Gas and Electricity Prices

[matthewr]

Still all has to be paid for by French taxpayers.

Or more accurately, a short term crisis has to be amortized by the state so that French taxpayers don't either see friends and family thrown into financial crisis through no fault of their own or experience it themselves.

This is also an interesting question. How miserable does life have to become and for how many people before the well off middle classes allow inequality to be addressed in even the smallest way?

 

[mansr]

Erm. I doubt expecting everyone who lived in Grenfell Tower to use a wood burner and to do without electricity would have been ideal. Ditto for all the homes in the UK that are now almost unsellable due to inflammable cladding!

And without electricity the lifts wouldn't work. Leaving people on the umpteenth floor to have to carry the wood up many flights of stairs. (Wood smoke is also toxic, so not welcome in cities.)

The reality is that many people don't live in a nice x-up/x-down detached house in suberbia, open country. And the trees we need for ecological reasons might soon go if we all used wood for heating.

The only place I've ever stayed was a wooden house in NE USA surrounded by its own woodland. There the main heat source was a woodburner and they cut their own wood from their own trees. Also made their own Maple syrup. Great place to live. But not exactly typical of where millions live in the UK.

Do you enjoy taking statements completely out of context and misconstruing them to mean something you can argue against? If not, why do you do it?

 

[mansr]

The Great Oxygenation Event was caused by Cyanobacteria, not plants. And, man, did it cause a revolution!

 

[Joe P]

Matthew,

I know, but the Great Oxygen Extended Episode doesn’t roll off the tongue. I had proposed Oxygen-o-rama, but was voted down because it sounded like a minor side show at a monster truck rally.

You have to pick your battles.

Joe

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Oxy-apocalypse!

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

Of course you can, as long as you have water, a heat source such as a wood burner, and food that doesn't require refrigeration. It won't be much fun, but it is certainly possible. Have you heard of this thing called "camping"? It's when people live like that for a while, in tents no less, supposedly even enjoying it (though I'm convinced they're lying about that).

That was the context that prompted what I wrote.

Camping is something else (as listeners of ye olde "Round The Horne" will know. )

 

[Ponty]

This is economic illiteracy. I'm start to see how the "good with the economy" tories have actually trashed both our economy and our society.

It's the difference between being given a belated, begrudged hand out to buy some bread and owning the actual bakery (and flour mill) (at a time when bread prices are sky-high). Night and day difference. *

Of course, if you own shares in the energy co. maybe you could argue "it's no different" at least for you, personally. The big difference is, one model benefits every household in the land, the whole economy and the other benefits a small minority of people at the expense of everyone else.


* For clarity; in this analogy the "bakery" is the energy company and the flour mill/wheat field is the oil & gas fields and/or nuclear power station.

OK, so if the state owned bakery is there to protect against price spikes, is it allowed to sell bread at over market value when the price of flour is very low? Presumably this would attract criticism of exploiting the poor and vulnerable, forcing them to pay greater than market price.

 

[mansr]

That was the context that prompted what I wrote.

Again, that was in response to the bizarre suggestion that humans somehow require electricity to live, much like we require food and water. Nobody said anything about tower blocks until you introduced that straw man.

 

[wulbert]

OK, so if the state owned bakery is there to protect against price spikes, is it allowed to sell bread at a profit when the price of flour is very low? Presumably this would attract criticism of exploiting the poor and vulnerable, forcing them to pay greater than market price.

If the poor and vulnerable were hungry then you would sell the bread at a "loss" to keep the population alive and healthy. There is no need to "make a profit". A country is not a business. This is the whole point of state control of essential sectors; full control and the ability to instantly respond to crises and need and (a degree of) security from external events. Our government's first duty is the safety and security of it's citizens. This Govt. has made us vulnerable, unequal, indebted and our economy precarious.

The other important point to make is that since no human agency created oil, gas, the sun, the tides, rainfall etc. then the citizens of each country have a moral right to the benefits bestowed by nature upon their own land. It should not ( in my opinion) be gifted away for the private enrichment of a few.

 

[klfrs]

Again, that was in response to the bizarre suggestion that humans somehow require electricity to live ...

What powers ventilators, positive airway pressure machines, etc?

 

[paulfromcamden]

Oxy-apocalypse!

This is all way over my head. Does that make me an oxy-moron?

 

[Ponty]

If the poor and vulnerable were hungry then you would sell the bread at a "loss" to keep the population alive and healthy. There is no need to "make a profit". A country is not a business. This is the whole point of state control of essential sectors; full control and the ability to instantly respond to crises and need and (a degree of) security from external events. Our government's first duty is the safety and security of it's citizens. This Govt. has made us vulnerable, unequal, indebted and our economy precarious.

