Everyone wants a discount, I wouldn't take it too seriously
.Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)
- Thread starter DXP55
- Start date
.
Putin is waging an economic war with Europe. Britain’s absurd energy plan plays into his hands | Will Hutton
The Tories’ ideology of daffy libertarianism seeks to triumph over evidence and reason
www.theguardian.com
Bloke is a moron.
He‘s right on point.
- Costs and inflation are high because the increases can be absorbed by enough people who are able to pay the increases and don’t see it as a problem.
- Unless energy use is reduced somewhere then the costs will continue to go up, and more people will get sucked into fuel poverty.
This guy is calling it now - just the same as those analysts who called out the bank and financial institution collapse in 2005, which eventually triggered from late 2007.
Soldato
For Truss's plan to work they need to find a way to get wholesale costs down to below the current £2.5K average cap, and then keep it there so that the higher price pays for the earlier debt until it's clear.
That can work, but ultimately without that we just have a debt that climbs up.
I think the best route to doing this beyond local energy production boosts is to free Ukraine from the war and then leverage their vast resources in terms of Nuclear generation and natural gas, kind of like Russia 2.0 but better, and not Russian.
That can work, but ultimately without that we just have a debt that climbs up.
I think the best route to doing this beyond local energy production boosts is to free Ukraine from the war and then leverage their vast resources in terms of Nuclear generation and natural gas, kind of like Russia 2.0 but better, and not Russian.
He's was a gambler with other peoples money and started just after the 2008 financial crisis, so lucky timing, if he started a year earlier he would have probably failed. And only did it for a short time period.
Most people who run the financial markets have degrees in economics or similar. Doesn't stop them being morons. His current point of view effectively says his degrees are BS anyway, he criticises economists in the video, eg the very people that taught him.
There are 1,000s of people with the same degrees, some will aggree with him some will disagree. Having a degree doesn't make you right.
He starts with complaining about giving money to rich. Given incorrect information like energy shareholders are all richer people, some will be, most won't be. (The ones the UK has some control over)
His reason for prices going up are also BS, as almost all the current inflation is due to the energy markets and the constrained supply, not just rich people having more money.
Seems to think due to the cap no one is going to reduce their energy consumption?
He's a millionaire with no concept of normal peoples lives, even though he's try to act like the average Joe.
Most people, rich or poor are going to see significant cost increases so do have an incentive to reduce consumption. Businesses even more so.
Wrong facts, saying we have (as in the UK) have less energy. We don't because we are paying the high prices for it. We'd only have less if we stop paying.
Countries that can't afford to pay for energy or don't have a suitable supply line will have problems.
Seems to think ordinary families will go cold due to lack of supply and be cut off, but rich people must have a separate national "rich persons grid" so won't go cold if we run out of energy. Moron!
If we do get a shortage of energy it likely to be large business users that will be forced to reduce consumption.
My main problem with him he doesn't have a valid alternative to paying the high market prices. We have to buy energy from outside the UK, so we have either pay the market rate or not buy it.
You prob have a v1. I just had our v1 swapped for V2HI All,
Does anyone have any idea if you can hook up any in home smart display to any smart meter?
Why I ask is that I got a smart meter many years ago. However, the in home display I have doesn't actually show current use - just the day spend (which I'm not sure is event accurate). So ideally, it would be good to switch it out with something a little more useful
Many thanks in advance
You have misunderstood, didn’t understand or have deliberately misquoted most of what he said.
He said the rich wouldn’t need to reduce energy consumption because 1) it’s being funded by the government and 2) they can afford it anyway.
He also said the poor would be the only ones who would be forced to reduce consumption due to the costs. Hence them going cold, because of cost not supply.
His valid alternative is the rich (people and businesses) should be taxed more.
Also, stop calling people morons
The other videos on this guys channel are right on the money.
The vast majority of shares in fossil fuel companies are owned by rich people, rich people own the vast majority of assets and your mortgage/debt is their asset, pension funds own less than 0.2% of BP and Shell shares:
Windfall tax on oil giants won’t hurt British pensioners, thinktank finds
Review by Common Wealth reveals that UK pension funds hold tiny fraction of Shell and BP shares
www.theguardian.com
He wasn't just lucky with his timing as in oversimplified terms he was betting that interest rates would not go up due to the economy not recovering as long as the wrong policies were maintained, whereas the conventional wisdom at the time was that the government policies favoured by parties like the supposedly wonderful Conservatives would restore economic health and such a recovery was just around the corner (if you remember the Conservatives kept missing all their economic targets, including on deficit reduction). He became the #1 most profitable trader in his company globally whereas his colleagues either didn't do as well or lost money, so if it was just luck then they would have done as well or better. The point is he knew austerity politics was nonsense and wouldn't work, as well as creating ever more inequality in terms of wealth.
The point he actually makes in criticising the academics is that they don't have the real world experience that people like him and his colleagues have and they are not paid well by comparison so you are not going to get the best people in those positions because the academics' mistakes are not punished by a huge financial loss and potential instant dismissal.
