It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2 SCAMS - How the rich get richer from literally nothing and rip you off at the same time

page: 2
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Power_Semi
 





Is almost certainly against some of the rules set out for MPs and politicians.


Ok, now prove it. See what I mean?

I think a healthy dose of realism is what is needed here, even if you prefer to call it cynicism. You need to pick your battles carefully.

- A minister who takes a cut from a multi-billion sale of frigates to Taiwan? Definitely wrong.
- But he worked for that office so he was in a position to overhear conversations that might have... Guess what, drop it.




posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Power_Semi
Rivers don't just flow through peoples land, they flow adjacent to peoples land. Instead of allowing people with water adjacent to their property to take it and sell it, it would make far more sense for the law to be changed so that only water companies can take it.


Why should Water companies be given a monopoly more than they have already? It would only make the situation worse. It seems to me your just pissed you don't live next to a river and can't do this yourself, because if you could, you would. Don't lie!


Power_Semi
And my point re rivers flow for hundreds of miles, which I assume you're deliberately ignoring, is that they flow across council owned land, government land, public land, and water company owned land - there is no need for the current system to exist.


Do you have any idea how much it costs to transport water? Water firms want it as close as they can to where they need it, not to pump it from 200 miles downstream when the river can do the work for you and you extract it closer. I wasn't ignoring it, I just thought it was totally irrelevant.


Power_Semi
And why don't I report the second point instead of "whinging about it on a forum" - this is a conspiracy forum, and to me this looks like it could be another "snouts in the trough" scenario, or in other words a political conspiracy to make money by abusing positions of power and influence.


Quite, so report it. No good banging on about it here. Go to the Parliamentary Ombudsman . I am sure, however, considering they are being as open as you claim, that there is nothing illegal here and no different to the way business is done throughout the country - word of mouth.

Also, as I said before, there is nothing in today's announcement that was either secret or unexpected - it has been on the cards since last year, pending the report from OFGEM.

That's why I've posted it here.


Power_Semi
The other site is, as mentioned many times - thisisthebigdeal (.com) set up by Henry de Zoete, of the de Zoete banking dynasty, ex employee of Michael Gove UK Member of Parliament.


Uh-huh - not sure what that has to do with the price of fish... Essentially, what you're saying, is that nobody who has any connections with any MP or Minister can go into business? I'm sure Mr Gove has many employees and ex-employees - are they all assumed to be up to no good if they go into business and use the contacts they developed?

BTW, Gove is the the Education Minister and has nothing to do with Energy policy nor is privy to anything Ofgem get up too.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Wow, that IS strange. It seems like it would be much cheaper for the councils to extract the water and have it treated themselves. Thats what is done here, except for bottled spring water.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by saneguy
 


In the US, with such large distances between towns, yes it would.

Here in the UK, we're a lot closer together, so each town having it's own dedicated water supply is not very economic. It's also a hangover from the local water boards (Government run) from the days of yore.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   

stumason
Why should Water companies be given a monopoly more than they have already? It would only make the situation worse. It seems to me your just pissed you don't live next to a river and can't do this yourself, because if you could, you would. Don't lie!


What, a monopoly to take free water that falls from the sky rather than buying it from someone else who takes that free water from the sky, and sells it to them instead?

Most people wouldn't do it quite simply because they wouldn't have the spare £10K for a license, or be able to fund the cost of storage, etc that you'd need to set up.

But a rich land owner could, not a bad return, a few £10's of thousands for £millions per year in return.

Your refusal to see that this is wrong and constant accusations of me being jealous suggests to me that you ARE doing it and don't like the idea of losing free money.

This is an issue and a cost that affects every family and home in the country.


Do you have any idea how much it costs to transport water? Water firms want it as close as they can to where they need it, not to pump it from 200 miles downstream when the river can do the work for you and you extract it closer. I wasn't ignoring it, I just thought it was totally irrelevant.


Right, so what you're saying is that all of the people extracting the water are right next door to a water company? Because whether they need to transport it, or the water company extracts it and needs to transport it - it's going to cost someone money, and it's going to be factored into the price we all end up paying.

Bottom line is it makes no sense to allow someone to do nothing more than drain water from a river and sell it to a water company, when the water company could do that without the expense of buying the water from a middle man.



Uh-huh - not sure what that has to do with the price of fish... Essentially, what you're saying, is that nobody who has any connections with any MP or Minister can go into business? I'm sure Mr Gove has many employees and ex-employees - are they all assumed to be up to no good if they go into business and use the contacts they developed?

BTW, Gove is the the Education Minister and has nothing to do with Energy policy nor is privy to anything Ofgem get up too.


There's a difference between leaving the employ of a government minister - and let's not be naive, if you work for one you certainly know others - and setting up your own business.

But when you set up a business aimed at energy prices, politicians then announce an inquiry into energy prices, and those same politicians also recommend the business that's been set up about energy prices by an ex employee of another minister - that's collusion.

It isn't just a small business doing X that has a recommendation or testimonial from a minister, it's a website set up about something that every house in the country needs, the ministers responsible for that utility then start action against the companies that provide the utility, and at the same time forward the public to the website set up by an employee of another minister just 1 month after he left the ministers employment, and 2 months before the inquiry is announced.

Plus they get national tv coverage, newspaper coverage, ministerial backing, etc.

