|
|
Post by wapentake on May 23, 2023 18:00:14 GMT
Dishonest debate,you know I refer to the energy company standing charges. I expected better from you but I’ll leave you to your inane ramblings. Misrepresentation is his idea of winning an argument he's losing. Indeed but not a great look is it? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on May 23, 2023 18:51:19 GMT
Misrepresentation is his idea of winning an argument he's losing. Indeed but not a great look is it? I just find it a waste of time. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on May 23, 2023 19:02:45 GMT
Dishonest debate,you know I refer to the energy company standing charges. I expected better from you but I’ll leave you to your inane ramblings. Misrepresentation is his idea of winning an argument he's losing. You've never won one against Pacif or anyone else for that matter. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on May 23, 2023 19:20:50 GMT
Misrepresentation is his idea of winning an argument he's losing. You've never won one against Pacif or anyone else for that matter. If it keeps you happy old chap. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 23, 2023 21:18:07 GMT
So what are the standing charges on water bills used for? Dishonest debate,you know I refer to the energy company standing charges. I expected better from you but I’ll leave you to your inane ramblings. If you do not want to answer a simple question then fair enough. One thing I would say is that you seem to have a beef with Standing Charges - if it bothers you so much then change to a tariff that has no Standing Charges. Then your life will be happier. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 23, 2023 21:18:52 GMT
Indeed but not a great look is it? I just find it a waste of time. True - every time you lose you quit. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on May 23, 2023 21:56:54 GMT
Dishonest debate,you know I refer to the energy company standing charges. I expected better from you but I’ll leave you to your inane ramblings. If you do not want to answer a simple question then fair enough. One thing I would say is that you seem to have a beef with Standing Charges - if it bothers you so much then change to a tariff that has no Standing Charges. Then your life will be happier. I put a simple question to you which is why should consumers have to pay excessive charges to cover a failed privatisation. I don’t have a beef with standing charges I do though with utilities being in private hands,I’d have a happier life and I expect many others too if govts hadn’t gone for short termism and done what they are supposed to do that is ensure the nations security which in this case includes our energy and water supplies so we wouldn’t be held hostage to fortune. We are ill served and have been for some time by a succession of administrations where the difference between the two parties was like spot the ball ,almost impossible to find. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 23, 2023 22:13:21 GMT
If you do not want to answer a simple question then fair enough. One thing I would say is that you seem to have a beef with Standing Charges - if it bothers you so much then change to a tariff that has no Standing Charges. Then your life will be happier. I put a simple question to you which is why should consumers have to pay excessive charges to cover a failed privatisation. I have already pointed out it delivered the investment it was designed to. Fair enough if you have ideological reasons for being against privatisation but dont try and pretend you are driven by economic objections. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on May 23, 2023 22:23:23 GMT
I put a simple question to you which is why should consumers have to pay excessive charges to cover a failed privatisation. I have already pointed out it delivered the investment it was designed to And I’ve already pointed out many times that the large increase in standing charges was used to bail out failed companies who ran off with consumers money. That cannot in any way shape or form be described as investment yet you blindly refuse to accept that is what happened and keep parroting investment. From an article on this very subject You either accept that or bury your head in the sand and see it as investment. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on May 24, 2023 6:01:30 GMT
I just find it a waste of time. True - every time you lose you quit. I'd say that was quite sensible, perhaps you should consider it, |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 24, 2023 7:08:39 GMT
I have already pointed out it delivered the investment it was designed to And I’ve already pointed out many times that the large increase in standing charges was used to bail out failed companies who ran off with consumers money. That cannot in any way shape or form be described as investment yet you blindly refuse to accept that is what happened and keep parroting investment. From an article on this very subject You either accept that or bury your head in the sand and see it as investment. Sorry - I cant see what you are complaining about. If you dont like Standing Charges then go with a tariff that does not have Standing Charges. The costs involved as "supplier of last resort” scheme will still be paid as it is funded by levy on all companies in the industry. In exactly the same way as the protection schemes in the Aviation industry, the moter insurance sector, Financial Services etc etc. - it is just a normal part of consumer protection Law. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on May 24, 2023 7:51:07 GMT
In fairness if Brexit has been a failure, then so has privatisation of water. Which it doesn't take much working out by the state of the sea and rivers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 24, 2023 7:53:54 GMT
In fairness if Brexit has been a failure, then so has privatisation of water. Which it doesn't take much working out by the state of the sea and rivers.So if the current state of the rivers and seas is an example of failure of privatisation, what was it when the business was nationalised and the state of the rivers and seas was even worse?. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on May 24, 2023 7:56:02 GMT
In fairness if Brexit has been a failure, then so has privatisation of water. Which it doesn't take much working out by the state of the sea and rivers.So if the current state of the river sand seas is an example of failure of privatisation, what was it when the business was nationalised and the state of the rivers and seas was even worse?. Which is no argument whatsoever, because for one there was a lot more polluting industry at the time and secondly doing the same thing in a roundabout way changed nothing. Which should at least should tell you something. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on May 24, 2023 9:22:52 GMT
And I’ve already pointed out many times that the large increase in standing charges was used to bail out failed companies who ran off with consumers money. That cannot in any way shape or form be described as investment yet you blindly refuse to accept that is what happened and keep parroting investment. From an article on this very subject You either accept that or bury your head in the sand and see it as investment. Sorry - I cant see what you are complaining about. If you dont like Standing Charges then go with a tariff that does not have Standing Charges. The costs involved as "supplier of last resort” scheme will still be paid as it is funded by levy on all companies in the industry. In exactly the same way as the protection schemes in the Aviation industry, the moter insurance sector, Financial Services etc etc. - it is just a normal part of consumer protection Law. Obviously you can’t,because you are wedded to the holy grail of privatisation and the infallibility of St Maggie. Were it in public hands there’d be no plethora of middlemen companies and false competition where they can run off with the cash and everyone else pays and the poorest wouldn’t be being fleeced and prepayment meters being illegally forced on people. |
|