You are misrepresenting his points, there are a number of factors to inflation (including COVID and Brexit) and energy supply is a big one but the effect of that is that rich will go into a bidding war for ever more scarce resources driving prices higher and that more money has ended up in the hands of the rich due to government policy of giving cash which flows to them resulting in ever inflating asset prices and the unwillingness to tax this back which exacerbates the problem. You reduce this excess demand to lower prices and tax money out of the economy.
He says that ordinary people will have to reduce consumption (they can't afford £2500 a year for the average family and the business support is only for 6 months, whereas the super rich could easily afford higher bills and Truss' plan has made it even easier and they will be rewarded through their shares in fossil fuels) rather than the super rich who consume the lion's share of our energy, this is the wrong way round and will result in ordinary people going cold (I don't understand why you don't realise this). Most business owners are not rich (at least not in the sense that we are talking about here).
There is less energy, just because we are paying more that doesn't mean there isn't less energy to go around. We will have to pay any increases in prices through taxation on ordinary people over time, that money then flows to rich people. How are ordinary people going to afford this? Why is the burden landing on us? I suppose you don't care if the rich keep bidding the price up, meaning we have to pay more, as long as this sham cap hides it in the short term. They will get ever fatter dividends in addition to having us pay for it, so that's brilliant then and it will not cost them a penny (the money flows in a circle back to them).
The alternative is a progressive tax based on usage, a wealth tax, as well as a windfall tax on the fossil fuel companies (with exceptions for disabled/ill people who need to run lifesaving equipment, hospitals, small businesses etc); this would reduce the energy used by the super rich (as I said, the lion's share) and would solve the problem at a stroke. You also transition to clean energy much faster using this extra revenue and insulate homes which means ordinary people would require less energy to heat them.
Came across as a activist twerp.You have misunderstood, didn’t understand or have deliberately misquoted most of what he said.
He said the rich wouldn’t need to reduce energy consumption because 1) it’s being funded by the government and 2) they can afford it anyway.
He also said the poor would be the only ones who would be forced to reduce consumption due to the costs. Hence them going cold, because of cost not supply.
His valid alternative is the rich (people and businesses) should be taxed more.
Also, stop calling people morons
The other videos on this guys channel are right on the money.
Most rich people will have other ways of heating/powering their homes so not to be reliant on gas.
Really?
‘Carbon footprint gap’ between rich and poor expanding, study finds
Researchers say cutting carbon footprint of world’s wealthiest may be fastest way to reach net zero
www.theguardian.com
Which households emit the most carbon from energy use? | Climate Just
The richest 10% produce about half of greenhouse gas emissions. They should pay to fix the climate | Lucas Chancel
This is not simply a rich versus poor countries divide: there are huge emitters in poor countries, and low emitters in rich countries
www.theguardian.com
Yes really.Really?
‘Carbon footprint gap’ between rich and poor expanding, study finds
Researchers say cutting carbon footprint of world’s wealthiest may be fastest way to reach net zero
Which households emit the most carbon from energy use? | Climate Just
www.climatejust.org.uk
The richest 10% produce about half of greenhouse gas emissions. They should pay to fix the climate | Lucas Chancel
This is not simply a rich versus poor countries divide: there are huge emitters in poor countries, and low emitters in rich countries
The rich are more likely to be in a position to afford solar, battery storage and heat pumps.
All of the quotes in your post are based on historical data.
Looking into the future it will be a different story.
Didn't say carbon footprint l, did I?Really?
‘Carbon footprint gap’ between rich and poor expanding, study finds
Researchers say cutting carbon footprint of world’s wealthiest may be fastest way to reach net zero
Which households emit the most carbon from energy use? | Climate Just
The richest 10% produce about half of greenhouse gas emissions. They should pay to fix the climate | Lucas Chancel
This is not simply a rich versus poor countries divide: there are huge emitters in poor countries, and low emitters in rich countries
I said gas. What would you have it's do, live in caves?
But many choose not to do it even if they can afford it. How do we change their behaviour? You have to make fossil fuel use unpalatably expensive or inconvenient for them.
If you read the first and second articles they talk specifically about this, also the higher the carbon footprint the higher the fossil fuel usage and gas is a fossil fuel.
Soldato
The rich that I work for and have met for the most part would rather have another holiday for £20k than pay for solar panels as example and just really don't care enough about their gas usage because event at 15k kwh gas usage that the same as a couple of bottles of wine or similar. The true rich are on a completely different level to high earners.
The document from the business Secretary suggests the £400 will be next year as well, it quotes the £2100 as per year rather than just this year.
That would be good news.
From what I understand they not going down the pay back via SC route, its to be paid back via general taxation, so government debt not energy company debt.
Yes I know, it's easy to stop using gas for other fuels, the original post was about the rich using less gas, which they can by buying other fuel types.
Soldato
Yes I understand that, but the best way to pay it back is to get the prices down so that we can pay a bit extra on the units to make up for the fact we are all underpaying now.
The debt has to be paid back one way or another, gov can't just magic up money to pay it with.
It's a delaying action to prevent individual burden being too high as much as possible.