If an Englishman's home has long ceased to be his castle then an Irishman's was or at least until the introduction or advent of a tax on something that puts a roof over your head. The argument for broadening the tax base and that in every other country or every comparable one there is something of its kind is a poor one in that in most other countries they enjoy benefits and services that are foreign to this neck of the woods if you'll pardon the pun and where they don't well if your neighbour is going to hell why follow him.
There is an important principle here with regard to ownership or what you might aspire to in that sense and whether you live in a hovel or that house on the hill if you are subject to a levy on what should be a right ~the family home~ then you are only a subject and that to a "debt" you can never clear. It's called slavery! Now if you are inordinately wealthy or otherwise disposed you may put some distance between yourself and those chains and they may not weigh so heavy but they are still chains.
Putting that aside, a charge for services you may never receive or benefit from and out here in the sticks there is little to benefit from is sharp practice at best and I would have thought illegal. But none of the above addresses the awful inequity of it all in that it is a further imposition on those who can least afford to pay but sure the poor will always be with us.... The cheerleaders in the media, what can you say?
2 comments:
Interesting thoughts on a subject that has been the principal mode of exploitation since ages..
good one..
Many thanks on that Deepak, appreciated.
FM.
Post a Comment