General Election 4th July

Murdochcat said:
So how are Labour going to afford their "pledges"?
Click to expand...
She's referring to income tax and ni. Clearly they do plan to increase the tax take but not in that area. Same with corporation tax. The rest - also summed up by the IMF in much the same way.

However, the IFS has said that the state of public finances hangs over the election campaign "like a dark cloud" and the winning party may have to reduce spending or lift taxes - something that Ms Reeves ruled out on Tuesday.

How did we get to this. Circumstance and Tory reactions. Even austerity has complaints - too fast and too severe.

Guess who was in power when the UK had it's longest ever period of growth. LOL Can they do it again? Only one way to find out and changes can not be instant - just as they have said.

What is happening currently - rut stuck factions incapable of changing their views. LOL Sure some will be labour supporters.
 
aveatry said:
Labour also said it will fund its spending plans through a "proper windfall tax" on profits made by oil and gas companies, which will rise from 75% to 78%.
But isn't this our money in the first place - paying our bills. The Gov stands by letting them have massive profits with our money and then hits them with a windfall tax taking our money/tax by the back door.
Some on here decry "populist" parties but what is this if not a populist policy.
Click to expand...
Aveatry the climate change denier moans that fossil fuel companies that fund climate change denier propaganda, get too much profit

weird
 
nwgs said:
God help Notchy when he doesn’t
Click to expand...
Ive said numerous times Labour will struggle to win, they have to convert 125 seats a greater swing than 1997


note:
NWGS previously said: "I left Labour when Corbyn took over".
Corbyn has left now so NWGS will be voting Labour again
 
Notch7 said:
Aveatry the climate change denier moans that fossil fuel companies that fund climate change denier propaganda, get too much profit
weird
Click to expand...
I am not allowed to respond otherwise you and denso will cry to the mods and all of my posts will be removed and I will be banned from the thread - just like the climate change one. I wonder how much fossil fuel it takes to run your £1M home.
 
aveatry said:
Labour also said it will fund its spending plans through a "proper windfall tax" on profits made by oil and gas companies, which will rise from 75% to 78%.
But isn't this our money in the first place - paying our bills. The Gov stands by letting them have massive profits with our money and then hits them with a windfall tax taking our money/tax by the back door.
Some on here decry "populist" parties but what is this if not a populist policy.
Click to expand...
It doesnt work like that

the oil and gas producers sell to UK energy suppliers based on market rates, so when prices go up due to Putin then the wholesale price goes up, even though the actual cost of production stays the same (hence why Shell and BP make so much money)

the UK government cant do anything, it doesnt own energy producers



unlike France where most of its energy is nuclear and owned by EDF which is now a fully owned state business

if labur win and start British Energy, it can start to avoid market fluctuation
 
Great British Energy will have three initial priorities working alongside private partners:

  1. Co-investing in new technologies: Great British Energy will help speed up and scale the deployment of new technologies, with public investment helping to crowd in investment in areas like floating offshore wind, tidal power and hydrogen as they develop into mature technologies.
  2. Scale and accelerate mature technologies: Great British Energy will also help scale and accelerate the roll-out of mature technologies, like wind, solar and nuclear. It will partner with existing private sector firms to speed up deployment of mature renewable technologies to meet our ambitious clean power timelines. It will also build organisational capability and expertise to deliver energy megaprojects like nuclear power stations, reducing project and construction risk.
  1. Scale up municipal and community energy: GB Energy will partner with energy companies, local authorities and cooperatives to develop 8GWs small-scale and medium-scale community energy projects. Profits will flow directly back into local communities to cut bills, not to the shareholders of foreign companies. This will help to create a more decentralised energy system, with more local generation and ownership, and will help to create a more resilient energy system.

GreatBritish-Energy.org

Putting the Fat Cats on a crash diet would be a good start. :mrgreen:
 
Few people invest in a business expecting to make a return as tiny as 2% on their investment. Businesses commonly borrow if they think they can make a return greater than the cost of capital.

The government can borrow at rates as low as 2%

Let's suppose you lived in a country where the rivers and seas were full of excrement, schools were crumbing as their concrete roofs collapsed, and the energy generation and transmission infrastructure was inadequate.

