barleycorn Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 So if you go on a night out with a rich guy does he pay more for his pint than you do? If he has a £5000 gift I work out that it will buy him far more John Smith's Smooth than your £200 or the poor guys 20p. I think its very good of Ed to think of his rich chums like that. When you are saving up for a Bugatti Veyron saving £5,000 on heating your swimming pool is very handy indeed, particularly when the windfall is tax free. . And? What's your point? Try reading again for comprehension. jb ETA: In fact, it would be better if your hypothetical rich guy did spend his 5k on John Smiths, or even Champagne, as they would end up paying more tax than if it had bee spent on electricity or gas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptowngirl Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Not to say the HateMail is sensationalising the story but their head example is this: What a pity that the government didn't force the power companies to heat up the outdoors too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonkatoy Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 And? What's your point? Try reading again for comprehension. jb ETA: In fact, it would be better if your hypothetical rich guy did spend his 5k on John Smiths, or even Champagne as they would end up paying more tax than if it had bee spent on electricity or gas. As long as he spent it in this country. I read very well thanks. The point is that it's even worse than Dead Head Red Ed just giving a £5,000 bonus to the super rich if that money means so little to them, that as you say, it becomes trivial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Ed Milibrain seems to have changed his tune from 4 years ago when he admitted that "low carbon energy would be more expensive for customers". What has changed between then and now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Ed Milibrain seems to have changed his tune from 4 years ago when he admitted that "low carbon energy would be more expensive for customers". What has changed between then and now? Informed reading, advice, testimony, evidence? Could be lots of things. Ever changed your views on issues HH? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Informed reading, advice, testimony, evidence? Could be lots of things. Ever changed your views on issues HH? Didn't Miliband do any of that when he was Energy secretary? Ever changed your views on issues HH? Of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptowngirl Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Ed Milibrain seems to have changed his tune from 4 years ago when he admitted that "low carbon energy would be more expensive for customers". What has changed between then and now? Trying to win an election. The power companies can lower costs by producing more electricity in coal fired power stations and not putting money into green energy. I suspect that making power companies peg prices will lead to lower investment in renewables and more imports of lignite and slurry coal. Is the population that bothered about global warming, acid rain and pollution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.