Quote Originally Posted by az city View Post
Jimbo, don't be so tetchy.

I didn't realize you had been given the keys to the website and set a proviso that one had to proffer a solution different to a price cap in order to contribute to this thread.

I'll explain again. What Truss is doing is adding to general taxation for years to come which will have a big depressive effect on the UK economy. The merits of her particular price cap are moot. What she should have done is funded the price cap from excess energy company profits. When those profits are realized - they are actually flowing in already whereas the tax required to service the debt in her model is way further off in terms of its realization - doesn't matter.

Basically it's a huge money grab which will further enrich already wealthy shareholders at the expense of the poor.
The profits are slowly flowing in, true (and a windfall tax does currently exist) but not at the rate to cover what is required to cover costs now, which is what is required.

I agree, we would all rather something be covered via someone else paying more tax, and it should be noted that extra profits will result in extra income. My point was rather that you dismissed the impact of borrowing when it suited, yet when it didn't you totally opposed it.

The reality is a solution was needed now and this winter, not just on bills, but to curb inflation and keep the economy going and preventing a recession (or a severe one). That, probably, has been done. Perfect? No. But people and businesses are in a much better position than yesterday and that should be recognised. Sometimes a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. To just simply claim 'oh we will pay for it with profits (that dont yet exist) sounds good but is no actual solution.