Profit Motive.

[observer]

So Gordon's going to provide home insulation at half-price; why not "free"; cos even at half the price, methinks there won't be many takers. And what's to stop these robber Baron Energy Companies from just adding the cost of home insulation onto the price of their gas? Notice one of the Energy Companies is a Nationalised French Enterprise, the French have a cap on their prices, but it doesn't stop them charging us Brits inflated prices - the Frogs must be laughing their heads off at our expense. U.K. the global joke!

[Paul Kennedy]

And it was "interesting" to note that a senior manger of the power firm EoN, made the comment that the worst thing that could happen with rising fuel prices is that his company could make more profit

 

His comment has been described as a "Ratner" moment. His employers say he faces disciplinary action....I assume for letting the cat out of the bag and telling the truth.

 

From a business profit point of view the thing to look at is if their profit margin is rising, an indication that they are profiteering from rising prices.

 

Many non utility type companies i.e. those that have to compete and are not in monopolistic type positions, are having to cut margins to get business.

[observer]

Well Gordon supposed to be looking for "a vision" to re-vitalise NuLabs flagging popularity, and is being bitten by the blooming of Maggie's legacy, which his Party has done nothing to correct. Perhaps a re-nationalisation programme (without compensation), funded by taxation of the excess profits of these robber barons and the super-rich; with a new scale of charge rates for energy use, which charges the big users more and the little users less; a programme of "free" insulations for all properties in the UK; would be a start?! Notice even the home of capitalism - the USA; has nationalised two mortgage companies, so the tax-payer can bail out the private sector!

[Legion]

I posted yesterday on the beeb that rather than half price, why not a one time investment of free loft,wall, double glazing and energy efficient central heating if not solar panels accross the country to all residential households whose fall below standards.

 

this would be beneficial to individuals and the country and the environment and ultimately the world.

 

ok its going to cost a lot, ok we never get anything for free realy but the long term results far outway this short term cost and a bold move like this could actualy give GB a legacy of the greatest prime minister ever for the environment and social welfare...and god know he needs help.

[observer]

Plus it could re-vitalise a flagging building industry!

[Paul Kennedy]

with a new scale of charge rates for energy use, which charges the big users more and the little users less;

 

Not a bad idea, certainly worth looking at to see if it would work well in practice.

[asperity]

So Jonah Brown wants to give us some of our money back and wants the energy companies to help insulate our homes at no cost to us (yeah right!). And this is to help protect us from the cold caused by global warming. Confused? Yes he certainly is.

[observer]

Nothing to do with Global Warming as far as I'm concerned Asp: Insullation = less consumption = less waste = less expense to the plebs.

[Peter T]

I thought that are winters were mild these days? So this is just another Gov. placebo conning the populace to have something they don't really need.

[asperity]

Nothing to do with Global Warming as far as I'm concerned Asp: Insullation = less consumption = less waste = less expense to the plebs.

 

The "plebs" will do what they always do when you give them something for nothing - waste it. And as usual the tax payer pays the bill

[observer]

Errm, and here's me thinking the Plebs are the tax-payers - who in an ideal world should pay less than the Patricians = "from each according to there means, to each according to their needs"

[asperity]

Errm, and here's me thinking the Plebs are the tax-payers - who in an ideal world should pay less than the Patricians = "from each according to there means, to each according to their needs"

 

I didn't say the Plebs, I said the"plebs" i.e. those that don't contribute towards their own needs never mind anyone else's

[observer]

Think you'll find that those who don't pay tax are a small minority; NB: remember Gordon increased low earner's contributions recently from 10p to 20p in the Pound! Tax avoidance, is probably more prevelent at the top end of the scale; estimates suggest that most of the super-rich pay less than 10p in the Pound.

[asperity]

I'm not talking low earner, I'm talking no earner. Even 10p in the pound is 10p more than some people pay.

[observer]

Yes, and I'm suggesting that they may be less in number than you seem to believe.

[Peter T]

Yes, and I'm suggesting that they may be less in number than you seem to believe.

 

Yet the numbers of deprived areas have not altered.

[observer]

Perhaps their all unemployed and have nothing to do except procreate; thus increasing their numbers?!

[asperity]

And the solution, in your opinion, is? More taxpayers money thrown at the won't work?

[observer]

There are many solutions, but it's whether they would be acceptable in an enlightened and civilized society, and whether they would work and save money - you could for example stop paying them anything and allow them to starve or steal, thus adding to the cost of keeping them in free board and lodgings in prison!