Water charges for excessive usage

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't care which is cheaper.

Water charges reduce consumption and encourage conservation.

Fair enough. But it's pointless so why support it?
You are now on record as accepting the metering won't pay towards repairs but may be a deterrant to waste...except..

No they don't. We are under the proposed cap. We do not, as a nation, have a habit of wasting water.
We should maybe hold the state/LA's to task for wasting all that water in the mains leaks?

charlie14

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

and thus ensuring that water consumption or conservation figures will never find its way to the perpretator.

Shure we’ll just keep pumping out clean potable water , which costs big money to manage and maintain,and they can piss it off out of the taps anyway they like.

Has to remind me of the Cash for Ash stuff up the North, the more you burned the better off you were.

Lads were lighting fires in outbuildings just to keep the income going.

Not a good way to run things, one would have to opine.

Of course,fine if you were ,whats the word, ‘offroad’ and as they say’ not really on the books’ tip away happy in the knowledge that if taxes go up you will only be affected minimally, irrespective of water consumption.

Lookit.... it’s done now and will take decades to sort out.

While I may have implied at times Brendan you were somewhat removed from the real world but credit where it`s due you nailed the highlighted.


Couple of problems with the rest of your post though.


Not much point in talking to people about conserving water as regards pissing treated water out of the taps when the know 50% is pissing out of the mains. Now if the cart had been put behind the horse rather than in front it actually may have been a talk they were prepared to listen to.


You know as well as anyone Brendan there are two certainties in life, death and taxes.
Off the books was never going to lower taxes. It was never intended to. It would just mean you paying the same in tax plus a hefty wad to Irish Water on top.

A handy way to keep the two separate while stiffing you twice.

Brendan Bendar

charlie14 wrote: »

While I may have implied at times Brendan you were somewhat removed from the real world but credit where it`s due you nailed the highlighted.


Couple of problems with the rest of your post though.


Not much point in talking to people about conserving water as regards pissing treated water out of the taps when the know 50% is pissing out of the mains. Now if the cart had been put behind the horse rather than in front it actually may have been a talk they were prepared to listen to.


You know as well as anyone Brendan there are two certainties in life, death and taxes.
Off the books was never going to lower taxes. It was never intended to. It would just mean you paying the same in tax plus a hefty wad to Irish Water on top.

A handy way to keep the two separate while stiffing you twice.

Once again you misunderstand the point of the post Chas.

What I was referring to was that coterie of folk who pay little or NO income tax(the clue is in the text...ergo ‘off-road’).
You know, tippin around, doin this and that but in for the full cargo of benefits... you get the dhhhrift.

These folk don’t give a flying fuuuhrke if Income taxes were raised to pay for the repairs to our water system. won’t affect them,dude, nothing to do with me Guv.

Now if there was a big hike in betting tax, in ciggies, in booze, in lotto tickets and the proceeds were ringfenced for water maintenance..:eek:

Now that would cause a fair auld flutther, I would suspect.

The frikken taps might even turned off now and again.;)

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Once again you misunderstand the point of the post Chas.

What I was referring to was that coterie of folk who pay little or NO income tax(the clue is in the text...ergo ‘off-road’).
You know, tippin around, doin this and that but in for the full cargo of benefits... you get the dhhhrift.

These folk don’t give a flying fuuuhrke if Income taxes were raised to pay for the repairs to our water system. won’t affect them,dude, nothing to do with me Guv.

Now if there was a big hike in betting tax, in ciggies, in booze, in lotto tickets and the proceeds were ringfenced for water maintenance..:eek:

Now that would cause a fair auld flutther, I would suspect.

The frikken taps might even turned off now and again.;)

TBF, FG have been current in paying tax as far as I know after their 9 year holiday from paying any.
Again, anyone on low or no income would be exempt, so wasting our money Bren on your one armed bandits supplied by Dinny. Why are you intent on wasting our hard earned few shillings?

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

TBF, FG have been current in paying tax as far as I know after their 9 year holiday from paying any.
Again, anyone on low or no income would be exempt, so wasting our money Bren on your one armed bandits supplied by Dinny. Why are you intent on wasting our hard earned few shillings?

I have no interest in the tax returns of FG, if I had I’d start a thread on it.

What I have an interest in though is common sense and equality.

The common sense is that to supply a treated product to folk is it must be measured.

Equality then means that if you use less you pay less, if you waste you pay more.

Seems fairly simple to this poster.

charlie14

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Once again you misunderstand the point of the post Chas.

What I was referring to was that coterie of folk who pay little or NO income tax(the clue is in the text...ergo ‘off-road’).
You know, tippin around, doin this and that but in for the full cargo of benefits... you get the dhhhrift.

These folk don’t give a flying fuuuhrke if Income taxes were raised to pay for the repairs to our water system. won’t affect them,dude, nothing to do with me Guv.

Now if there was a big hike in betting tax, in ciggies, in booze, in lotto tickets and the proceeds were ringfenced for water maintenance..:eek:






Now that would cause a fair auld flutther, I would suspect.

The frikken taps might even turned off now and again.;)

My mistake Brendan.You really are not in the real world.


Where have you found this massive coterie people tipping around doing this and that. Aren`t we being told daily that we have practically full employment ?
Do you think we are being lied to Brendan ?


You do realise that if nobody drank booze or smoked with the duty and taxes gone from both your income tax would be through the roof Brendan. Through the roof I say.:eek:

McMurphy

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I have no interest in the tax returns of FG, if I had I’d start a thread on it.

What I have an interest in though is common sense and equality.

The common sense is that to supply a treated product to folk is it must be measured.

Equality then means that if you use less you pay less, if you waste you pay more.

Seems fairly simple to this poster.

Bren, you are getting your y-fronts all in a twist about nothing my friend.

These lads you mention.

What I was referring to was that coterie of folk who pay little or NO income tax(the clue is in the text...ergo ‘off-road’).
You know, tippin around, doin this and that but in for the full cargo of benefits... you get the dhhhrift.

Would be exempt from charges, you know it, i know it, and fine gwael know it too.

If you're calling for a drop in their sw welfare payments, that's a different story all together, but water charges will do the square root of shag all to concern them. Take it from me.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I have no interest in the tax returns of FG, if I had I’d start a thread on it.

What I have an interest in though is common sense and equality.

The common sense is that to supply a treated product to folk is it must be measured.

Equality then means that if you use less you pay less, if you waste you pay more.

Seems fairly simple to this poster.

You mentioned people who weren't interested in paying tax. You should really specify if you mean only some people who don't pay tax.

The measure is pointless. What will exact figures of fair use give us to help save the 50% of the entire supply going down the swanny? It'll merely take good money and flush it.
Whatever form any of it might take, certain folk will be exempt regardless.

Pay for meters to gauge our water is still under any cap. Subsidise IW and all the while none of it fixes a yard of pipe without money from...taxation. Fantasy Bren.

charlie14

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I have no interest in the tax returns of FG, if I had I’d start a thread on it.

What I have an interest in though is common sense and equality.

The common sense is that to supply a treated product to folk is it must be measured.

Equality then means that if you use less you pay less, if you waste you pay more.

Seems fairly simple to this poster.

It may seem simple to you Brendan, but when looked at it with common sense it falls down badly.


We already know that if ever household paid 260 euro a year it would only cover Irish Water`s overheads with nothing going to services.


Now you want to increase those overheads by metering the other 50% of households plus all apartments.
Now Brendan what is that going to cost and how much more is it going to cost every house/apartment with those extra overheads just to keep Irish Water`s doors open before a cent can go to services ?


You see where I`m going here Brendan with common sense :eek:

jay0109

charlie14 wrote: »

My mistake Brendan.You really are not in the real world.


Where have you found this massive coterie people tipping around doing this and that. Aren`t we being told daily that we have practically full employment ?

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp8iter/p8iter/p8itseah/
Just the 80% in that grouping alone

charlie14

jay0109 wrote: »

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp8iter/p8iter/p8itseah/
Just the 80% in that grouping alone

That is 80% when taken in the context of 8,541 unemployed out of a total of 10,653.
When taken in the context of 2,280,000 in the state labour force, it is so minuscule to even bother calculating the percentage.


Pretty irrelevant in relation to water charges imo in that we do not know how many households that 8,541 represent. How many of those households would be liable for metering or how many from that number would qualify for waivers under the same criterion as other households in society.

NovemberWren

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Once again you misunderstand the point of the post Chas.

What I was referring to was that coterie of folk who pay little or NO income tax(the clue is in the text...ergo ‘off-road’).
You know, tippin around, doin this and that but in for the full cargo of benefits... you get the dhhhrift.

These folk don’t give a flying fuuuhrke if Income taxes were raised to pay for the repairs to our water system. won’t affect them,dude, nothing to do with me Guv.

Now if there was a big hike in betting tax, in ciggies, in booze, in lotto tickets and the proceeds were ringfenced for water maintenance..:eek:

Now that would cause a fair auld flutther, I would suspect.

The frikken taps might even turned off now and again.;)

just don't reckon that the employees at soc.welf. are any slouches at knowing what de poor have, or have gotten.
Betting, is a waste of time; cigs./alc. you will die quicker; lotto, - being taken for a fool.
Just reckon that Irish Water should say exactly when the spend every year is on upgrading the mains; and, completely separately, what their and their consultants' salaries are per year.
This focus on just amounts of water (and it was torrential rain yesterday) just does not make real sense to people?
It seems to make ill-dissent and who knows, some persons may even try to disconnect (in urban areas) from the mains; or even worse, could apply stry*"^ne or cya')de through to validate such.

Benedict

The following quote is from the official IW site https://www.water.ie/conservation/household-conservation/

"The threshold amount is set by the Minister and may be amended by the Minister which would require new legislation."

The penny does not appear to have dropped yet. Realisation has not dawned that nobody cares anymore about the "threshold".

Benedict

Benedict wrote: »

The following quote is from the official IW site

"The threshold amount is set by the Minister and may be amended by the Minister which would require new legislation."

The penny does not appear to have dropped yet. Realisation has not dawned that nobody cares anymore about the "threshold".

Would you mind posting a link as well as copying and pasting.

Benedict

https://www.water.ie/conservation/household-conservation/

Q&A on above site:

"Who is liable for excess use charges - Landlord/Tenant?

The occupier of the property is liable for excess use charges."

Sorry wrong! The occupier is liable IF there is a meter installed. If not? Happy days!

charlie14

Deleted User wrote: »

Would you mind posting a link as well as copying and pasting.

Are you just bone lazy when it comes to doing even the most basic research or is it just a case of you enjoying asking pointless questions and making people jump through hoops.



If you believe something posted is incorrect then go and do your own research to show it is incorrect.


Myself and others have had to do it often enough with many of yours.

charlie14

charlie14 wrote: »

Are you just bone lazy when it comes to doing even the most basic research or is it just a case of you enjoying asking pointless questions and making people jump through hoops.

If you believe something posted is incorrect then go and do your own research to show it is incorrect.

Myself and others have had to do it often enough with many of yours.

No. It’s just accepted practice to include a link to source when copying and pasting.
I think that you will find that where I quote an article, I include a link to the source.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

TBF, FG have been current in paying tax as far as I know after their 9 year holiday from paying any.
Again, anyone on low or no income would be exempt, so wasting our money Bren on your one armed bandits supplied by Dinny. Why are you intent on wasting our hard earned few shillings?

Once again Matt, you post a load of lies. FG did not have a 9 year holiday from paying any tax as you well know. Just another low-level smear. They did have an issue over taxation of small Christmas bonuses or some other relatively minor issue where there was a revenue ruling, but an allegation of paying no taxes for 9 years is just stupid, silly and baseless.

What some person called Danny or Dinny has to do with anything is also baffling.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

My mistake Brendan.You really are not in the real world.


Where have you found this massive coterie people tipping around doing this and that. Aren`t we being told daily that we have practically full employment ?
Do you think we are being lied to Brendan ?


You do realise that if nobody drank booze or smoked with the duty and taxes gone from both your income tax would be through the roof Brendan. Through the roof I say.:eek:

We don’t have practically full employment, we have very low unemployment, there is a difference.

We have low workforce participation rates, what are those adults doing? We also have the highest disability rates in the world, or at least the highest proportion of disability benefit claimants, and nobody seems to know why.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Once again Matt, you post a load of lies. FG did not have a 9 year holiday from paying any tax as you well know. Just another low-level smear. They did have an issue over taxation of small Christmas bonuses or some other relatively minor issue where there was a revenue ruling, but an allegation of paying no taxes for 9 years is just stupid, silly and baseless.

What some person called Danny or Dinny has to do with anything is also baffling.

For someone who has according to yourself has only interest in ideas rather than politics you have a very intimate knowledge of Fine Gael tax affairs.

Yet on a thread relating to water meters you are baffled by a mention of Dinny and his one armed bandits.
Yeah......right :rolleyes:

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

We don’t have practically full employment, we have very low unemployment, there is a difference.

