Soldato
Energy prices are crazy right now, our standing charges have increased again this month. Powerless to do anything about it, makes you want to live off grid 
Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)
- Thread starter DXP55
- Start date
Soldato
You really should be ashamed of yourselves.
Laughing reactions instead of having a proper debate.
Personal put downs instead of having a proper discussion.
Taking a view on how various charges get levied across rich and poor that is different depending on what thread you're in.
But as they are in the standing charge, do you think its right that poorer, smaller households pay proportionally more of it? Do you think its right that, for those components with something in the unit rate as well, that people who can get solar can avoid making a contribution at all?
Im amazed to be honest, at the hypocrisy here. MKW is an advocate of wealth taxation, yet is quite happy to see poorer smaller households take a greater share of energy standing charges which includes things that should be shared among everyone. Hypocrit.
Laughing reactions instead of having a proper debate.
Personal put downs instead of having a proper discussion.
Taking a view on how various charges get levied across rich and poor that is different depending on what thread you're in.
That is what I said a few posts back which you'd have seen if you hadn't been selectively reading my words.
But as they are in the standing charge, do you think its right that poorer, smaller households pay proportionally more of it? Do you think its right that, for those components with something in the unit rate as well, that people who can get solar can avoid making a contribution at all?
Im amazed to be honest, at the hypocrisy here. MKW is an advocate of wealth taxation, yet is quite happy to see poorer smaller households take a greater share of energy standing charges which includes things that should be shared among everyone. Hypocrit.
Soldato
You're trying to equate the standing charge to a tax, it's not meant to be one, it's meant to cover the costs of connecting as a utility, same as things like the internet.
Do people with larger houses pay more for internet supply?
You don't need to make special allowances for energy connectivity based on house size (with some exceptions). A house that needs more energy throughput may have a larger incoming supply, but by and large, a 2 bed bungalow is going to have the same power connectivity as a 5 bed detached house.
Given a typical usage scenario where larger houses with more occupants do use more electric, nothing changes really, those cables don't get worn out by carrying 100 more kWh to property B than property A is using in a given month.
Trying to tax things like solar is not helpful vs the way the current system works.
That's why I said the SC should be lowered a bit, and some of those costs can go onto unit rates, I think the current system is flawed, but you're talking about completely upending it and then trying to claw money back from heavy users or indeed people that have some form of green energy supply such as solar.
Do people with larger houses pay more for internet supply?
You don't need to make special allowances for energy connectivity based on house size (with some exceptions). A house that needs more energy throughput may have a larger incoming supply, but by and large, a 2 bed bungalow is going to have the same power connectivity as a 5 bed detached house.
Given a typical usage scenario where larger houses with more occupants do use more electric, nothing changes really, those cables don't get worn out by carrying 100 more kWh to property B than property A is using in a given month.
Trying to tax things like solar is not helpful vs the way the current system works.
That's why I said the SC should be lowered a bit, and some of those costs can go onto unit rates, I think the current system is flawed, but you're talking about completely upending it and then trying to claw money back from heavy users or indeed people that have some form of green energy supply such as solar.
Last edited:
Come on, reform of the standing charge is better than taxing renewables.
I just suffered MKW calling me an idiot as well get over it
Soldato
And your answer…..put a tax on the SUN.
Soldato
Again
The fixed costs of distribution should be on SC things like the cables going to each house, the meter for each house etc
We all also need the backbone, in my region we have a lot of backbone now and more coming to get offshore to more of the UK
Should I be paying that in my area where as others will benefit more, sometimes it just sucks
The problem comes from the not exactly variable costs. Eg the costs of the call centres. Do they vary with usage? Not generally no, they mainly vary with the number of customers.
Do I am customer using say 10000kwh a year cost them far more than another customer using 2000kwh a year?
Collecting £100 from me costs the same as £40 from you. Etc etc
Costs often work in a way contrary to the way that people who do not look at costs for their job actually think they work.
Things like volume discounts, getting to the front of the queue due to volume, being able to employ experts due to volume etc etc.
Charging tax on solar is one of the dumbest things I have heard this decade. Hell I may even suggest this century.
The problem is as soon as someone says "to make it fairer" you know its always going to be a fairer system that just happens to mean they will pay less
Come on, reform of the standing charge is better than taxing renewables.
I just suffered MKW calling me an idiot as well get over it
No offence meant.
Last edited:
Soldato
We should tax people with log burners, for not using gas to heat their house……poor people cant afford to fit log burners, so they pay more to heat their house through gas….tax them, tax them all i say.
Last edited:
Soldato
Dont forget those avoiding tax on fuel by walking or riding bikes to work, they should be paying tax on the amount of energy they are avoiding!
