Tories announce energy price rises for those who shop around to protect big business

Jon_B_2

A better comparison would be chopped tomatoes in an own label. Pretty much 35p across the board.

That's basically what energy is. Bought from he same wholesale market, so the customer should get by default the best price as it is classed as an essential.

Look at marketplace style products in a supermarket and you will see what I mean. The customer does on balance get the best deal. In energy, unless you spend time and effort to shop around you do not.

The fact you fail to understand that your analogy is flawed makes this whole debate a bit pointless.

I will put my hand up and admit that at 29 years old, I feel quite uncomfortable that I am able to heat my home cheaper than a pensioner as I know how to use the internet. Remember a lot of pensioners were buying energy in their prime from nationalised institutions.

michaels

I buy chopped tomatoes in bulk when they are 4 for a pound saving 33%. I can only do this because I have a car to transport them, space to store them, the money upfront to hold a stock, the time to shop around and look out for special offers (that I often find out about on the internet).

Thus even on a basic commodity food stuff some people are able to pay 33% less than others. How can you claim this market is working and the energy market is not when exactly the same price differentials apply?

mayonnaise

michaels wrote: »

I am obviously to dim to see the flaw. Is energy more essential than food? Is it easier to shop around for savings on food rather than on energy? I would have thought it takes much more time and effort to save 200 quid a year on food than it is on energy. There are only 4 major food retaillers and they are extremely skilled at manipulating consumers.

I really can not see how the energy market is in some way so much less competitive than the food market but I guess my iq is too low.

It's really simple, michaels.
Labour proposing government intervention in the energy sector = BAD (communism!)
Tories proposing government intervention in the energy sector = GOOD (strong and stable leadership!)

michaels

mayonnaise wrote: »

It's really simple, michaels.
Labour proposing government intervention in the energy sector = BAD (communism!)
Tories proposing government intervention in the energy sector = GOOD (strong and stable leadership!)

I do so hate govt by focus group

wotsthat

mrginge wrote: »

I realise it's a bit socialist, but I don't think people should have to spend their time shopping around for fundamentals like energy.

I spend around 15 minutes every 12 - 24 months shopping around for energy.

wotsthat

Jon_B wrote: »

Look at marketplace style products in a supermarket and you will see what I mean. The customer does on balance get the best deal. In energy, unless you spend time and effort to shop around you do not.

If the consumer is getting the best deal on food it's because they're shopping around. If not food margins for retailers would increase and efficiency fall. Energy is no different.

Jon_B wrote: »

I will put my hand up and admit that at 29 years old, I feel quite uncomfortable that I am able to heat my home cheaper than a pensioner as I know how to use the internet. Remember a lot of pensioners were buying energy in their prime from nationalised institutions.

You not exercising your powers to punish expensive energy suppliers will not help a single pensioner.

Helping your grand-parents to get the best deal will. My grandmother was always on the best deal despite not being on the 'Intercom'. Literally minutes a year.

mrginge

wotsthat wrote: »

I spend around 15 minutes every 12 - 24 months shopping around for energy.

Very good.
How do you believe we should address the issue of two thirds of people being on the most expensive standard tariffs?

Or is it not a problem and all those people are simply lazy idiots?

BobQ

antrobus wrote: »

Why disparage the capabilities of an 80 year old? You'll be having a pop at the disabled next.



Oh, I see you already have. Well *** me, I'm disabled. I must be, I have PIP and a Blue Badge, and I'm not being "ripped off by the system".

Perhaps it's all those youngsters who are on SVR, because they spend all their time twittering or whatever, and have none left for anything else.

Not having a pop at anyone. Some people will be able to cope with the system whatever their age and some cannot cope at all any age.

I think that your attempt to promote an argument on this topic is not worthy of your usual thoughtful posts. In my experience as people age declining physical and/or mental capabilities mean that at some point, some people cannot cope with change.

Take the internet. My disabled uncle at 80 ish was very capable of using the internet to run the financial affairs of himself and his wife. When he died his wife could not use the internet, was not able to learn it, had no idea who their energy suppliers were or what bank accounts he/they had. My mother opened her first current account at the age of 82, could not use the internet and relied on the phone. She was distraught one day because the bank refused to let her pay a bill (she had merely failed security questions).

You may not know people who are incapable of interacting with modern technology but they do exist.

Whether people who are obsessed with social media stay on SVR because of it is their choice. (One could suggest that in saying that this only applies to "youngsters" you are also singling out a group?). I am more concerned about people of any age who cannot participate in this "free market" not those who choose not to do so.

BTW Twitter is more likely used by older people, youngsters rely more on Instagram and facebook messenger I am told:)

BobQ

wotsthat wrote: »

Helping your grand-parents to get the best deal will. My grandmother was always on the best deal despite not being on the 'Intercom'. Literally minutes a year.

Good that you take the trouble to do this for them. But what of those grandparents who are confused by the multiplicity of options and the Intercom but do not have a caring grandchild? Some children (let alone grandchildren) do not see their parents for a year or more and often then just want a cheap loan. How should they manage?

michaels

mrginge wrote: »

Very good.
How do you believe we should address the issue of two thirds of people being on the most expensive standard tariffs?

Or is it not a problem and all those people are simply lazy idiots?

Probably only 75% of them.

I thought we looked for equality of opportunity not equality of outcome.