Energy thread
Comments
-
Thanks - will take some pics tomorrow.rjsterry said:
Of course.Stevo_666 said:
It's a converted garage which is separate from the pmain house (which is decently insulated). That said I'd be interested to know what you think based on the specifics - could send some pics by PM?rjsterry said:
If you are heating it it's worth insulating. If you insulate it you may not need to heat it.Stevo_666 said:
Yep, but probably not worth it given the type of building it is. If it gets really cold I can just work in the house.rjsterry said:
You do know that you can now buy insulation? 🙂Stevo_666 said:There was a spot of ice on the car windscreen the other morning.
Mind you, its now quite mild so warmer outside than in my converted garage where I WFH. So now sitting with the door and windows open to warm things up a tad...
Have just seen an article saying that well insulated homes now command a premium in excess of the cost of installation, so it offers a ROI as well."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
But it's really hot and humid which makes cycling and running unpleasant.surrey_commuter said:Could I say Singapore is better than here, everything is clean and works on time.
0 -
Octopus must work strange working days, I applied for £500 of my overpayment to be returned on Saturday and they said they process this in 2 working days but still nothing in my account0
-
Classic nimby attitude!monkimark said:Pretty much 100% wfw unless I have a zoom meeting or I need to lock myself away to focus on something.
Managing a construction site is pretty difficult if you aren't there and I don't really want to build a 20 storey block of flats in my back garden.
2 -
Having racked up a £900 surplus and getting a £500 refund from Octopus (which I'm still waiting to see in my bank over a week later) with the rest left in reserve I've just had an email from them recommending an increase of £50 per month on my current payments. It works out around a 30% increase on my monthly payments that were already significantly above what they should be hence the £900 surplus in less than 2 years. They don't seem to have a clue.0
-
Sucks if you’re gaysurrey_commuter said:Could I say Singapore is better than here, everything is clean and works on time.
0 -
rick_chasey said:
Sucks if you’re gaysurrey_commuter said:Could I say Singapore is better than here, everything is clean and works on time.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I mean it, they only legalised gay sex a few months ago, and in return they confirmed gay marriage is off the cards so they don't get the same rights around things like tax breaks, tenant rights etc.0
-
rick_chasey said:
I mean it, they only legalised gay sex a few months ago, and in return they confirmed gay marriage is off the cards so they don't get the same rights around things like tax breaks, tenant rights etc.
I suspect that it was you choice of words that caused the amusement, not your concern for the homosexual population.0 -
-
rick_chasey said:
lol, not related
Of course, the thought didn't pass my pure mind until PB's guffaw.
🤥0 -
Given the context that emoji is not a lot of pixels and could be taken a few waysbriantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:lol, not related
Of course, the thought didn't pass my pure mind until PB's guffaw.
🤥- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
pangolin said:
Given the context that emoji is not a lot of pixels and could be taken a few waysbriantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:lol, not related
Of course, the thought didn't pass my pure mind until PB's guffaw.
🤥
Which way would you like to take it? 🤔😜1 -
Quite correct. Abriantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:I mean it, they only legalised gay sex a few months ago, and in return they confirmed gay marriage is off the cards so they don't get the same rights around things like tax breaks, tenant rights etc.
I suspect that it was you choice of words that caused the amusement, not your concern for the homosexual population.n unfortunate turn of phrase.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter. That will save billions which can go to protecting bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free” share bonuses."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
blazing_saddles said:
The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter, which will save billions that can go to bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free”share bonuses.
Might make their voting figures even worse though. Do you think they've fully thought this through?0 -
If the triple lock is appropriate for pensions, (I’m not arguing either way, but if it is) it should also apply to; minimum wage, other benefits and the lowest tax band.0
-
Not sure I get the logic behind the bankers’ bonus rant. (I get the emotional element, obviously!)blazing_saddles said:The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter. That will save billions which can go to protecting bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free” share bonuses.
Bankers’ bonus are paid by shareholders and are subject to income tax. So letting them increase is distribution from evil shareholders to deserving causes via HMRC.
0 -
No impact this winter Blazin. The energy cap is unchanged this winter, and State Pension increases wouldn't come in until 6th April anyway.blazing_saddles said:The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter. That will save billions which can go to protecting bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free” share bonuses.0 -
Dorset_Boy said:
No impact this winter Blazin. The energy cap is unchanged this winter, and State Pension increases wouldn't come in until 6th April anyway.blazing_saddles said:The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter. That will save billions which can go to protecting bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free” share bonuses.
And, to be fair, he did say they'd be reviewing to better target it, not that there wouldn't be a mechanism or support at all. Mind you, it is the Tories, and in crisis, so who knows?0 -
New chancellor = this month's chancellor. Consistency, con-sistency.0
-
For the last time **it won’t make a difference to their pay**wallace_and_gromit said:
Not sure I get the logic behind the bankers’ bonus rant. (I get the emotional element, obviously!)blazing_saddles said:The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter. That will save billions which can go to protecting bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free” share bonuses.
Bankers’ bonus are paid by shareholders and are subject to income tax. So letting them increase is distribution from evil shareholders to deserving causes via HMRC.
