Discussion:
Electricity Prices
(too old to reply)
Rich80105
2024-08-08 20:37:11 UTC
Permalink
Pertinent comment here:

https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
Gordon
2024-08-08 23:28:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This will be one of many articles explaining why the other sides actions
have caused all this and they have not done anything to cause the present
situation.

Meanwhile the lights are likely to go out and the fix will set us up fot the
next disaster.
Tony
2024-08-08 23:39:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This will be one of many articles explaining why the other sides actions
have caused all this and they have not done anything to cause the present
situation.
Exactly. Labour and National have equal responsibility for this. Only fools and
horses believe differently.
Post by Gordon
Meanwhile the lights are likely to go out and the fix will set us up fot the
next disaster.
Rich80105
2024-08-09 01:40:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This will be one of many articles explaining why the other sides actions
have caused all this and they have not done anything to cause the present
situation.
Meanwhile the lights are likely to go out and the fix will set us up fot the
next disaster.
I agree, Gordon. This part in particular points out the issue, and
the lack of an easy answer:
"Their sole legal duty is to make a profit for their shareholders, by
gouging as much money as they can from their customers. If Jones
doesn't like that, and wants an electricity system that works for us,
rather than being a price-gouging cartel, he knows the answer:
re-nationalise it, and take back what National stole."

