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 ![Stick Out Tongue :p :p](/styles/default/xenforo/vbSmilies/Normal/tongue.gif)
![Stick Out Tongue :p :p](/styles/default/xenforo/vbSmilies/Normal/tongue.gif)
That is what I said a few posts back which you'd have seen if you hadn't been selectively reading my words.The issue is the standing charge shouldn't be a tax. Its being used as one though. Move all that to general taxation instead of this stupid solar tax idea.
Come on, reform of the standing charge is better than taxing renewables.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.
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.
And your answer…..put a tax on the SUN.Are you all being deliberately thick or what?
If there is a charge included in the unit rate of energy, and you are on solar so hardly use any energy, then you won't be paying towards that charge.
If that charge is there to be RE-DISTRIBUTIVE, like for example a social tariff contribution or green tax, then you won't be paying it.
If the standing charge is a fixed amount for everyone equally, then you can be rich or poor and still pay the same amount. Your house can be massive or small and you still pay the same amount. If elements of that standing charge are designed to be RE-DISTRIBUTIVE, then poorer people will be paying a larger proportion of those costs compared to richer people. THE EXACT OPPOSITE FROM HOW TAXES WORK IN THIS COUNTRY.
It is not me who is being selfish here - it is all of you.
Dont get shirty with me. As usual, you arent understanding or comprehending what I am trying to say, probably because of your usual biases towards me.
My suggestions are the EXACT OPPOSITE from selfishness. They are to make the system fairer, not less fair.
As usual you just dismiss my views thinking its all because I will benefit from it.
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![]()
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.
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!![]()
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?The fixed costs of distribution should be on SC things like the cables going to each house, the meter for each house etc
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.Charging tax on solar is one of the dumbest things I have heard this decade. Hell I may even suggest this century.
Service charge isnt a tax for god sake…..stop calling it one.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.
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.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.
Do you believe the standing charge only contains components related the fixed costs of supply? If so, that is incorrect.Service charge isnt a tax for god sake…..stop calling it one.
Service charge isnt a tax for god sake…..stop calling it one.
What is included in electricity standing charge?
The charge covers the cost to maintain the energy supply network, take meter readings, and support government social schemes, for example helping people that cannot afford energy, and environmental schemes.
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.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?
So if i live on a remote farm, complete off grid…..i should be taxed for not using energy. Are you for real???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.
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.So if i live on a remote farm, complete off grid…..i should be taxed for not using energy. Are you for real???
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.
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…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.