94 thoughts on “Tuesday’s Papers

  1. Dr.Fart

    why do they try to introduce water charges when the country is down? they tried to bring them in last time when we were reeling from recession and getting hit with new costs left right and centre. now they’re guna try bring them in while we are reeling from a pandemic which isn’t over, and from a housing crisis. If they go at this again there’ll be hell to pay, not water charges.

    1. Hank

      And their stupid minimum unit pricing idea for alcohol. This government really have no concept of when it might be time to stop pushing people and just give them some time to breathe.
      But sure, we’re all in this together..

      1. Dr.Fart

        I think they time it on purpose. while we’re weary and weak they hope to load on more and we’ll already be too broken to oppose. but when we’re pushed too far, we’ve already shown we won’t stand for it. can’t wait for a general election.

    2. goldenbrown

      I’ve been having visions recently Dr.Fart….

      of hand-wringing radio chat shows a year from now where we’re gonna be informed that we’re whingers objecting to water charges (again) cos “we all partied” and “you can’t put a price on the health of the nation” and “where else is the money gonna come from to build all these affordable lol houses” etc. etc. we are where we are. when they turn up the noise about how our debt has just doubled and the impending financial armageddon and how FFG are the only party equipped with sufficient geniuses, visionaries, creative accountants to deal with this “challenge”

      yes the narrative will be that books are just so fupped now but it wasn’t our fault and if you vote FFG we will steady the ship (again)

      and should they fail to somehow convince us they’ll get a nice holiday on the opposition benches watching and laughing as the SF+others construct are left to deal with the burning buildings and decades of cooked books knowing there’s no chance and they’ll be back at the trough baby in 12 months

      all while we pay for it

      Cian and Rob G will be along shortly to explain it all to you

      1. Rob_G

        Water charges are a great idea:

        – there was no way of checking for leaks at household level before water meters – look how much they have saved, even at one house

        – Without water charges, there is no way to discourage excess consumption. Having no water charges mean that rich people don’t pay any extra no matter how much water they use, even though they use a lot more water than poorer people

        – while no-one really likes paying new taxes, the loudest contingent of the water charges protestors were people who had never paid anything before in their lives, stoked up by cynical middle-class professional protestors like Ogle and Paul Murphy.

        Ask yourself if there are any other items where we should adopt this model: that service is paid for out of general taxation, and people can then use as much as they like – electricity? petrol? natural gas? If not, why not?

        1. SB

          Agreed, I don’t like paying tax, but we need to charge for water, it’s the only way to discourage excess consumption. It’s an expensive and precious resource. All the people watering massive gardens endlessly. People not caring how much they use. People with massive mansions who use hundreds of times more than people in small flats. I even find myself doing it – I’d run the tap for a drink of water then say to myself “feck it, doesn’t matter how much I use, I’ll let it run for a while so it gets nice and cold”. I think if they enshrine in law that there should be no privatisation, it should get a lot of people on board, along with their plan to have it cost-neutral for most people if they use just a standard amount.
          The current situation is also very unfair on people, mostly rural, paying privately for water.

          1. Micko

            I think the main issue is that, just like the increase on the minimum pricing on alcohol, this will in no way affect the rich. It won’t bother them paying for it.

            It will however hurt the poor.

          2. Gabby

            If a constitutional amendment is inserted stating that all rivers, lakes and sea coastlines belong to the nation, I’ll gladly pay water charges provided there is no other water levy.
            OECD guidelines do not mean that water supply has to go into private companies.

          3. Dr.Fart

            SB.. that was quashed early in debate the last time water charges was on the table. Ireland has the lowest waste per person in the EU. Thats why we also rejected Gov.s proposal of excess use charges. The Gov.s plan to solve anything is go straight to emptying the publics pockets. While they waste millions in other areas. We want just accept taking the hit every time just because they can’t sufficiently use the revenue we already supply. Sure look at the USC, that was brought in to help dig out from recession. Over a decade later its still there. They need to use revenue intelligently instead of just “oh well lets just hit the tax payer up for more”

          4. SB

            @Micko: As I said, if everyone gets an allowance, it shouldn’t affect the less well off AT ALL, unless they waste water and exceed their allowance. We just have to ensure the allowance is realistic. And if the rich don’t mind paying for it, then all the more reason to charge them, then perhaps we’d have the funds to improve the crappy water infrastructure and quality in many places. It could even become a progressive charge, increasing more the more you use.

            So how exactly would that hurt the poor?

          5. Rob_G

            “Ireland has the lowest waste per person in the EU.”

            Actually, Ireland has the 3rd highest use of water in the EU – i know this because I looked it up. I suggest you try it yourself some time.