While it is easy to say "re-nationalise," in practice if you want to
retain any confidence that as a country we are trustworthy, that needs
be done by compensating the current shareholders at least the current
market value, and the value of a near monopoly is of course higher
than in a competitive market. The other way is to first require a
Telecom type split - probably of generation from distribution to make
the problem slightly smaller, but also to introduce a competitor -
which realistically would be the government itself. Unfortunately at
present our government has other priorities (tax reductions for
property owners, helping set up Charter Schools, and of course "More
Roads!") The next government will have priorities of rescuing a
public health system, rescuing education, restoring a rail connection
from the Nth to Sth Islands, finding money to pay international
obligations under Climate Change agreements, and fixing near bankrupt
local authorities and restoring clean reliable water supplies.
Tony
2024-08-09 04:19:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This will be one of many articles explaining why the other sides actions
have caused all this and they have not done anything to cause the present
situation.
Meanwhile the lights are likely to go out and the fix will set us up fot the
next disaster.
I agree, Gordon. This part in particular points out the issue, and
"Their sole legal duty is to make a profit for their shareholders, by
gouging as much money as they can from their customers.
That is not how commerce works. If it was many companies would fail.
Post by Rich80105
If Jones
doesn't like that, and wants an electricity system that works for us,
rather than being a price-gouging cartel
Which it is not!
Post by Rich80105
re-nationalise it, and take back what National stole."
Nobody stole anything.
Post by Rich80105
While it is easy to say "re-nationalise," in practice if you want to
retain any confidence that as a country we are trustworthy, that needs
be done by compensating the current shareholders at least the current
market value, and the value of a near monopoly is of course higher
than in a competitive market. The other way is to first require a
Telecom type split - probably of generation from distribution to make
the problem slightly smaller, but also to introduce a competitor -
which realistically would be the government itself. Unfortunately at
present our government has other priorities (tax reductions for
property owners, helping set up Charter Schools, and of course "More
Roads!") The next government will have priorities of rescuing a
public health system, rescuing education, restoring a rail connection
from the Nth to Sth Islands, finding money to pay international
obligations under Climate Change agreements, and fixing near bankrupt
local authorities and restoring clean reliable water supplies.
All of which are a direct result of the mismanagement of this country by the
last government more than anything that this government has done. Wow, you are
getting desperate.
Rich80105
2024-08-09 05:10:59 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 04:19:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This will be one of many articles explaining why the other sides actions
have caused all this and they have not done anything to cause the present
situation.
Meanwhile the lights are likely to go out and the fix will set us up fot the
next disaster.
I agree, Gordon. This part in particular points out the issue, and
"Their sole legal duty is to make a profit for their shareholders, by
gouging as much money as they can from their customers.
That is not how commerce works. If it was many companies would fail.
So which of the oligopoly companies is looking to fail, Tony?
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
If Jones
doesn't like that, and wants an electricity system that works for us,
rather than being a price-gouging cartel
Which it is not!
Argue with the author - I merely quoted the article. Cartel or
oligopoly - which description is more accurate, Tony?
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
re-nationalise it, and take back what National stole."
Nobody stole anything.
One National Government sold off Contact, a later National Government
sold half of the rest of the companies, creating through legislation a
group of shareholders who have made well above average returns year
after year, at the expense of the vast majority of the population, who
received no compensation for a considerably higher cost of electricity
- sounds like stealing, looks like stealing - certainly it was very
far from an open market fair trade . . . . Most of the population lost
to the private shareholders who were able to raise the money quite
quickly when the shares were offered - how is doing favours for
friends at the expense of the rest of the country any different from
theft? - Legal theft of course, but still value was certainly given to
some at the expense of the rest . . .
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
While it is easy to say "re-nationalise," in practice if you want to
retain any confidence that as a country we are trustworthy, that needs
be done by compensating the current shareholders at least the current
market value, and the value of a near monopoly is of course higher
than in a competitive market. The other way is to first require a
Telecom type split - probably of generation from distribution to make
the problem slightly smaller, but also to introduce a competitor -
which realistically would be the government itself. Unfortunately at
present our government has other priorities (tax reductions for
property owners, helping set up Charter Schools, and of course "More
Roads!") The next government will have priorities of rescuing a
public health system, rescuing education, restoring a rail connection
from the Nth to Sth Islands, finding money to pay international
obligations under Climate Change agreements, and fixing near bankrupt
local authorities and restoring clean reliable water supplies.
All of which are a direct result of the mismanagement of this country by the
last government more than anything that this government has done. Wow, you are
getting desperate.
Tony
2024-08-09 07:21:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 04:19:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This will be one of many articles explaining why the other sides actions
have caused all this and they have not done anything to cause the present
situation.
Meanwhile the lights are likely to go out and the fix will set us up fot the
next disaster.
I agree, Gordon. This part in particular points out the issue, and
"Their sole legal duty is to make a profit for their shareholders, by
gouging as much money as they can from their customers.
That is not how commerce works. If it was many companies would fail.
So which of the oligopoly companies is looking to fail, Tony?
Probably none because I don't know which ones you are referring to. But in any
event I was referring to businesses in general - but you knew that.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
If Jones
doesn't like that, and wants an electricity system that works for us,
rather than being a price-gouging cartel
Which it is not!
Argue with the author - I merely quoted the article. Cartel or
oligopoly - which description is more accurate, Tony?
It is neither, as I said.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
re-nationalise it, and take back what National stole."
Nobody stole anything.
One National Government sold off Contact, a later National Government
sold half of the rest of the companies, creating through legislation a
group of shareholders who have made well above average returns year
after year, at the expense of the vast majority of the population, who
received no compensation for a considerably higher cost of electricity
- sounds like stealing, looks like stealing - certainly it was very
far from an open market fair trade . . . . Most of the population lost
to the private shareholders who were able to raise the money quite
quickly when the shares were offered - how is doing favours for
friends at the expense of the rest of the country any different from
theft? - Legal theft of course, but still value was certainly given to
some at the expense of the rest . . .
That is not what happened - you are lying.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
While it is easy to say "re-nationalise," in practice if you want to
retain any confidence that as a country we are trustworthy, that needs
be done by compensating the current shareholders at least the current
market value, and the value of a near monopoly is of course higher
than in a competitive market. The other way is to first require a
Telecom type split - probably of generation from distribution to make
the problem slightly smaller, but also to introduce a competitor -
which realistically would be the government itself. Unfortunately at
present our government has other priorities (tax reductions for
