Hydro bill

[nobbie48]

Forum Sponsor

I think they did disable half the toaster a toaster normally takes 1500w 350 would take forever to make a slice.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

You can see the elements glowing on both sides and they state it is a 700 watt toaster. Someones playing with the facts to make a point. Half of his energy is being wasted.

That said, there is a diminishing return factor. Below a certain power level it ceases being a toaster and becomes a bread warmer.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Quest-2-Slice-Toaster-Watt-White/dp/B0091UCPZS

You often see lower wattage appliances being used in RV's, Semi's and Chevy Volts

 

[sburns]

Set up an abandoned warehouse with excercise bikes and generators, let the meth heads in for cold weather shelter, peddle like heck and a meth tab drops down a pipe, they'll go for days.
Solves homeless winter shelter, low cost electric and keeps all the tweakers in one spot. Build it in Hamilton.

why am I not Premier?

Ha start with being a mayor first, should be easy enough.


Sent from the moon!

 

[fastar1]

Yes, very informative.

Regarding the debt, imagine your kid running up a massive debt. You have a talk with him / her, set a plan, jointly cough up the coin to pay things off so life can become reasonably normal again. Everyone has learned their lesson.

Ontarians are in the kid's boat and it would be nice to think that we could suck it up, use austerity, fast track the debt payoff and become normal. Unfortunately I don't trust the politicians to follow through with continued austerity and realistic fiscal control.

A buddy's son got himself behind the financial eight ball and dad helped him get straightened out with a loan under the condition the son and son's wife stop buying stuff. All is good for a month and then they notice a new stereo at the son's place. "We didn't buy it. We leased it." Our governments have the same mentality.

Austerity is the only way out of debt but you can't buy votes with austerity. Austerity isn't working in Greece as they just had another protest strike.

It's every man for himself.

I've been meaning to reply to this for a while. Since Christmas apparently!

It is possible to grow your way out of debt. Austerity is an option, but it's definitely the worst option. The growth strategy however depends on having a viable plan, but then austerity needs a plan too. It's not just a matter of saying 'spend less and my finances will improve'. If a publicly traded company said something like that their stock would suffer, even if they were deeply in debt.

Austerity is the equivalent of eating less to lose weight. Yes, you'll lose weight, but what you really need for your health is a good dietary plan and exercise regimen. (No, I'm not saying you're fat!) That usually includes austerity but it's not strictly necessary, the point here is to have a good plan.

The problem with simple austerity is often that it's treated like a whole solution all on its own. But if you think about it that view makes about as much sense as saying all debt is bad, regardless of circumstances . Yet businesses, governments, and you and me go into debt a lot for very good reasons. The difference is, like good austerity, we (hopefully) do it with a plan.

The premise of your scenario seemed to be that the debt was incurred for pure self-indulgence, but that's wasn't explicitly stated. So the flawed premise easily explains how you arrived at a flawed conclusion that all austerity is good.

Here's an example of bad austerity in the face of crushing debt; where many suspected the plan made no sense: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/imf-greece/

 

[mxs]

I don't necessarily disagree about the basis of your post, but the bad austerity example is not a good one ... the reason I say that is because, it was never a genuine plan, it was a setup perpetrated by more than one player. Many people knew it will implode (not only the plan, but the whole idea of one currency which somehow is supposed to work for Germany as well as for Greece .... there's no precedence in this world where it has worked before. It was a bad experiment, with Germany having nothing to lose.). There was a time for Greece to be honest with themselves, look into the mirror, tighten their belts and chip away ... that would be the example of austerity leading to slow recovery. They never looked into the mirror, they just kept loading up the "credit card" and then called for help when the bottom fell off ... the sharks were ready and you know who they were.

 

[sburns]

Oh looks like they increased the transmission rate. Another $2 a month. I though the costs for electricity was suppose to go down...oh I guess they forgot to mention that doesn't include the transmission rates...

 

[mxs]

Which hydro? Not mine.

 

[sburns]

Which hydro? Not mine.

Toronto Hydro. There was one of those little notices, like you get with your gas bill, stating rates are changing. They are allowed to changed them every Jan and Nov (Or something). Mine said they changed it Jan 2018 for transmission. A new bump for residents and a different rate for non-residents.

You can't win. Also I was away for 2 weeks beginning of Jan and I expected a lower bill...nope.

 

[Baggsy]

Even the star is getting in on it: https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...-hydro-and-the-power-of-secrecy-analysis.html

 

[Mad Mike]

I've been meaning to reply to this for a while. Since Christmas apparently!

It is possible to grow your way out of debt. Austerity is an option, but it's definitely the worst option. The growth strategy however depends on having a viable plan, but then austerity needs a plan too. It's not just a matter of saying 'spend less and my finances will improve'. If a publicly traded company said something like that their stock would suffer, even if they were deeply in debt.

Austerity is the equivalent of eating less to lose weight. Yes, you'll lose weight, but what you really need for your health is a good dietary plan and exercise regimen. (No, I'm not saying you're fat!) That usually includes austerity but it's not strictly necessary, the point here is to have a good plan.