The other important point to make is that since no human agency created oil, gas, the sun, the tides, rainfall etc. then the citizens of each country have a moral right to the benefits bestowed by nature upon their own land. It should not ( in my opinion) be gifted away for the private enrichment of a few.

Of course, but your talking a whole different level of investment and barriers to entry between a baker and an oil producer. In essence then, the govt owns the industry (whatever that happens to be), it can’t make a profit when global commodity prices are very low (as it can’t exploit people) and has to sell at a (taxpayer funded) loss to insulate people when global commodity prices are deemed ‘unaffordable’. What could possibly go wrong.

 

[Seanm]

Of course, but your talking a whole different level of investment and barriers to entry between a baker and an oil producer. In essence then, the govt owns the industry (whatever that happens to be), it can’t make a profit when global commodity prices are very low (as it can’t exploit people) and has to sell at a (taxpayer funded) loss to insulate people when global commodity prices are deemed ‘unaffordable’. What could possibly go wrong.

It can set a price appropriate to broader strategic goals. Setting price higher than cost would allow for investment in infrastructure, hedges against input price volatility, the subsidising of other public services.

Also, not sure if we’re talking about energy producers or suppliers? Whatever about producers, it’s hard to see any justification for suppliers - middlemen - being subsidised by the state in order to protect private profit, which is the likely Tory solution to unaffordable price rises. They should be nationalised.

 

[Curtis]

Thank you Joe. I am pleased that my BSc. Astrophysics University of YT is still intact.

I have also been down a rabbit hole reading about the Great Oxygenation Event although I quibble about if you can call something that lasted a few billion years an "event"

But what about good old God?
Creating the universe with his first clay modelling kit.
I think these days god is sitting in Sagittarius A * hoovering up all his bad work.
Still when that stops radiating apparently he will send all the data back to the universe for another round of primate commerce.

 

[twotone]

Again, that was in response to the bizarre suggestion that humans somehow require electricity to live, much like we require food and water. Nobody said anything about tower blocks until you introduced that straw man.

There's nothing bizarre about suggesting that you need electricity to live especially if you live in a prominent UK city in the 21st century.

You're at it.

You're nothing but a troll.

 

[Ponty]

It can set a price appropriate to broader strategic goals. Setting price higher than cost would allow for investment in infrastructure, hedges against input price volatility, the subsidising of other public services.

Also, not sure if we’re talking about energy producers or suppliers? Whatever about producers, it’s hard to see any justification for suppliers - middlemen - being subsidised by the state in order to protect private profit, which is the likely Tory solution to unaffordable price rises. They should be nationalised.

What happens is the state owned industry becomes flabby, inefficient and complacent. Taxpayer subsidies have to increase but so what, it’s only taxpayers money. Meanwhile, Joe Bloggs comes along, providing a superior service / product at a better price and people move away from the state run offering. Unless you’re talking about living in a communist state.

 

[klfrs]

What happens is the state owned industry becomes flabby, inefficient and complacent.

That and worse applies to the privately owned energy suppliers in UK, and the market they operate in.

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

Again, that was in response to the bizarre suggestion that humans somehow require electricity to live, much like we require food and water. Nobody said anything about tower blocks until you introduced that straw man.

FWIW I don't regard it as a "Straw Man" to point out the stark reality of many in the UK. Although I do accept this is a wider point that you were concentrating upon. The reality in the UK is that - barring *effective* action by UK Gov - this is shaping up to being a disaster for millions of people here. I want to make sure people realise this as the muppets currently bickering over who will be the next clown-PM simply aren't facing it.

 

[mansr]

FWIW I don't regard it as a "Straw Man" to point out the stark reality of many in the UK. Although I do accept this is a wider point that you were concentrating upon. The reality in the UK is that - barring *effective* action by UK Gov - this is shaping up to being a disaster for millions of people here. I want to make sure people realise this as the muppets currently bickering over who will be the next clown-PM simply aren't facing it.

I see you've moved on from straw man to non sequitur.

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

What happens is the state owned industry becomes flabby, inefficient and complacent. Taxpayer subsidies have to increase but so what, it’s only taxpayers money. Meanwhile, Joe Bloggs comes along, providing a superior service / product at a better price and people move away from the state run offering. Unless you’re talking about living in a communist state.

I did laugh out loud at that. The reality in the UK is slightly different for many sectors. 'Privatisations' and 'Outsorcings' has created all kinds of gravy trains for the owners of the companies, and the actual level of service and investment fades. So we end up paying them to make a profit.

IIRC various case like water in the Thames area was bought up by an Australian firm who them got it to borrow a huge amount. They then paid themselves a huge dividend from that, and sold off the company, leaving it saddled with debt. Which then means reluctance to invest, maintain, etc. Quite a lot of medium-large scale 'private' becomes essentially a monopoly. And profits tend to go offshore, often dodging tax at the door.