- 21 Oct 2019 22:08
#15043959
I think it would certainly shake up the energy market. Certainly there would need protections to prevent energy companies dumping those who don't offer a profit and probably lead to the need for a nationalised energy company to pick up those people that energy companies refuse to accept after inception.
I'm ok with that, a government run energy company would have access to huge levels of investment funding and could stipulate every household joining has solar and other energy generation/saving measures installed where possible to cover the cost of offering an energy allowance. All supported by the tax revenue of those the energy companies are profiting from.
I'm a firm believer in universal basic services where capitalism only kicks in once everyone's basic needs have been met. Means testing has two failure points, first it creates an atmosphere of scrounging/ laziness (why do I have to pay for others) whilst a universal allowance does not carry that tag and still benefits the poor and incentivises the wealthy. Secondly there is an administrative overhead to means testing that increases the burden on those not recieving the benefit.
late wrote:Maybe,
Administrative nightmare..
I think it would certainly shake up the energy market. Certainly there would need protections to prevent energy companies dumping those who don't offer a profit and probably lead to the need for a nationalised energy company to pick up those people that energy companies refuse to accept after inception.
I'm ok with that, a government run energy company would have access to huge levels of investment funding and could stipulate every household joining has solar and other energy generation/saving measures installed where possible to cover the cost of offering an energy allowance. All supported by the tax revenue of those the energy companies are profiting from.
I'm a firm believer in universal basic services where capitalism only kicks in once everyone's basic needs have been met. Means testing has two failure points, first it creates an atmosphere of scrounging/ laziness (why do I have to pay for others) whilst a universal allowance does not carry that tag and still benefits the poor and incentivises the wealthy. Secondly there is an administrative overhead to means testing that increases the burden on those not recieving the benefit.
Last edited by BeesKnee5 on 21 Oct 2019 22:08, edited 3 times in total.