We have low workforce participation rates, what are those adults doing? We also have the highest disability rates in the world, or at least the highest proportion of disability benefit claimants, and nobody seems to know why.

Why are you asking me?

If you want an answer to all your points I would suggest Regina Doherty Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection.

Brendan Bendar

charlie14 wrote: »

For someone who has according to yourself has only interest in ideas rather than politics you have a very intimate knowledge of Fine Gael tax affairs.

Yet on a thread relating to water meters you are baffled by a mention of Dinny and his one armed bandits.
Yeah......right :rolleyes:

Are you lads more interested in Dinny rather than the substance of the water charge ideal.

That’s what is seems like to some observant posters.

One could refer to the alleged activities of say Mr Haughey, yet he was revered in certain areas, could do no wrong,it would appear.

Why is this, one might wonder, is it because someone threw a sop to the support base, whilst allegedly screwing others.

Bit off topic I have to admit but one might wonder why the odium against certain individuals.

Strange kind of situation, some might say, veeerry strange ?

charlie14

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Are you lads more interested in Dinny rather than the substance of the water charge ideal.

That’s what is seems like to some observant posters.

One could refer to the alleged activities of say Mr Haughey, yet he was revered in certain areas, could do no wrong,it would appear.

Why is this, one might wonder, is it because someone threw a sop to the support base, whilst allegedly screwing others.

Bit off topic I have to admit but one might wonder why the odium against certain individuals.

Strange kind of situation, some might say, veeerry strange ?

Have you been hitting the Christmas sherry a bit early Brendan.?

Brendan Bendar

charlie14 wrote: »

Have you been hitting the Christmas sherry a bit early Brendan.?

No Chas,now in fairness I might be surmising a little bit .

Just throwing a few things out there , see if anything sticks.

Few swallows of Port wouldn’t be refused though.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

For someone who has according to yourself has only interest in ideas rather than politics you have a very intimate knowledge of Fine Gael tax affairs.

Yet on a thread relating to water meters you are baffled by a mention of Dinny and his one armed bandits.
Yeah......right :rolleyes:

I google Dinny and water charges and the only thing I get is references to Dinny McGinley TD, or back to here.so I don’t really understand you and Matt being so obsessed with a Donegal TD.

As for one-armed bandits, I really don’t understand what seaside slot machines have to do with water meters.

As for FG tax affairs, just helping to clarify a completely misleading disingenuous post.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

I google Dinny and water charges and the only thing I get is references to Dinny McGinley TD, or back to here.so I don’t really understand you and Matt being so obsessed with a Donegal TD.

As for one-armed bandits, I really don’t understand what seaside slot machines have to do with water meters.

As for FG tax affairs, just helping to clarify a completely misleading disingenuous post.

I find it surprising with all the time you have spent on threads relating to water metering you have never come across a reference to Dinny and his one armed bandits.



Perhaps that is down to the last three years not working out well for you on metering and you have just blocked them out.


Looking that way.

Dinny McGinley hasn`t been a T.D. for the last three years either.

Brendan Bendar

charlie14 wrote: »

I find it surprising with all the time you have spent on threads relating to water metering you have never come across a reference to Dinny and his one armed bandits.



Perhaps that is down to the last three years not working out well for you on metering and you have just blocked them out.


Looking that way.

Dinny McGinley hasn`t been a T.D. for the last three years either.

Maybe the lad doesn’t move in the same circles, Cha?

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

I find it surprising with all the time you have spent on threads relating to water metering you have never come across a reference to Dinny and his one armed bandits.



Perhaps that is down to the last three years not working out well for you on metering and you have just blocked them out.


Looking that way.

Dinny McGinley hasn`t been a T.D. for the last three years either.

You can understand my surprise that you and Matt keep referring to a former TD, but then again, so much of your argument and figures are in the past.

charlie14

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Maybe the lad doesn’t move in the same circles, Cha?

Sphere perhaps ?

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

You can understand my surprise that you and Matt keep referring to a former TD, but then again, so much of your argument and figures are in the past.

You see that is the thing you have never grasped with figures.

Time doesn`t alter the story they tell.

To read them correctly though you do need a basic understanding of what they represent.


In business for example, very important to know what set-up costs are as opposed to recurring cost. Confuse those two and you while your profit and lose a/c might look great, insolvency would be staring you in the face and you would not even recognising it.