Jump to content

Utility bills


Recommended Posts

It’s not often I see a news story that boils my piss but here we go.

Ofgen suggesting that you pay slightly more in your utility bill to subsidise those that are struggling to pay.

People struggling to pay is bad news and these are tough times for many but why ask others to pay?

Instead why don’t the Utilities themselves, instead of paying dividends, give these people a rebate and pay lower dividends?

Are times really that tough for cash strapped utilities?

If this was France they’d already be rioting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, Hunterian said:

It’s not often I see a news story that boils my piss but here we go.

Ofgen suggesting that you pay slightly more in your utility bill to subsidise those that are struggling to pay.

People struggling to pay is bad news and these are tough times for many but why ask others to pay?

Instead why don’t the Utilities themselves, instead of paying dividends, give these people a rebate and pay lower dividends?

Are times really that tough for cash strapped utilities?

If this was France they’d already be rioting!

Off with their gas!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hunterian said:

It’s not often I see a news story that boils my piss but here we go.

Ofgen suggesting that you pay slightly more in your utility bill to subsidise those that are struggling to pay.

People struggling to pay is bad news and these are tough times for many but why ask others to pay?

Instead why don’t the Utilities themselves, instead of paying dividends, give these people a rebate and pay lower dividends?

Are times really that tough for cash strapped utilities?

If this was France they’d already be rioting!

Ya dancer...   :clapping   I'm gonna stick ma heating on then full bung and Faraway can pay it 

Edited by portmahomack saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2023 at 9:57 AM, Hunterian said:

It’s not often I see a news story that boils my piss but here we go.

Ofgen suggesting that you pay slightly more in your utility bill to subsidise those that are struggling to pay.

People struggling to pay is bad news and these are tough times for many but why ask others to pay?

Instead why don’t the Utilities themselves, instead of paying dividends, give these people a rebate and pay lower dividends?

Are times really that tough for cash strapped utilities?

If this was France they’d already be rioting!

 

Don't a lot of pension funds invest in utility companies, given that they're relatively demand inelastic and guarantee a relatively stable yield? Paying lower dividends would potentially affect folks' pension increases. I know it's nice to think folk with private pensions are affluent, but that's not the case, necessarily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, W6er said:

 

Don't a lot of pension funds invest in utility companies, given that they're relatively demand inelastic and guarantee a relatively stable yield? Paying lower dividends would potentially affect folks' pension increases. I know it's nice to think folk with private pensions are affluent, but that's not the case, necessarily.

Interesting. EDF is one of the biggest suppliers and owned by the French Government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, W6er said:

So presumably it will not have shareholders then and will not pay dividends.

No…. The French government simply uses the profit taken from its foreign investments to subsidise the costs for its citizens.  As any civilised government of the people, by the people should do.

This is just a further reminder (if it was needed) that Thatcher was an evil bastard.  She hated Nationally owned and utilised natural resources when someone could exploit them for profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, antrin said:

No…. The French government simply uses the profit taken from its foreign investments to subsidise the costs for its citizens.  As any civilised government of the people, by the people should do.

This is just a further reminder (if it was needed) that Thatcher was an evil bastard.  She hated Nationally owned and utilised natural resources when someone could exploit them for profit.

There are so many utility and non utility companies that operate under a UK brand name but are foreign owned that most of the public have no idea (or likely care) about.


No doubt there is a good image representing such “deals”.

Is it the French that own majority of our whisky distilleries?

This group are trying to make change, but I fear that it’s too late in many ways.

https://weownit.org.uk/about-us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Albanian Buddy said:

There are so many utility and non utility companies that operate under a UK brand name but are foreign owned that most of the public have no idea (or likely care) about.


No doubt there is a good image representing such “deals”.

Is it the French that own majority of our whisky distilleries?

This group are trying to make change, but I fear that it’s too late in many ways.

https://weownit.org.uk/about-us

Dunno about a majority, but Glen Morange is Luis Vuitton and Moët Chandon, while Scapa proudly displays its Pernod heritage…

Diageo (a “British multinational” if that makes any sense) runs a lot of “scotch” production, from Brora to Fife etc..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, antrin said:

No…. The French government simply uses the profit taken from its foreign investments to subsidise the costs for its citizens.  As any civilised government of the people, by the people should do.

This is just a further reminder (if it was needed) that Thatcher was an evil bastard.  She hated Nationally owned and utilised natural resources when someone could exploit them for profit.

Was it not to also prevent strike action, due to the blackouts in the 1970s?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, W6er said:

Was it not to also prevent strike action, due to the blackouts in the 1970s?

No, it was all about Keith Joseph's and Thatcher's vision that if you make the rich richer then they would trickle their wealth down to the rest of us.

In the end, they trickled something else down on us.

She took on the unions directly, most of the black outs were caused by fuel shortages, oil in the early-mid 70s and coal in the late 70s, although some of those shortages were partly driven by labour disputes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, W6er said:

Was it not to also prevent strike action, due to the blackouts in the 1970s?

How could flogging off National Assets make any impact on people’s right to strike/work or not?  :o

You may not have noticed, but there are widespread industrial actions being taken STILL throughout the UK. Thatcher has impoverished UK in many ways but not made a jot of difference on the strike front.

(I’m assuming you approve of the constant running down of NHS in order to make it easier to flog off the most lucrative sectors to US companies?   Not for greed, of course, but to stop nurses, doctors, consultants, support staff from withdrawing their labour?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, beyond our ken said:

No, it was all about Keith Joseph's and Thatcher's vision that if you make the rich richer then they would trickle their wealth down to the rest of us.

In the end, they trickled something else down on us.

To be fair, they now just shovel it straight into our rivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, antrin said:

How could flogging off National Assets make any impact on people’s right to strike/work or not?  :o

You may not have noticed, but there are widespread industrial actions being taken STILL throughout the UK. Thatcher has impoverished UK in many ways but not made a jot of difference on the strike front.

(I’m assuming you approve of the constant running down of NHS in order to I make it easier to flog off the most lucrative sectors to US companies?   Not for greed, of course, but to stop nurses, doctors, consultants, support staff from withdrawing their labour?)

Really? The NHS has a productivity problem, more doctors and more nurses than in 2019. It’s a money pit that consumes money at an alarming rate but has worst productivity figures than most comparative European health systems. 
I am mindful that this is not the politics section and this thread should probably be moved.

04F2794C-9988-47D3-A2BC-BD7711F10363.jpeg

DD4A3F83-A455-48A0-BBC9-451F70B4EDD8.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, antrin said:

How could flogging off National Assets make any impact on people’s right to strike/work or not?  :o

You may not have noticed, but there are widespread industrial actions being taken STILL throughout the UK. Thatcher has impoverished UK in many ways but not made a jot of difference on the strike front.

(I’m assuming you approve of the constant running down of NHS in order to make it easier to flog off the most lucrative sectors to US companies?   Not for greed, of course, but to stop nurses, doctors, consultants, support staff from withdrawing their labour?)

Why would you assume anything? That's rather presumptuous.

I thought it was common knowledge that public sector workers are more likely to strike than private sector workers:

https://www.civilserviceworld.com/news/article/publicly-funded-industries-account-for-96-of-strike-days-says-report

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...