            When a precious resource is free, there is little onus to conserve it – voilà.

          6. Cian

            Sure look at the USC, that was brought in to help dig out from recession. Over a decade later its still there.

            False. USC was introduced as a new way to collect tax fairly. It has REPLACED the income levy and health levy.

          7. Ghost of Yep

            “The commitments we’re making in this election, this is the central commitment in our tax policies. It’s a hated tax. It’s a socially divisive tax. It was introduced as an emergency measure. The emergency is over and now we’re going to abolish it.”

            Noonan – 2016

          8. GiggigyGoo

            @Cian.
            The USC was introduced as a temporary measure by Brian Lenihan in 2010.
            As you say, it replaced the Health and Income levies which were introduced to plug the hole in finances. Those were also meant to be temporary.

            ‘The Universal Social Charge requires that everyone makes some contribution, however small, to the provision of services’ is what Lenihan said.

            Roll on a couple of years, and Hogan and his henchmen/women introduced the property tax…..for the provision of services (having reduced the state payments to local authorities which already provided those services, and paid for out of general taxation). On top, then, Varadkar introduced what is in effect another Health levy penalizing people over 35 (i think) who took out health insurance.

          9. Cian

            @Ghost of Yep
            you are right. It was introduced in 2010 as a “forever tax”;

            Just because Noonan subsequently said (in 2016) he would get rid of it (but didn’t) doesn’t mean it was introduced as temporary.

            @GG health and income levies were also ‘forever taxes’

        2. scottser

          well rob, anyone can install a meter to check their consumption, it doesn’t mean you have to be charged for the acutal water. as regards consumption, rich folks can afford it, the poor and low paid workers will be forced further into poverty.
          water charges are a stupid idea and there is nothing of merit to be gained by their introduction.

          1. Rob_G

            – no, you can’t dig up the pavement outside your house and install a water meter

            – even if you could, no-one would – why would they?

            – why should people not be charged for ‘the actual water’, same as they are for ‘actual food’, ‘actual gas’, ‘actual electricity’, etc ?

            – every other country in the EU apart from Malta (AFAIR) has water charges, I’m sure that they take into account poorer and lower-paid workers there

          2. scottser

            you can install a water meter anywhere on your property. you could do this, if as you pointed out in your first post that you were concerned about your consupmption rate or if there is a leak somewhere.
            people should not be charged for actual water use because it’s actually paid for already out of actual general taxation.
            ‘every’ other country might have water charges but due to a myriad of reasons it drives the cost of water production and consumption up, making it a toxic political mess.
            ‘I’m sure that they take into account poorer and lower-paid workers there’
            HAHAHAHAHAHA!!

          3. Rob_G

            why would anyone be concerned with their water consumption if they would never have to pay any more for it, no matter how much was used?

            Guess what? No-one was, and no-one installed meters to monitor their consumption.

            “people should not be charged for actual water use because it’s actually paid for already out of actual general taxation.” – this is why rich people don’t give a toss and use way more water than anyone else (as per my 2nd link above) – sure why would they not water their massive lawns, when they are paying for it anyway? “Ah sure I’ve paid for it, I may as well use as much as I want anyway”

            “myriad of reasons it drives the cost of water production and consumption up,” – it drives prices AND consumption up?! That doesn’t make any sense; you’re just making things up to support your wafer-thin point.

          4. Dr.Fart

            everyone who comments on BS should know full well by now to not engage with Rob_G. He absolutely is not listening to you. It’s entirely pointless to try discuss anything with him. He’s just a Fine Gael parrot.

          5. Rob_G

            poor Fart – when faced with statistics and sources, he gathers up his ball and leaves crying.

          6. scottser

            except rob, there are no statistics or sources in your replies, just lots and lots of rhetorical questions.
            i’d still happily go for a pint with ye rob, but typing answers to your points is seriously laborious.

          7. Cian

            If “we already pay for water out of taxes” what about the 720,000 people that supply their own water? Are they paying for your water? Is that fair?

    3. GiggidyGoo

      Something else coming down the political line ?- could be the usual divert, confuse etc. procedure that FFG are noted for.

    4. Unreal

      Next things they will try it on will be spelling and punctuation. You’re going to be rightly fupped then

  2. Clampers Outside

    Child abuse… Nothing more nothing less.
    https://twitter.com/thismorning/status/1391708707805929473?s=19
    Schofield and Willoughby are promoting child abusers and child abuse.

    Come at me, call me names, do your worst. Facts is facts. And it is a fact that a 2 year old cannot understand this kind of thing, and it is the parents who are projecting onto the child.

