Thread: The energy crisis
View Single Post
Old 11-08-2022, 23:10   #907
jfman
Architect of Ideas
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,468
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
Re: The energy crisis
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul View Post
There seems to be two choices, spend billions giving us handouts, or spend billions on buying the suppliers, and then more billions reducing the price we pay.
This assumes the actual gas/electricity will still cost the same for the suppliers to buy, regardless of who owns them. The second option sounds more expensive.
Buy the suppliers and develop the means of production in the national interest. Prices stay high if you buy intermediate actors and simply play the market game at an international level.

We need to do the things the private sector won’t do - actually satisfy demand removing the price premiums. Wind farms, nuclear reactors, you name it.

The problem for the Tories is if the public see this as the way forward for energy what next? Water? Exorbitant costs to have hundreds of thousands of tons of human waste released into rivers and the sea? Telecommunications? Railways?

None of these sectors are genuinely competitive marketplaces as understood in economic theory. Nobody can enter these markets easily without significant investment. Meaning incumbents can continue to price gouge end users.
Last edited by jfman; 12-08-2022 at 01:00.
jfman is online now   Reply With Quote