The problem with simple austerity is often that it's treated like a whole solution all on its own. But if you think about it that view makes about as much sense as saying all debt is bad, regardless of circumstances . Yet businesses, governments, and you and me go into debt a lot for very good reasons. The difference is, like good austerity, we (hopefully) do it with a plan.

The premise of your scenario seemed to be that the debt was incurred for pure self-indulgence, but that's wasn't explicitly stated. So the flawed premise easily explains how you arrived at a flawed conclusion that all austerity is good.

Here's an example of bad austerity in the face of crushing debt; where many suspected the plan made no sense: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/imf-greece/

If you let finances run amok for too long, austerity may be the only available solution. Ontario's electricity cost are a result of decades of political and operational malfunction. Hydro cannot grow out of its financial mess, perhaps an Ontario Hydro austerity plan would help.

As for Greece, austerity was the only option. Austerity was forced on Greece. After living beyond their means for decades battling austerity the hammer came down on and Greeks had austerity forced on them. 2 years later and Greece has growing employment, a growing economy, and a better fiscal outlook. All good.

Never say austerity doesn't work - while painful, its often the best and most likely path to recovery.

 

[fastar1]

Austerity can work. I don't think you understood my post.

 

[fastar1]

Even the star is getting in on it: https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...-hydro-and-the-power-of-secrecy-analysis.html

This reeks of the same stuff that the Ornge scandal smelled of.

 

[sburns]

This reeks of the same stuff that the Ornge scandal smelled of.

is that the same as e-health and the panam games, where people were hired and paid big money and did nothing. I really need a gov or gov contract job.


Sent from the moon!

 

[fastar1]

is that the same as e-health and the panam games, where people were hired and paid big money and did nothing. I really need a gov or gov contract job.

Sent from the moon!

E-health was just a plain old fashioned failed plan, but an expensive one. Panam games? An exec expensed bubble gum or something and a lynch mob formed. No scandal.

No, these are execs of public companies operating them like they're private and rewarding themselves nicely for for the effort.

 

[Type17]

I really need a gov or gov contract job.


Sent from the moon!

I've had them. Being a public servant is not a path to riches unless you're at the very top (and even then, your private sector counterparts dwarf your salary).

 

[RockerGuy]

I've had them. Being a public servant is not a path to riches unless you're at the very top (and even then, your private sector counterparts dwarf your salary).

They certainly have more perks than the average worker

 

[Riceburner]

I've had them. Being a public servant is not a path to riches unless you're at the very top (and even then, your private sector counterparts dwarf your salary).

But low and middle range has it better than private low and middle, no?

 

[shanekingsley]

But low and middle range has it better than private low and middle, no?

Probably yes because of benefits and pension, but in my experience, there are no yearly bonuses. Some places, private middle is not that great, but the yearly bonus if the firm does well can be equal to or more than the base yearly income. There are certainly pro's and con's of each. I've taught many workshops for students on helping them decide where to go - private or public. Private low is not a living wage. Private middle is a tough life over the long term. I've done both for years and it's a great way for some to start out in an industry until they figure out their future path, but with the increasing cost of living - especially housing, I would encourage someone to think beyond private middle - as a generalization.

 

[Type17]

They certainly have more perks than the average worker

Benefits wise and in terms of pension contribution, absolutely. Generally speaking your salary is lower but you're hooked up in terms of work life balance... government offices are wastelands at 4:30 unless it's some sort of crunchtime in which case they hustle pretty hard (including weekends).

But low and middle range has it better than private low and middle, no?

I would imagine it depends on the role and what exactly it is that you do because government is broad and not all functions are as valuable in the private sector. For example comms and admin people make bank in government compared to what they'd make in the private sector (especially after you account for workload). In other places/roles, if you leave after a couple of years to go to the private sector you could end up doubling your salary (think specialized lawyers/consultants/finance people). It all depends.

 

[sburns]

Probably yes because of benefits and pension, but in my experience, there are no yearly bonuses. Some places, private middle is not that great, but the yearly bonus if the firm does well can be equal to or more than the base yearly income. There are certainly pro's and con's of each. I've taught many workshops for students on helping them decide where to go - private or public. Private low is not a living wage. Private middle is a tough life over the long term. I've done both for years and it's a great way for some to start out in an industry until they figure out their future path, but with the increasing cost of living - especially housing, I would encourage someone to think beyond private middle - as a generalization.

How can someone who is starting out go beyond private middle?

Those benefits and pension are worth a lot. I would have loved to be taken care of after working for "X" company but not many have a pension or some will scam you out of it in the private sector. A friend was just telling me story of a colleague who was let go after several years of employment just under the year they would have gotten a full pension. This from one of the big banks.

 

[Type17]

How can someone who is starting out go beyond private middle?

Those benefits and pension are worth a lot. I would have loved to be taken care of after working for "X" company but not many have a pension or some will scam you out of it in the private sector. A friend was just telling me story of a colleague who was let go after several years of employment just under the year they would have gotten a full pension. This from one of the big banks.

Man, I feel for your friend; that's agonizing. Honestly, pension wise, the government was ridiculously good and if you stay in government long enough, you'll be very well taken care of in retirement provided you're not dead wood during your working years.

Forum Sponsor