    If you believe this is not abuse, and defend the parents you are stating you believe a 2 year old can wholly understand what it is to be a girl or a boy. That the 2 year old is capable of understanding beyond stereotypes. They cannot.

    1. Micko

      Only a complete moron would argue that a two year old is capable of making a decision like that.

      It’s a bit worrying that this is trotted out on UK TV as a inspirational puff piece.

      Schofield and Willoughby are either utterly stupid or they are too afraid of being branded transphobic.

      Prob it’s the latter.

      It is total click bait too though.

      1. Clampers Outside

        +1 likely the latter, but that is no excuse for promoting child abusing ideological claptrap.

      2. Nigel

        UK media are not notable for being worried about being branded as transphobic. If anything, their willingness to tackle the subject through such a problematic case seems to be trolling for responses like Clamper’s.

          1. Nigel

            They’re setting them up as targets. Nobody could fail to predict responses like yours.

          2. Clampers Outside

            You think Willoughby and Schofield support these parents on TV and they don’t believe this in private?
            Highly doubtful, in fairness that they’d do that just for TV ratings…. And on a morning show.
            You’re daft as a brush.

        1. Clampers Outside

          “such a problematic case”.

          You clearly think there’s a case for a 2 year old to make identifications claimed by the parents…. Jesus Christ Nigel, get a grip.

          The only case to be answered, is the one of bad parenting and ideological rubbish that dumb parents are projecting onto children.

          1. Nigel

            I clearly think no such thing, but your calm and measured response is really helpful, I’m sure.

          2. Nigel

            Oh, we’re judging groups of people by the actions of disuturbed individuals now, are we?

        2. Junkface

          @Nigel

          Come on! All of establishment media are terrified about these issues, especially any presenter’s faux pas resulting in instant online pile ons from woke disciples, being called TERFs and all of that. This is their way of going : “See, we care, we covered a Trans issue, now can we get on with our normal business.” They don’t want to have to issue a groveling ISIS prisoner style apology video about how much they have to learn.

          1. Janet, dreams of an alternate universe

            anyone watching the SAS, who dares….on Channel 4,
            guilty pleasure, I fecking love it,
            we have a trans representative this year who despite literally collapsing face first in the first challenge is through to the next, you wouldn’t want to be cynical

          2. Nigel

            This is absolutely not true, certainly not in the UK media. Some people on twitter may call them TERFS, but other people on twitter will call parents of trans children ideologically-driven child abusers, like Clampers does, and which do you think the media cater to? Trans people have little representation and don’t actually have any power, except maybe the odd ‘woke mob’ on twitter, which is full of various kinds of mobs that can be easily ignorted or dismissed or used as villains, like you just did. ISIS, good one. Also, they do love a Satanic Panic. Irish media don’t seem as interested in engaging with or pandering to the hysterical tabloid fearmongering of the likes of Clamps, they prefer indifference.

          3. Clampers Outside

            LOL!

            You do realise that Prof Diane Erhenshaft is a leading gender studies Prof who pushes for sex-transition of children, including toddlers, was one of the leading idiots behind the Satanic Panic.

            Of course you did, you’ve looked into this topic very well haven’t you….

            Oh…

            You’re a joke a minute!

    2. Junkface

      +1
      Insane stuff! How can grown adults seriously discuss a life changing decision made by a 2 or 4 year child!!
      Maybe we should change the voting age requirements? Let 4 years olds vote!
      These parents have been brainwashed by a broken, useless ideology.

    3. scottser

      kinell, how stupid can people be?
      toy are toys, clothes are clothes, kids are kids – let them at it.

      1. Clampers Outside

        One of my older brothers loved wearing my older sisters clothes when he was 3 or 4…. We have the photos! :)
        In todays world you’d have idiot “professionals” telling my Mum and Dad he’s trans ffs!

        1. Janet, dreams of an alternate universe

          plus I had a BMX, always robbing a kitchen knife to strap to my ankle, cut the heads off all my dolls and would only wear my brothers clothes, I wanted to be just like my Dad when I grew up and if asked I definitely did not want to be a girl or at least the image of a girl offered to me…pink and fluffy,
          it is dangerous to bring this conversation to young children and confusing, kids are just kids, why do they have to be put in any box, just let them enjoy whatever, time enough to figure out ” identity ‘

          1. Junkface

            My cousin was the same. A total Tomboy, she used to nick our jackets to wear if we put them down, put her Dads ties on her head like the rest of the boys and run into the forest to play.
            By the time she was 16 she was completely changed, no more Tomboy, very interested in dancing, discos, seeing boys, normal stuff. She still retained her strong interest in football and practical jokes. She deffo would have been presented as a case for Trans issues today. These parents are dumb and completely lacking forethought and logic. Kids can get into different roles for years at a time, then just drop it and move on after a few years. No harm done.

