Fianna Fáil leader, does it all have to be wrapped up by 10pm tomorrow night? “There is no compelling urgency here . . . stop trying to ram things through the Dáil,” he urged the Taoiseach.

Grayson

Fuhrer wrote: »

You don't seem particularly bright, you really shouldn't be throwing around accusations about lack of education.

Oh BURN!

You've put me in my place. I thought comparing a service which can be measured and quantified, with one that can't, was stupid. But your retort has shown me that i was soo, soo wrong. obviously you must be right.

Fuhrer

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You didn't quote him but chose to highlight his quote :rolleyes:

A valid section to highlight, why does the legislation have to be rammed through by 10?

Fuhrer

Grayson wrote: »

Oh BURN!

You've put me in my place. I thought comparing a service which can be measured and quantified, with one that can't, was stupid. But your retort has shown me that i was soo, soo wrong. obviously you must be right.

Yes, I guess I had "more learning" as you so eloquently put it.

VinLieger

BBJBIG wrote: »

GENERAL ELECTION .... *** NOW *** .... PLEASE .... !!! !!! !!!

Time to get these Fooooookin Liars OUT NOW !!! !!! !!

You honestly want a GE this close to christmas? Businesses would be destroyed due to the uncertainty they bring and how much shops rely on the high spending at this time of year which would be non existent during a GE.

Banjo String

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You didn't quote him but chose to highlight his quote :rolleyes:

It was the text within the quote that was relevant, not the author.

**clutching at straws** :pac:

Fuhrer

VinLieger wrote: »

You honestly want a GE this close to christmas? Businesses would be destroyed due to the uncertainty they bring and how much shops rely on the high spending at this time of year which would be non existent during a GE.

How disruptive do you think General Elections are?


The vast, vast majority of people are only affected for the 20 minutes it takes them to go to the polling station and vote.

Fukuyama

I said it almost two months ago that if the behaviour of people at these protests was allowed to continue (as it has been) it would get worse (as it has). Blocking roads, intimidating workers and shouting down any voice of reason or opposition is not democracy - it's mob rule and the OP is 100% right in saying it.


The present government have lost a load of support and I'm not happy about how IW is being run (despite supporting water charges in general). However I'll be voting FG. They actually have policies that make sense as opposed to a bunch of idiots desperate for the political limelight. I could never support a political party or ideology like they're a football team - I vote for what I think will actually work, not who can shout the loudest and create PR stunts.

Blocking the taoiseach's car on O'Connel street, and blocking the táiniste's car multiple times is intimidation of elected officials and the antithesis of democracy. It shouldn't stand and it should be put down until these protests learn how to behave legally.

This is all a joke anyways. These protests are not about water, socialism or getting rid of FG/Lab.

They're about money. The average attendee doesn't want to pay an extra bill. Fine. That's why they're protesting. I guarantee if you asked the average person at these protests about the kind of policies and ideals Paul Murphy, AAA, ULA, PBP etc... actually have and they'd shrug their shoulders. They don't support them - they're just following the dude with the loudspeaker saying he'll save them from an extra bill.

FG are backpedaling big time. Todays announcement of a fixed charge for three years is their attempt to quell the average protester's short-term worries because an election is coming very soon. Maybe it's because of the protests. Or maybe it's a political move that dates back to the Roman era. Either way, if it reduces the "angry idiot" vote who'd actually like to see Ireland's hard-left in power then it'll do.

Anyone who watches these protest videos or has seen them trapsing around their area will know that intimidation and an angry mob mentality is all these guys have going for them.

If they ever did get into power I'd give it three months before there was a real angry mob protesting.

howiya

LostinKildare wrote: »

Glad you don't. In general, though, it does seem that Doherty has escaped the attention and vitriol that is aimed at Wallace.



Yes, it does fall on the voters, but in fairness, there has to be an EFFECTIVE system in place that supports the execution of the people's wishes. The party whip system prevents this.

"If TD A says they will fight against water charges and then votes for them due to the whip system, why would we trust them again?" --- The thing is, NO party candidates can be trusted as long as they submit to, and hide behind, the party whip.

If I give my vote to the Labour candidate because he said he'd vote against water charges, and once in power he votes in water charges because his Labour party membership requires it, he then justifies it by saying that with my vote I supported the Labour party, and entrusted the party to do what they think best. Unfortunately, a political party will always act in the political party's interests over the constituents' interests.

The system is rigged so that when you vote in an election you are voting for a party, not for policy. You must trust the party to do what you want, but if you are aware of and accept the whip system, you cannot really hold an individual representative accountable for his/her votes.

You can say that come the next election you will not again vote for that person, but discarding that possibility, how do you choose among the other candidates, all of whom are doing the same --- making promises that they will not/cannot keep because their party will forbid it?

Unless you vote for an Independent. They are the only representatives truly accountable to the voters. The Irish public seem to be catching on to this.

Politicians need to put their promises to the people before their pinky swear to abide by the whip. But thats like asking turkeys to vote for christmas because the lads won't get their ministerial cars and pensions if they step out of line

May as well abolish the Dail if we are to retain the whip system. At present all decisions are being made by the four member economic council, rubber stamped by cabinet and rushed through the Dail in an effort to appear to be abiding by the constitution. The Irish Water legislation being a prime example.