Do we trust the government to maintain the Energy Price Guarantee?

nologo

I'm not worried about the price rises at the moment,  but I'm using the time until it goes up again to improve my insulation, draught proofing & glazing so if it does go up some more I don't have to worry & of it doesn't go up I use even less! ( Moved in my home 19 months ago, have already reduced my bills by 50% with £140 pipe insulation,£9 worth of squirty foam,£18 tank jacket,change to octopus, have loads more to do & it's not expensive, next it's more insulation in the eaves.

wittynamegoeshere

The detail of what the govt states may become irrelevant if they simply can't pay for it.

Truss is writing a lot of cheques, and it's all dependent upon perpetually borrowing ever-rising sums, and borrowing more just to pay the ever-rising interest on the vast pile of money we already owe.  None of it is sustainable, it's all based on the idea that we're going to have an economic boom in the midst if what is looking like a global economic depression.

One of the wheels wobbled yesterday, they may yet fall off completely, if so the UK govt doesn't have any money to spend, whether it wants to or not.  After that who knows what happens.

If we've learnt anything from the past 3 years or so it should be to expect the unexpected.  Anyone predicting this year's world and UK events last year would have been called a nutter.

But... getting back on-topic, my suggestion would be to expect the unexpected, spend wisely and keep some money in the bank.  But I wouldn't voluntarily pay more than necessary to guard against the unknown.

Besides, if the UK govt goes down then it will probably take all the suppliers with it, in which case all the fixes become irrelevant anyway.

ariarnia

wittynamegoeshere said:

The detail of what the govt states may become irrelevant if they simply can't pay for it.

Truss is writing a lot of cheques, and it's all dependent upon perpetually borrowing ever-rising sums, and borrowing more just to pay the ever-rising interest on the vast pile of money we already owe.  None of it is sustainable, it's all based on the idea that we're going to have an economic boom in the midst if what is looking like a global economic depression.

we still owe less per gdp than places like france and japan. imo there's a place for a low tax low regulation and high interest rate economy. and i can see why some would think that's a good role for the uk in the future and something we should work towards. the problem is more that moving from where we are to there needs confidence. the markets have to believe its going to work out in the end. i think that's why the tories you see on the news are sometimes so bullish about things will work out. some call it 'magic thinking' but if they were more cautious then it certainly wouldn't but if they can make everyone believe it will work then it could (very small chance but not 0) happen. 

wittynamegoeshere

Yep, I agree that it has potential.  I'm capable of seeing the problems with a concept without disagreeing with everything the current gang does or supporting the other gang either, this is not the party political debate that I think you're edging towards.

But the fact remains that (getting back on-topic) the PM has promised to spend lots of money that we simply do not have.  So that promise depends on someone somewhere wanting to continue to lend the UK more and more money.  This is not a given.  I personally hope that we do become a wealthy low tax country where we have a gold-plated skyscraper each, but I also recognise that if it really was that easy then plenty of other countries would have done it already.

IMO we're a poor country that hasn't yet realised.  We can't be prosperous by flogging each other coffee and dog walking services.  The Germans got it long ago, they've made proper money by flogging us overpriced posh cars.  Norway kept its oil revenue in the bank while we were (collectively) blowing it on steaks and prawn cocktails and now have nothing to show for this gift we were given.

It's comforting to think the government is actually in charge, but they're not really.  They're just management, they're not all-powerful and we're broke.

Spoonie_Turtle

wittynamegoeshere said:

They're just management, they're not all-powerful and we're broke.

That is a stunningly apt description.

ariarnia

wittynamegoeshere said:

Yep, I agree that it has potential.  I'm capable of seeing the problems with a concept without disagreeing with everything the current gang does or supporting the other gang either, this is not the party political debate that I think you're edging towards.

But the fact remains that (getting back on-topic) the PM has promised to spend lots of money that we simply do not have.  So that promise depends on someone somewhere wanting to continue to lend the UK more and more money.  This is not a given.  I personally hope that we do become a wealthy low tax country where we have a gold-plated skyscraper each, but I also recognise that if it really was that easy then plenty of other countries would have done it already.

IMO we're a poor country that hasn't yet realised.  We can't be prosperous by flogging each other coffee and dog walking services.  The Germans got it long ago, they've made proper money by flogging us overpriced posh cars.  Norway kept its oil revenue in the bank while we were (collectively) blowing it on steaks and prawn cocktails and now have nothing to show for this gift we were given.

It's comforting to think the government is actually in charge, but they're not really.  They're just management, they're not all-powerful and we're broke.

not party political just pointing out that being 'in debt' isn't always a problem. like i said other economies are in MORE debt relative to gdp and doing okay for themselves because country debt isn't really the same as real people debt. as long as the people we're borrowing from are confident we can make our interest payments they'll keep loaning us money. 

after world war 1 the national debt was something like twice what it is now and after ww2 it was closer to two and a half times. if the pandemic can be equated to one of the great wars (which many people have made that comparison given the rates of spending and impact on society and the economy) then our 95 odd percent debt against gdp is actually relatively good.

basically i think there's two possible futures (not party political) which is banking on the equivalent of a post war boom (which took nearly 20 years after the second world war for everything to recover) or to go back to something like austerity (cutting spending and raising taxes) both have arguments for and against and economists can be found to support both sides but both both rely on 'politics' (by that i mean the government convincing people their plan will work because it can if people believe it can and won't if people don't) 

Ryan_Holden

The_Green_Hornet said:

Ryan_Holden said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

People worry too much.

I'm glad you're in a position where an energy bill at twice what it could be isn't worth worrying about. As a single homeowner, I assure you, I'm not.

My response was to the question from the OP about whether the government will maintain the EPG for two years as promised. Personally I see no reason for them not to.

If you want to take it out of context and make it about yourself then so be it.

I am the OP. I took nothing out of context.

The_Green_Hornet

Ryan_Holden said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

Ryan_Holden said:

The_Green_Hornet said:

People worry too much.

I'm glad you're in a position where an energy bill at twice what it could be isn't worth worrying about. As a single homeowner, I assure you, I'm not.

My response was to the question from the OP about whether the government will maintain the EPG for two years as promised. Personally I see no reason for them not to.

If you want to take it out of context and make it about yourself then so be it.

I am the OP. I took nothing out of context.

So I have answered your question then.

deano2099

I do wonder if we get a cold winter and supply issues do end up leading to some blackouts, whether the political will will remain to keep this going, at least at the current rates.

ariarnia

deano2099 said:

I do wonder if we get a cold winter and supply issues do end up leading to some blackouts, whether the political will will remain to keep this going, at least at the current rates.

this is a conversation we have had recently with the mil. she is convinced we're going to go back to the three day week and she could just wake up one morning with no electric. i can't see that's even a remote possibility. i think there's maybe a 10% chance (numbers picked from the air. low but not inconcevable) that there will be energy shortages and blackouts. but i think they will be planned in advance and i dont think they'll extend to domestic customers. businesses use the vast majority of electricity in the uk and worst case scenario they can be compensated by the government for any losses. i think the government would have really had to have lost it for us to see unplanned outages (where entire parts of the system just fail) unless it's related to a huge storm or flooding or for rolling blackouts to extend to normal people.