Keir Starmer

[Captain Howdy]

11 hours ago, Section_31 said:

Andrew Pearce is such a boring cunt. I can't stand all this punch and judy banter news shows seem to depend on now, loads of double acts doing the rounds. 

Pearce is actually a very nasty piece of work 

[Section_31]

13 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

Pearce is actually a very nasty piece of work 

He's Kenneth Williams if the Germans won the war.

[Captain Howdy]

1 minute ago, Section_31 said:

He's Kenneth Williams if the Germans won the war.

I’ll have that 

[Gnasher]

Privatisation is a rip off.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Can’t believe so many people support *checks notes* paying shareholders 26bn instead of taking the entire industry back for free and magically saving everybody’s bill rises.

[Jose Jones]

1 hour ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Can’t believe so many people support *checks notes* paying shareholders 26bn instead of taking the entire industry back for free and magically saving everybody’s bill rises.

I reckon if you did a poll on "Should the government nationalise all energy industry for free and save everybody's bill rises?"  you would get more than 75% support.

[Rico1304]

8 hours ago, Captain Howdy said:

I know nothing of the industry other than the fucking horrific and believe me I do mean fucking horrific (possibly criminal) “service” I’ve had from BG in the past 12 months or so which has led me to believe that Nationalising is the only way out of this mess. Whatever the answer is it most definitely isn’t being left at the mercy of these fucking grifters.

Where do you live? One option is to turn up at an office and demand to speak to someone.  That usually gets attention as having a pissed off customer in reception where someone important might bump

into them tends to focus the mind. 

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, Jose Jones said:

I reckon if you did a poll on "Should the government nationalise all energy industry for free and save everybody's bill rises?"  you would get more than 75% support.

You’d also have to have a question following it up asking if they’d like starving to death whilst freezing to death.  

[Anubis]

2 hours ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Can’t believe so many people support *checks notes* paying shareholders 26bn instead of taking the entire industry back for free and magically saving everybody’s bill rises.

Of course people will support them not having to pay more money when they’re facing a cost of living crisis, because the question is so limited.

 

Now, set out the long term benefits and cost of renationalisation as opposed to the above, and ask them which they’d prefer if possible.

[Jose Jones]

2 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Of course people will support them not having to pay more money when they’re facing a cost of living crisis, because the question is so limited.

 

Now, set out the long term benefits and cost of renationalisation as opposed to the above, and ask them which they’d prefer if possible.

"Renationalisation" is such a broad concept as well, so it can be used willy nilly by people miles to the socialist left and hard right marketeers for whatever they want it to mean and to support or ridicule accordingly.

It's a bit silly.

A specific plan on what you are going to nationalise, how and the benefits is really what people should be debating.

[Vincent Vega]

Privatisation would be a piece of piss, the government should just adopt this approach to the energy companies.

 

[Gnasher]

 

 

 

[Gnasher]

On the cost of privatisation it's perhaps telling that Starmer does not challenge the figures quoted from the TUC by the BBC interviewer. 

 

 

 

 

[skend04]

17 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

 

 

Oooh more wanking material for Stats and Gnash. Seem to miss the fact that Truss and Sunak have had free part political broadcasts for the last month.

[Numero Veinticinco]

27 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

 

 

Get the fuck in! 

[Gnasher]

Shoot the messenger time again. The Labour leader is a dud.

[Numero Veinticinco]

24 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

On the cost of privatisation it's perhaps telling that Starmer does not challenge the figures quoted from the TUC by the BBC interviewer. 

 

 

 

 

Mad how gas and electricity become free if he pays 2.5bn. He should do this, I have to admit. You know, but only if the figures aren’t completely made up and if gas and electricity really costs nothing. 
 

Such smart people screaming on Twitter and such idiots in high positions. Mad really. 
 

I’d love to be able to give these Twitter screechers a country to run for a year. Seeing the death toll wouldn’t be pretty but everything else would be a chuckle. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

Shoot the messenger time again. He's a dud.

Every time you say that, it makes me laugh. You clearly don’t understand what it means. 

[Gnasher]

The person putting her name forward to run the country's finances believes losing members is good news. 

 

 

 

 

[Jose Jones]

9 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Mad how gas and electricity become free if he pays 2.5bn. He should do this, I have to admit. You know, but only if the figures aren’t completely made up and if gas and electricity really costs nothing. 
 

Such smart people screaming on Twitter and such idiots in high positions. Mad really. 
 

I’d love to be able to give these Twitter screechers a country to run for a year. Seeing the death toll wouldn’t be pretty but everything else would be a chuckle. 

 

No-one is saying gas or electricity would be free. If you’re going to engage on the topic might as well do it honestly.

Gordon Brown thinks energy should be nationalised, presumably you don’t think he is a left wing screecher?

[Jose Jones]

Actually probably some people on Twitter are saying energy should be free. My mistake there.

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

Shoot the messenger time again. He's a dud.

Every time you say that, it makes me laugh. You clearly don’t understand what it means. 

[House of Dirk]

39 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Mad how gas and electricity become free if he pays 2.5bn. He should do this, I have to admit. You know, but only if the figures aren’t completely made up and if gas and electricity really costs nothing. 
 

Such smart people screaming on Twitter and such idiots in high positions. Mad really. 
 

I’d love to be able to give these Twitter screechers a country to run for a year. Seeing the death toll wouldn’t be pretty but everything else would be a chuckle. 

We have had screechers in charge for the last twelve years. I wish I could take joy from the complete capitulation of the UK, but I will wait until I am dead for that.

[Numero Veinticinco]

7 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

 

No-one is saying gas or electricity would be free. If you’re going to engage on the topic might as well do it honestly.

Gordon Brown thinks energy should be nationalised, presumably you don’t think he is a left wing screecher?

As somewhat of a Brownite, no I don't think he is a screecher. I also think energy should be nationalised. That's not the point I'm making, and have made honestly and engaged about honestly before only to be greeted with dozens of twitter links screeching on about 'nationalise at 2.5bn or Starmer's plan'. Those two things are not the same thing. One is the (fantasy, BTW) cost of renationalising. The other is the cost of capping bills. Now, you can renationalise - for free or for 200bn - it doesn't do anything towards lowering or capping prices, that would still need to be dealt with afterwards. Effectively the cost of privatisation is the cost of removing private profits from the equation. So you'd be paying many 10s of billions (which would be profit to shareholders) to buy the profit making ability from the shareholders. That's probably well worth it in the long term, but that's entirely different to this current issue. All Starmer's plan does is actually help people get through the winter and it does so by increasing taxes on the gas and oil companies via the windfall tax, and it does it for 8 months - which is how far the forecasts go. How do people think it works, you just nationalise an industry and *poof* energy appears? Because if you say '2.5bn vs 26bn' then that's what you must think, because it's really 2.5bn (or, actually, the real number... many 10s of bns) + plus cost of covering the shortfall in procuring and providing energy vs Starmer's plan'. Again, these two things they're comparing are not the same thing. Price will be going up an extortionate amount. A crazy amount. Starmer's plan deals with that. Renationalising doesn't deal with that, not in and of itself. 

[Gnasher]

£57 billion given to shareholders since water privatisation in 1991.