Soldato
I cant believe some one wants to tax the sun….crazy worldDont forget those avoiding tax on fuel by walking or riding bikes to work, they should be paying tax on the amount of energy they are avoiding!
Soldato
Why? Do you specifically pay for the roads which come to your specific house? Or do we all nationally share in all of the roads, out of general taxation, with the higher income earners paying proportionally more towards it?
You full well know that I am not referring to the energy component which is avoided by a solar user. It is all the other things that are part of our energy bills which includes some elements to support others such as bad debt. A solar user should still contribute to those elements of cost which are societal.
Soldato
Service charge isnt a tax for god sake…..stop calling it one.
As for other peoples bad debt, why should i pay for solar, not use leccy….but still pay others debt. Will you pay towards my debt ( i havent got any) …..
Soldato
You say this in jest but actually its very valid. If you get your energy essentially for free by burning logs, you aren't contributing to the wider societal components which also form part of our energy bills. You avoid contributing.
So yes, if we are to really incentivise reducing our use of energy, then all forms of energy need to be incentivised. That would result in a tax on the amount you burn, so that you'd be contributing like others to those societal components of the cost.
This is exactly the same thought processes/logic as the arguments for private healthcare vs NHS. If someone goes private medical, should they be able to opt out of the NHS? That would only benefit the very rich, leaving the poor to pick up the pieces of an ever diminishing service, wouldn't it.
The same would ultimately happen in energy. If 80% of the country went solar, that would leave the remaining 20% having to pick up all the costs, and they would likely be the poorer 20%.
Do you believe the standing charge only contains components related the fixed costs of supply? If so, that is incorrect.
Last edited:
Soldato
Do you think that as you are lucky enough to be able to generate your own power, that you shouldn't contribute to helping people that cannot afford energy, or environmental schemes, which are currently within the standing charge? If the standing charge is changed to be more on the unit rate, then how would you contribute to those societal costs?
Last edited:
Soldato
By my unit rate on import…or are you that stupid, we still use the grid. So thats how we pay. People who use more, pay more, people who use less, pay less.
People earn less, pay less tax, people earn more pay more…….
Soldato
Someone really needs educating……
Soldato
So if i live on a remote farm, complete off grid…..i should be taxed for not using energy. Are you for real???
Soldato
But you would use energy wouldn't you, just not grid energy. You'd be polluting the same as power stations do. Why should you get away with not paying green levies? Why should you get away with not paying a contribution to support those unable to pay for their energy? Those things are currently in the bills we all pay, instead of in general taxation. And because of that, we all should pay them whether you use grid energy or not. Do you not understand this point? It is really nothing to do with using energy at all - it is a societal redistribution i.e a tax that is included in our energy bills.
Last edited:
Soldato
Roads are different, they are built and then nothing is charged for usage. You have a house, you require a meter, you should pay for that.
You don't pay less for your phone/fibre cable if you use less do you?
If you have a new phone installed you pay for that. All of it.
Once we can charge for road usage we will likely see that happen.
But generally just because some things are socialised it doesn't mean we should socialise everything.
Solar users currently pay, they do it via the service charge.
Also they will pay for units as well, depending on what their setup actually is
Right now however we contribute more as we also help to reduce the requirement for the most expensive grid units. Your welcome.
Doing dumb things like taxing solar will see people doing dumb things like installing it and not registering.
Talking of dumb things. Most of the issues we have are due to the dumb way the UK energy market has been setup to operate.
It was that dumb price cap that killed many of the companies that we are now paying for the credit those who were force moved had built up.
The SC works (as long as it's legitimate)
Solar or not.. If you use the grid you should be paying for it.
It doesn't matter if you supply or demand from it. If you're using it.. You should pay. And it shouldn't matter how much you use.
Now you could bundle the SC part of failed suppliers etc into general tax. Probably wouldn't make much difference end of the day.
What you shouldn't have is people using more or less benefiting from moving elements correctly allocated to fixed costs to unit cost.
Solar or not.. If you use the grid you should be paying for it.
It doesn't matter if you supply or demand from it. If you're using it.. You should pay. And it shouldn't matter how much you use.
Now you could bundle the SC part of failed suppliers etc into general tax. Probably wouldn't make much difference end of the day.
What you shouldn't have is people using more or less benefiting from moving elements correctly allocated to fixed costs to unit cost.
Soldato
What energy would i use???….. the sun is free for all to use, no one pays to use it. The government or energy companies dont do anything to produce SUN. So no i shouldnt contribute to the energy market, if not using the energy the companies who buy/produce by burning other energy like gas, coal etc etc…
I would be using a totally free resource that sits in the sky and no one pays anything towards it being there.
Last edited: