Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
* * - - - 1 votes

Ed Miliband


  • Please log in to reply
837 replies to this topic

#461 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,716 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 04:19 PM

what price would energy be today if government owned.

 

Good question.


John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#462 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,976 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 04:47 PM

The prize freeze is to be time-limited thing.

 

Looks like Miliband is also freezing something else, or at least getting it stuck...

 

http://www.youtube.c...BA8&app=desktop

 

:D


Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#463 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,958 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 06:07 PM

 

People only complain about the markets when they are the loser in the transaction, which of course in the energy markets we as buyers are all losers. But I don't hear people complaining about the markets when they are selling something for higher than its worth such as a house during a housing boom or tickets to a sold out gig because "that's the market price for it".

 

 

Au contraire mon ami, the idea of "The invisible hand" of the market eventually curing all social and economic ills is a myth, but as many of us know,these myths can grow and oppress us, jesus, mohammed, the market, all oppressive myths.


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#464 fieldofclothofgold

fieldofclothofgold
  • Coach
  • 5,741 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 09:08 PM

The idea of public works depts and direct in house labour was to counteract all the Joe Bloggs's and John Doe's down the road getting together and name their own price
but you and I weve been through that and this is not our fate.
So let us so let us not talk falsely now.
The hour is getting late
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

#465 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 02:44 PM


Then the taxpayer would have to fund all the capital investment etc etc

 

The taxpayer funds the capital investment anyway.   The reason why the UK has such a low gas reserve (15 days, compared to 99 days in Germany and 122 days in France), is because Centrica wouldn't build the capacity unless the government paid for it.

 

 

It's worth remembering that if a trade union threatened to "switch out the lights" in the way that Centrica are threatening, then Cameron would be holding press conferences on the steps of Downing Street and talking about the enemy within.


That's me.  I'm done.


#466 fieldofclothofgold

fieldofclothofgold
  • Coach
  • 5,741 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 03:21 PM

Come in Frank Owen give us The great oration and the great money trick
but you and I weve been through that and this is not our fate.
So let us so let us not talk falsely now.
The hour is getting late
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

#467 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,400 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 04:35 PM

The taxpayer funds the capital investment anyway.   The reason why the UK has such a low gas reserve (15 days, compared to 99 days in Germany and 122 days in France), is because Centrica wouldn't build the capacity unless the government paid for it.

 

 

It's worth remembering that if a trade union threatened to "switch out the lights" in the way that Centrica are threatening, then Cameron would be holding press conferences on the steps of Downing Street and talking about the enemy within.

 

Can we see the source and exact wording of the Centrica comment? A BBC News report doesn't count.



#468 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,931 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 05:50 PM

Come in Frank Owen give us The great oration and the great money trick


:)

I'm just reading that at the moment. There are plenty of things in it that remind you of things happening in the present day. Unfortunately. :(
"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#469 archibald

archibald
  • Coach
  • 646 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 06:03 PM

The taxpayer funds the capital investment anyway.   The reason why the UK has such a low gas reserve (15 days, compared to 99 days in Germany and 122 days in France), is because Centrica wouldn't build the capacity unless the government paid for it.

 

 

It's worth remembering that if a trade union threatened to "switch out the lights" in the way that Centrica are threatening, then Cameron would be holding press conferences on the steps of Downing Street and talking about the enemy within.

So the government built the storage facility?

 

Miliband would probably say the same thing from the steps of which ever "ordinary" house he lives in, while trousering a big check from the "ordinary" people.



#470 archibald

archibald
  • Coach
  • 646 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 06:06 PM

:)

I'm just reading that at the moment. There are plenty of things in it that remind you of things happening in the present day. Unfortunately. :(

Like what? As far as I can see, life now is infinitely more preferable to what it was 100 years ago, life expectancy being a tad better for one. Then there's the whole who can and can't vote nonsense.


Edited by archibald, 26 September 2013 - 06:09 PM.


#471 archibald

archibald
  • Coach
  • 646 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 06:14 PM

That's a fairly shallow comparison.

 

Unless you live in a cave, you need to buy energy. You have no choice in the matter if you want to heat and light your home or business amongst other things. When the energy companies act as a cartel - and they do - they can effectively charge the consumer what the hell they like, regardless of the wholesale price of the energy they are selling, in order to rack up enormous profits at the expense of those who can least afford it. That is not a 'market' by any stretch of the imagination, it is a racket. It's about time it was dismantled.

You want it dismantled? To what?

Unfortunately, if you have a pension you really need this cartel to make as much money as possible.



#472 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,712 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 06:43 PM

I suspect that Milliband has massively shot himself in the foot with this energy policy. Even if it is sound (which I don't think it is), it has been widely panned and the fear of blackouts will be a real blow for their image.

Therefore they are left with the choice of either persisting with the policy and the fear of blackouts putting voters off or back tracking and it looking like they are stupid and prone to making bad choices.

The Tories were the ones that have really benefited from this.

#473 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,958 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 07:46 PM

He won't, but Milliband should go on the offensive on this one, if it were me I'd denounce the energy companies as the enemy within, tell them that the first facility to be taken off-line at peak time would be taken over by the army and taken into public ownership and tell the energy cartel they were being re-nationalised with no compensation.

 

But he won't, 'cos he wants to uphold the capitalist system.


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#474 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,690 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 08:19 PM

He won't, but Milliband should go on the offensive on this one, if it were me I'd denounce the energy companies as the enemy within, tell them that the first facility to be taken off-line at peak time would be taken over by the army and taken into public ownership and tell the energy cartel they were being re-nationalised with no compensation.

But he won't, 'cos he wants to uphold the capitalist system.


Better still, just treat power supply like the railways. If a power company wants to supply the national grid then they have to meet an obligation. If they fail for say a maintainence issue then they are liable to a prohibitive fine. No need to be as drastic as you say.

And if nobody wants to sign up we get a situation like the east coast line were it is run by the government and actually turns a small profit back into the public purse. But the profit is not large enough for the private sector to want to run it.

#475 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,690 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 08:31 PM

I suspect that Milliband has massively shot himself in the foot with this energy policy. Even if it is sound (which I don't think it is), it has been widely panned and the fear of blackouts will be a real blow for their image.

Therefore they are left with the choice of either persisting with the policy and the fear of blackouts putting voters off or back tracking and it looking like they are stupid and prone to making bad choices.

The Tories were the ones that have really benefited from this.


Actually what Steve May said is relevant why is it if the unions wee threatening this then there is uproar - Marxists attacking democracy etc, but when a large corporation threatens thus it is somehow different.

Please explain this point to me because in my view it is just either section looking after their own interests.

#476 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,313 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 08:35 PM

The squeals from the right-leaning press about this tell me that whatever the fine detail this is one policy Millipede is right to promote.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#477 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,712 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:26 PM

Actually what Steve May said is relevant why is it if the unions wee threatening this then there is uproar - Marxists attacking democracy etc, but when a large corporation threatens thus it is somehow different.

Please explain this point to me because in my view it is just either section looking after their own interests.


If it leads to blackouts then the public won't care if it's self-interest or not. The Unions can do a bit of striking but it's hardly the same.

Even if you are looking at it from a financial point of view, the companies will just adjust to make their money by either raising it more before the policy comes in or after it does. It is a flawed concept.

#478 fieldofclothofgold

fieldofclothofgold
  • Coach
  • 5,741 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:21 PM

:)

I'm just reading that at the moment. There are plenty of things in it that remind you of things happening in the present day. Unfortunately. :(

Yes we have one or two BoB Crass's on here too
but you and I weve been through that and this is not our fate.
So let us so let us not talk falsely now.
The hour is getting late
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

#479 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 12:21 AM

He won't, but Milliband should go on the offensive on this one, if it were me I'd denounce the energy companies as the enemy within, tell them that the first facility to be taken off-line at peak time would be taken over by the army and taken into public ownership and tell the energy cartel they were being re-nationalised with no compensation.

 

But he won't, 'cos he wants to uphold the capitalist system.

 

Energy companies taken over by the army? We are talking about a potential Labour government here, not a military junta! Do you really think the army would take such an order from a Labour government?

My first reaction to the announcement of a price freeze was how is it going to be carried out, but no one seems to be very clear. It is, as far as I can make out, to be a freeze on the retail price of energy, ie the price charged to the consumer. The wholesale price, that is the price charged by the generators to the retail suppliers, won't be frozen, so the electricity will continue to be generated and the gas will continue to be sourced according to the agreed contract price. In the absence of any clear information, I'm assuming that the retail suppliers will be expected to take the hit - buying at the agreed price, selling at the frozen price, even if the transaction results in a loss. So any, theoretical, military action would not be at the generating facilities but at the boardrooms of the retail suppliers and their banking partners: guns at the ready to make sure the retailers continue to operate regarless of losses!

Another problem that occurs to me is that energy isn't just purchased by the retail supplier from the generator as and when they need it, but contracts for wholesale energy can be agreed months and even years in advance (based upon forecasts). It is likely that contracts for some of the energy needed during the price freeze period are being negotiated at this present time. What the proposal for a price freeze has done is throw a large amount of uncertainty into those negotiations. Retail suppliers will be piling into the wholesale market now to try and secure supplies to meet the expected demand which will, surely, lead to upward pressure on prices.

As for nationalisation without compensation, I just don't think that would be a remote possibility for an economy and society like Britain.


"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#480 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 12:27 AM

Better still, just treat power supply like the railways. If a power company wants to supply the national grid then they have to meet an obligation. If they fail for say a maintainence issue then they are liable to a prohibitive fine. No need to be as drastic as you say.

And if nobody wants to sign up we get a situation like the east coast line were it is run by the government and actually turns a small profit back into the public purse. But the profit is not large enough for the private sector to want to run it.

 

Right, so an energy company - SSE, say - decide that they can no longer supply gas and electricity at a loss, and the other companies don't want any more loss-making business, then the government steps in. How do they take a situation where they have to buy energy at one (wholesale) price, sell it on to the customer at a lower price - and make a small profit for the public purse?


"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users