property owners, helping set up Charter Schools, and of course "More
Roads!") The next government will have priorities of rescuing a
public health system, rescuing education, restoring a rail connection
from the Nth to Sth Islands, finding money to pay international
obligations under Climate Change agreements, and fixing near bankrupt
local authorities and restoring clean reliable water supplies.
All of which are a direct result of the mismanagement of this country by the
last government more than anything that this government has done. Wow, you are
getting desperate.
Crash
2024-08-09 08:09:11 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 07:21:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 04:19:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This will be one of many articles explaining why the other sides actions
have caused all this and they have not done anything to cause the present
situation.
Meanwhile the lights are likely to go out and the fix will set us up fot the
next disaster.
I agree, Gordon. This part in particular points out the issue, and
"Their sole legal duty is to make a profit for their shareholders, by
gouging as much money as they can from their customers.
That is not how commerce works. If it was many companies would fail.
So which of the oligopoly companies is looking to fail, Tony?
Probably none because I don't know which ones you are referring to. But in any
event I was referring to businesses in general - but you knew that.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
If Jones
doesn't like that, and wants an electricity system that works for us,
rather than being a price-gouging cartel
Which it is not!
Argue with the author - I merely quoted the article. Cartel or
oligopoly - which description is more accurate, Tony?
It is neither, as I said.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
re-nationalise it, and take back what National stole."
Nobody stole anything.
One National Government sold off Contact, a later National Government
sold half of the rest of the companies, creating through legislation a
group of shareholders who have made well above average returns year
after year, at the expense of the vast majority of the population, who
received no compensation for a considerably higher cost of electricity
- sounds like stealing, looks like stealing - certainly it was very
far from an open market fair trade . . . . Most of the population lost
to the private shareholders who were able to raise the money quite
quickly when the shares were offered - how is doing favours for
friends at the expense of the rest of the country any different from
theft? - Legal theft of course, but still value was certainly given to
some at the expense of the rest . . .
That is not what happened - you are lying.
Quite right Tony. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread, which
Rich has chosen to ignore so far as what I have said cannot be
logically rebutted by anti-government rhetoric.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
While it is easy to say "re-nationalise," in practice if you want to
retain any confidence that as a country we are trustworthy, that needs
be done by compensating the current shareholders at least the current
market value, and the value of a near monopoly is of course higher
than in a competitive market. The other way is to first require a
Telecom type split - probably of generation from distribution to make
the problem slightly smaller, but also to introduce a competitor -
which realistically would be the government itself. Unfortunately at
present our government has other priorities (tax reductions for
property owners, helping set up Charter Schools, and of course "More
Roads!") The next government will have priorities of rescuing a
public health system, rescuing education, restoring a rail connection
from the Nth to Sth Islands, finding money to pay international
obligations under Climate Change agreements, and fixing near bankrupt
local authorities and restoring clean reliable water supplies.
All of which are a direct result of the mismanagement of this country by the
last government more than anything that this government has done. Wow, you are
getting desperate.
--
Crash McBash
Tony
2024-08-09 21:09:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 07:21:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 04:19:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This will be one of many articles explaining why the other sides actions
have caused all this and they have not done anything to cause the present
situation.
Meanwhile the lights are likely to go out and the fix will set us up fot the
next disaster.
I agree, Gordon. This part in particular points out the issue, and
"Their sole legal duty is to make a profit for their shareholders, by
gouging as much money as they can from their customers.
That is not how commerce works. If it was many companies would fail.
So which of the oligopoly companies is looking to fail, Tony?
Probably none because I don't know which ones you are referring to. But in any
event I was referring to businesses in general - but you knew that.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
If Jones
doesn't like that, and wants an electricity system that works for us,
rather than being a price-gouging cartel
Which it is not!
Argue with the author - I merely quoted the article. Cartel or
oligopoly - which description is more accurate, Tony?
It is neither, as I said.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
re-nationalise it, and take back what National stole."
Nobody stole anything.
One National Government sold off Contact, a later National Government
sold half of the rest of the companies, creating through legislation a
group of shareholders who have made well above average returns year
after year, at the expense of the vast majority of the population, who
received no compensation for a considerably higher cost of electricity
- sounds like stealing, looks like stealing - certainly it was very
far from an open market fair trade . . . . Most of the population lost
to the private shareholders who were able to raise the money quite
quickly when the shares were offered - how is doing favours for
friends at the expense of the rest of the country any different from
theft? - Legal theft of course, but still value was certainly given to
some at the expense of the rest . . .
That is not what happened - you are lying.
Quite right Tony. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread, which
Rich has chosen to ignore so far as what I have said cannot be
logically rebutted by anti-government rhetoric.
Logic is not something that Rich permits to influence his thoughts or actions.
Post by Crash
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
While it is easy to say "re-nationalise," in practice if you want to
retain any confidence that as a country we are trustworthy, that needs
be done by compensating the current shareholders at least the current
market value, and the value of a near monopoly is of course higher
than in a competitive market. The other way is to first require a
Telecom type split - probably of generation from distribution to make
the problem slightly smaller, but also to introduce a competitor -
which realistically would be the government itself. Unfortunately at
present our government has other priorities (tax reductions for
property owners, helping set up Charter Schools, and of course "More
Roads!") The next government will have priorities of rescuing a
public health system, rescuing education, restoring a rail connection
from the Nth to Sth Islands, finding money to pay international
obligations under Climate Change agreements, and fixing near bankrupt
local authorities and restoring clean reliable water supplies.
All of which are a direct result of the mismanagement of this country by the
last government more than anything that this government has done. Wow, you are
getting desperate.
--
Crash McBash
Crash
2024-08-09 00:45:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
This is an article that finds fault only with previous National-led
governments (over 9+9 years) and ignores the fact that Labour-led
governments (over 9+6 years) ignored the issues now apparent.

Yes, both National governments sold off some elements of the industry
to private ownership (Contact 100%, 3 other 49% each) but the reality
is that electricity generation and retailing is still dominated by
Government-controlled entities.

It should be noted that the current government seems likely to be
forced by circumstances to take action.
--
Crash McBash
Mutley
2024-08-12 21:30:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/08/reaping-what-they-sowed.html
I'd expect that from an extreme left website / blog.

How many Labour governments have there been in NZ since these power
reforms were put in place and how often did they do something about
it?? Nothing just sat back and relieved the nice dividends .
Loading...