Could you think of anything to invest in for the good of the nation?

(P.S. handing out money to shareholders in sewage companies is not a benefit to the nation)
 
JohnD said:
Few people invest in a business expecting to make a return as tiny as 2% on their investment. Businesses commonly borrow if they think they can make a return greater than the cost of capital.

The government can borrow at rates as low as 2%

Let's suppose you lived in a country where the rivers and seas were full of excrement, schools were crumbing as their concrete roofs collapsed, and the energy generation and transmission infrastructure was inadequate.

Could you think of anything to invest in for the good of the nation?

(P.S. handing out money to shareholders in sewage companies is not a benefit to the nation)
Click to expand...

Would a set of inducements including tax rebates for companies who invest entice them into the scheme? I mean, 2% of two million quid is still a lot of money.
 
Andydevon said:
May be you can tell us how the Labour government will do differently
Click to expand...
It’s a fair question and the reality there is no information about GB energy, probably because it’s only a policy platform so far

My guess is that Scale is the possible reason why Labours option would be different. Plus Labour are going to get billions from a windfall tax on oil and gas companies to fund it.

Also GB energy is not going to be supplier but a producer




‘The answer is simple’, writes Alan Simpson, an expert on green energy, ‘Britain’s energy market has been rigged in favour of big, centralised (and dirty) energy’ (Morning Star, 16 August 2020). In 2018 and 2019 alone, 15 smaller private energy companies failed. Similarly to these companies, Robin Hood Energy had failed to grow its customer base fast enough in order to be competitive with the big providers such as British Gas

andreasbieler.blogspot.com

The failure of Robin Hood Energy and the missing labour-centred perspective

The attempt to address energy poverty through a municipal, not-for-profit public company was as ambitious as it was path-breaking. And yet t...
andreasbieler.blogspot.com andreasbieler.blogspot.com
 
JohnD said:
Businesses commonly borrow
Click to expand...
You only really need to have stated that section as it is what businesses do. it's one of the factors that make nuke expensive. Large cash injections needed and a long time before they show a return. In the end the returns needs to greater than the interest rates. The gov actually guarantee the loans as far a nuke in concerned which keeps the rates low. They may well do in all cases where a utility is privatised. That even went on when electricity was gasified. Mrs T's days. She just said any one interested will get help with a low rate loan.

Take any of the privatised utilities and people can go to companies house web site and see their year end accounts. LOL I just tried with Severn Trent. Actual accounts detail starts at ~ page 175. Given the way it is all presented I am not sure I have seen a straight forwards profit and loss section. Something nearer right at the end, 5year figures; That indicates a return of 3.5% for inverstors based on share price and dividend. An £11b company made up of loads of others. There is lots of details in these accounts but to be sure I am seeing what I want to see would take more time than I am prepared to give. Maybe I should trust the signed off section more.

Say pension funds hold these shares. Go back to when these generally invested in larger manufacturing companies. This resulted in dividends not being directly related to profits. They would fluctuate but not by as much as might be expected. More cash coud be achieved by rights issues. New share issues to existing holders at a discounted price. Looks like on water it's borrow more and increase prices.
 
Odds said:
Great British Energy will have three initial priorities working alongside private partners:
Click to expand...
It's essentially a different way for the gov to put money in. Pity it has had to be cut back by rather a lot. ;) We all know why. The tax take just wouldn't cover it. That may have been rather different when the plan was initially formulated. Being fair the cut back probably more than what might have been expected - that's politics from who ever.
 
The Tories’ latest attempt to avoid a kicking from Labour?

Claim their opponent hates the monarchy, by spending nearly £15,000 on eight attack ads in the past week focusing on the stance of Labour and its leader Keir Starmer toward the U.K. royal family, an analysis by Politico shows. Another set of Conservative ads spotlighted calls made at a small pro-republic fringe event at the 2022 Labour conference. They included a demand for a referendum on abolishing the monarchy — with the Tories now claiming the views are symbolic of “what Keir Starmer’s party stands for.”

The attack ads come amid signs Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is courting older voters, hoping to limit what are expected to be heavy Tory election losses. According to the think tank, people aged 55 and over make up a majority of voters in 331 constituencies across the country once age-related turnout rates are taken into account.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top