Trying to freeze utility prices - can a labour supporter please explain how?

thor

michaels wrote: »

Read my post above - in the run up to the election prices will be rising quickly

They will rise anyway whether wholesale costs increase or not. The supplier's apologists are forever preparing us by bleating on about green taxes being the main cause.

CLAPTON

thor wrote: »

They will rise anyway whether wholesale costs increase or not. The supplier's apologists are forever preparing us by bleating on about green taxes being the main cause.

why not give us the real breakdown of costs and the real profit?

k12479

lvader wrote: »

Why not freeze wholesale prices as well?

Are you being serious or sarcastic?

TruckerT

michaels wrote: »

in the run up to the election prices will be rising quickly as suppliers anticipate of the cap and Labour will be promising to fix them. The proportion of the electorate this is aimed at will not be interested in the logic of what is going on only that they are struggling to pay the electic bills and labour are promising to stop the increases. As noted elsewhere with a strong UKIP performance Labour can win a parliamentary majority with 33% of the popular vote.

I think I am beginning to understand Milliband's plan. He forces the energy companies to rack up their prices in the approach to the next election, and then presents himself as the saviour of us all, with his promise to stop the rot.

lvader wrote: »

Why not freeze wholesale prices as well? that is where the real money is made.

Good idea! The biggest producers of gas and oil (especially oil) are relatively small users. The western world is 'united' in its opposition to foreign terrorism, but each country continues to buy its own oil (and gas) at so-called 'market prices'. Just as the oil-producing countries have a cartel (OPEC) which sets availability, and therefore price, it should be possible for the western world to set up a similar purchasers' cartel in order to protect themselves. The mid-east based terrorist groups seem to blame the west for all their problems, but maybe some of them would be better to spend their time asking their own stupidly wealthy rulers why their lives are so sh*te.

My 'take' on Milliband's proposal is that he has finally worked out that there is little point in having two main parties who offer a broadly similar 'proposition' to the electorate.

I would like to think that the Labour party is willing to go back to its roots, and offer a solution to what appears to be a growing resurgence of a massive gap between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots'.

It may be that the gap is not yet big enough for Red Ed's message to get through.

TruckerT

grizzly1911

wotsthat wrote: »

I'm not disputing the average bill size but commenting that most people could reduce the size of their bill with little or no investment. Why have so many people still never switched? They either think the savings are not worth it or can't be bothered. It's a doddle.

If the average consumer can't be arsed to spend 15 minutes (max) reducing their bills I doubt they're worried about the complexity of company margins.

It does of course benefit you and I that they CBA. If the majority switched they would not be able to offer the lower prices to us.

Many older people do not have the ability to switch or manage on line. There are no doubt many more that are stuck with prepayment charging at penal rates.

grizzly1911

k12479 wrote: »

Are you being serious or sarcastic?

Perhaps they mean the downstream price for electricity generation rather than the raw fuel?

TruckerT

grizzly1911 wrote: »

It does of course benefit you and I that they CBA. If the majority switched they would not be able to offer the lower prices to us.

Many older people do not have the ability to switch or manage on line. There are no doubt many more that are stuck with prepayment charging at penal rates.

Please don't forget that the ongoing abolition of two-tier tariffs has resulted in this older person experiencing a six-fold increase in the price of gas!

Temporarily, I have switched to Scottish Power, but at the time of switching, the salesperson was very doubtful about how long it would be before SP was forced to comply with the rest of the industry, and impose a daily standard charge on all its customers.

Mrs Thatcher's plans to hand over the nationalised industries to the private sector were, at the time, widely regarded as 'unthinkable'. Mr Milliband's ideas are currently getting a similar response.

TruckerT

ps - does red ed have one L or two Ls in his surname?

k12479

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Perhaps they mean the downstream price for electricity generation rather than the raw fuel?

Would that be a fixed percentage margin between the costs and revenues (i.e stripping out the fuel costs) or a fixed cost per MW that power can be sold for?

TruckerT

Information please....

Who owns/operates the power stations which are currently in operation in the UK?

Do any of the BigSix energy 'providers' have any 'say' in the production processes?

TruckerT

Fella

And where is the "Business Secretary" in all of this? If he was of any use whatsoever Vince Cable should have been all over the media in the last couple of days pointing out all the things wrong with Labour's attack on the Energy Companies. AFAIK he hasn't said a word.

The reason of course, is that Cable is even more left-wing than Miliband & this is exactly the sort of measure he'd love. He'll keep quiet while he considers his options to try to take over the Libs & lead them into coalition with Labour, who he is very clearly courting.

A disgrace of a business secretary, the most overrated politician in memory and the worst thing about the coalition. A socialist at heart, but one with no principals who happily went into coalition with his hated enemies at the first opportunity because he couldn't resist a bit of power.