    4. Hank

      You’ll all be sorry when the cancel culture, who so vehemently stand for tolerance, decide that you should be cancelled..

      1. Clampers Outside

        When they call, I’ll be busy doing the ironing and won’t answer the door :)

        1. Janet, dreams of an alternate universe

          I’ll be busy building the crib while himself sorts the lunch ;) ( barefoot and in the kitty…that’s how I like my men ) …joke ! ( kind of ;))

          1. Clampers Outside

            I was originally going for a subtle pun with that comment.
            But yeah, my wife hates ironing so much she buys clothes that don’t need ironing… yet, she still gives them to me for a press when I’ve the board out :0) I find it relaxing.

    5. Nigel

      Someone level-headed needs to sit them down to have a careful chat about this, but I’m sure your hysterical over-reaction would also be useful and constructive.

      1. Clampers Outside

        You think it hysterical to note the child abuse based in an ideology you support.
        That’s not at all unexpected.

        After all, you said this kinda thing wouldn’t happen.

        And you said that people were being hysterical when you wheeled out “think of the children” sarcastically on numerous occasions.

        Own your bullpoo Nigel.
        Own it.
        Be a conscientious adult, not a blinkered anti-science idealogue, please.

        There are no hysterics here. It is not hysterical nor hyperbole to call this what it is – child abuse and ideological projection by those misguided by pseudo scientific rubbish.

          1. Clampers Outside

            Conveniently ignored.

            The whole ideology would be cancelled by their own standards of “digging up”.
            But this guy… simply brushed under the carpet.

        1. Nigel

          I absolutely think you are being hysterical, over-reacting, fearmongering, hatemongering, abusive, slanderous and transphobic. I wouldn’t worry about it. Whether the child turns out to be trans or not, access to health care and treatment for trans people in the UK is tortuously slow, and thanks to people like you, getting slower and more tortuous.

          1. Hank

            Ridiculous post Nigel. He was none of those things. A two year old child is just that – a child. The idea that saying that society should let them be a child until they’re older and more self aware and capable of informed decisions is “transphobic” or “hysterical” is complete nonsense. You should be embarrassed.

          2. Clampers Outside

            He is beyond embarrassment and wrapped in an echo chamber of bullpoo pseudo science.

            Wait until he finds out that Sweden, just last week, made a huge policy shift away from puberty blockers and cross-sex hormone experimentation on children under 18. 

            Effectively an end to the “Dutch Protocol” of prescribing puberty blockers and cross sex hormones to kids (named after the inconclusive study that much of the use of such drugs is based on).

            But, its not that Sweden will ban the drugs. Its that they are recognising the truth that there are far too many unknowns to be prescribing drugs that are still experimental – they will be allowed in clinical trials; and/or when proper psychiatric history of the patient is done and not just a single one hour visit with a (biased ideologically) psychiatrist, which is the stadard of care Nigel wants a return to. 

            When he says treatment in the UK is slow, it is this sped up quick one hour diagnosis that was going on in the UK that he sorely misses and has advocated a return to when calling anyone a transphobe who spoke against such practices. He’s incredulous to what is real improvements in care, where care had been put second to ideological pseudo scientific opinion. A science denying opinion on a par with flat earthers and creationists. 

            But if Sweden is pushing back, that’s a very good sign that the science is winning ground back from the idealogues. 

          3. Nigel

            Hank – of course I did not say that, I said Clampers screaming like a fool about child abuse is those things.

            Clampers -I think it’s great that Sweden are basing their public health policy on the Satanic Panic hysteria of transphobes.

          4. Clampers Outside

            You make fun of a practice that destroys young lives all you want. You seem to enjoy pushing it.

            I’m just relieved that Sweden has seen sense and other countries will likely follow.

          5. Nigel

            I’m glad we agree that this move by Sweden will destroy young lives, though I’m not sure why you’d be happy about it.

    6. Unreal

      I’ll come back at you
      You are a lovely man
      And your points are
      Always so relevant and insightful

    1. Janet, dreams of an alternate universe

      when’s the giant orgy in Stephens Green kick off…. asking for a friend

      1. Fergalito

        Not to be confused with a Giant orgy – Ogres welcome I hear.

        If absolutely necessary and you cannot go about your journey in such a way as to avoid the Giant orgy be sure to carry an umbrella AND regardless of what you thought you saw it was not a brown-eyed Cyclops.

    2. Junkface

      Great stuff! There will be some serious shifting going on all over the place. I’m looking forward to it. Can’t get the vaccine fast enough.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link