They raised base salaries to compensate the cap on 100% of base.
Who’s gonna give up a big base salary?
You’ll get the odd headline massive number but for the most part it won’t change a thing for at least the next 5 years.
Meanwhile they’re gonna get hit a big windfall tax by the sounds of it so the bonus pot will be *even smaller*.
0 -
What’s with the “for the last time”? We haven’t had a first time re banker remuneration!rick_chasey said:
For the last time **it won’t make a difference to their pay**wallace_and_gromit said:
Not sure I get the logic behind the bankers’ bonus rant. (I get the emotional element, obviously!)blazing_saddles said:The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter. That will save billions which can go to protecting bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free” share bonuses.
Bankers’ bonus are paid by shareholders and are subject to income tax. So letting them increase is distribution from evil shareholders to deserving causes via HMRC.
They raised base salaries to compensate the cap on 100% of base.
Who’s gonna give up a big base salary?
You’ll get the odd headline massive number but for the most part it won’t change a thing for at least the next 5 years.
Meanwhile they’re gonna get hit a big windfall tax by the sounds of it so the bonus pot will be *even smaller*.
My point was that bankers’ bonuses aren’t funded from government sources as a counter to Blazing’s heartfelt but illogical rant about bonuses earlier.
1 -
If you read my post again, I said "protect", not "pay". The cap on bankers bonuses being one of the few policies that the government aren't planning to U turn on.wallace_and_gromit said:
What’s with the “for the last time”? We haven’t had a first time re banker remuneration!rick_chasey said:
For the last time **it won’t make a difference to their pay**wallace_and_gromit said:
Not sure I get the logic behind the bankers’ bonus rant. (I get the emotional element, obviously!)blazing_saddles said:The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter. That will save billions which can go to protecting bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free” share bonuses.
Bankers’ bonus are paid by shareholders and are subject to income tax. So letting them increase is distribution from evil shareholders to deserving causes via HMRC.
They raised base salaries to compensate the cap on 100% of base.
Who’s gonna give up a big base salary?
You’ll get the odd headline massive number but for the most part it won’t change a thing for at least the next 5 years.
Meanwhile they’re gonna get hit a big windfall tax by the sounds of it so the bonus pot will be *even smaller*.
My point was that bankers’ bonuses aren’t funded from government sources as a counter to Blazing’s heartfelt but illogical rant about bonuses earlier.
Not sure why you think that illogical.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63290169
Or if you prefer.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/oct/17/jeremy-hunt-bankers-bonus-cap-no-u-turnThe new chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, is pressing on with plans to scrap the bankers’ bonus cap, protecting one of the most divisive policies from his predecessor’s disastrous mini-budget."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
It's only divisive because journos are too lazy to understand it and therefore make a story out of something that as Rick states, makes no difference.0
-
It has been discussed a bit.wallace_and_gromit said:
What’s with the “for the last time”? We haven’t had a first time re banker remuneration!rick_chasey said:
For the last time **it won’t make a difference to their pay**wallace_and_gromit said:
Not sure I get the logic behind the bankers’ bonus rant. (I get the emotional element, obviously!)blazing_saddles said:The new chancellor has nailed it.
Remove the energy cap and the triple lock on state pensions. That should see a good percentage of the oldies freezing or starving this winter. That will save billions which can go to protecting bankers bonuses and energy company “windfall free” share bonuses.
Bankers’ bonus are paid by shareholders and are subject to income tax. So letting them increase is distribution from evil shareholders to deserving causes via HMRC.
They raised base salaries to compensate the cap on 100% of base.
Who’s gonna give up a big base salary?
You’ll get the odd headline massive number but for the most part it won’t change a thing for at least the next 5 years.
Meanwhile they’re gonna get hit a big windfall tax by the sounds of it so the bonus pot will be *even smaller*.
My point was that bankers’ bonuses aren’t funded from government sources as a counter to Blazing’s heartfelt but illogical rant about bonuses earlier.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
MPs too, tbf.Dorset_Boy said:It's only divisive because journos are too lazy to understand it and therefore make a story out of something that as Rick states, makes no difference.
0 -
Blazing - you posted “that will save billions that can go on protecting bankers’ bonuses”.
That is simply wrong in factual terms for the reasons I gave. Public spending does not feed into or otherwise protect bankers’ bonuses.
The bonus cap was a purely political move from the EU commission doubtless to try and aid Macron in his ongoing attempts to neuter London as the premier financial centre in Europe. It has feck all to do with actual remuneration for as Rick points out, banks will always find a way to remunerate the staff they want to remunerate.0 -
Blazing - you posted “that will save billions that can go on protecting bankers’ bonuses”.
That is simply wrong in factual terms for the reasons I gave. Public spending does not feed into or otherwise protect bankers’ bonuses.
The bonus cap was a purely political move from the EU commission doubtless to try and aid Macron in his ongoing attempts to neuter London as the premier financial centre in Europe. It has feck all to do with actual remuneration for as Rick points out, banks will always find a way to remunerate the staff they want to remunerate.0 -
They screwed the pooch in the City on Brexit anyway, so any minor revenue the relaxation of the bonus might bring is lost in the mire that is that.
0