It stinks.

Do you work for a minister? Because you sure sound like you're trying to brush this under the carpet.
edit on 27-3-2014 by Power_Semi because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Power_Semi
 




You're spot on regarding the website issue.... this kind of things happen all the time.
Politicians buy shares in such and such sector or start up such and such a company and then a short while later, a law is passed or something comes into effect and we all have to do or buy or use whatever service, product or whatever it is that they're selling.

They use their relatives companies, they set up accounts and flip homes and do all manner of dodgy ****
They sit on boards and hold positions in private companies and then we find that such company has been given huge public contracts like the welfare to work schemes or lobbyists or whatever

I'm not going to do lots of digging but here are a few from a quick google search... and you hear about these incidents ALL the time on websites, on radio shows or anywhere where serious journalists investigate these things.



www.independent.co.uk...

www.telegraph.co.uk...

www.independent.co.uk...

www.bbc.co.uk...

www.bbc.co.uk...

www.independent.co.uk...



This is wider and deeper than most care to think about.
The majority do it, they're on the take and it's our money they're stealing.

edit on 27/3/14 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   

saneguy
Wow, that IS strange. It seems like it would be much cheaper for the councils to extract the water and have it treated themselves. Thats what is done here, except for bottled spring water.
Yorkshire water used to belong to us yorkshire people then some corrupt people sold it. All us yorkshire people got was extortionate bills. Yorkshire water is now owned by some rich chinese people. Poor people cant buy a pint of milk nether mind shares. So who are the thieves?
The ones who demonize the poor.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 10:09 AM
link   
not sure how they do it across the pond, but here in the states water has to go through a whole big process before it comes in your house.

first depending where it comes from, water has to be pumped, out of the ground,rivers, reservoirs, or where ever.
the shop that i use to own, part of my business was repairing the pump motors for water systems in the area or for the well drillers/installers.

we repaired hollow shaft pump motors ranging in size from 50hp up to1000hp, being the biggest we could get in the shop and only repaired one of those. that was just one type of motor used, they also use very different motors for different jobs. just to give you a estimate on what it takes to repair or replace a motor. i'm gonna go with the last one i did before i closed my doors.

to tear down, strip, clean, rewind, replace bearings and oil, reassemble and paint a 75 hp motor depending on the shape it was in when it came in, averaged any where from $1500.00 to $2100.00, and that was six years ago. a new motor that size back then would have cost me with a dealers discount, about $4500.00. i sold them fairly cheap compared to others, depending on if they were repeat customers or just one timers, i would mark them up based on how much work went in to get the new motor. any where from 15 to 35%.

some of these water systems have as many as 20 treatment plants with at least one electric pump motor. then at these plants there are tons of other equipment. electric motor starters, chlorinators, although in my area none had fluoride equipment some places do, no telling how many valves, pipes ranging in size from 12in down to 3/4in, most of the best big stuff is made out of steel, pumps that the motors are mounted on, then there are the back up systems, some had generators to run the motors, smallest i 've seen at a plant was a 50kw, which ant cheap, some have much larger. some plants had or have engine driven backs up using gas, natural gas, and diesel fuels, then there's the big a@@ water towers. i have know idea about cost on most of the stuff there, except for the starters, generators, starters figure ball parking at about $3500.00 each for end users six years ago, 50kw generator figure at least $7500.00, a 750,000 gallon water tower $300, 000 to $500,000 depending on who builds it. then you got the cost of the building that the plant is in. remember these are six year old prices i'm remembering and low balling at that. then on top of that, there are the miles and miles of pipe, meters and valves that are used to get the water to the houses, equipment used to dig, haul and place said pipe in the ground.
and employees, one water system i worked for had upwards of 500 employees.

all that considered, where my business was, in a commercial zone so they can tax and charge you more. my water system even took care of the sewage. the combined bill averaged between $52 to $60 a month. my home which is about 15 miles away from the shop is any where from $18 to $20 a month now. that's not bad seeing how many millions that have been spent in building, and maintaining the systems.

as far as your buddy's site, it's his own fault for just piddling around for seven years. should been on top of it if he didn't want the competition to come in and swoop up the business.




edit on 27-3-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Power_Semi
What, a monopoly to take free water that falls from the sky rather than buying it from someone else who takes that free water from the sky, and sells it to them instead?


They already are monopolies - why make them more powerful and give them the right to extract water from your land and NOT pay you for it! What if it was Oil, Gas or they wanted to build a road? You'd expect to be compensated then, wouldn't you? It's their land, they can do as they like, within the law.


Power_Semi
Most people wouldn't do it quite simply because they wouldn't have the spare £10K for a license, or be able to fund the cost of storage, etc that you'd need to set up.


Actually, anyone with the cash to buy land next to a watercourse has the money. In fact, anyone who has property full stop can raise cash quite easily.


Power_Semi
But a rich land owner could, not a bad return, a few £10's of thousands for £millions per year in return.


And what is wrong with that? It's his/her land. I smell the rotten stench of socialism here....


Power_Semi
Your refusal to see that this is wrong and constant accusations of me being jealous suggests to me that you ARE doing it and don't like the idea of losing free money.


Nope, poor as a church mouse. I don't own my house, nor do I live next to a river. If I did, however, I would be very interested in making some cash out of it...


Power_Semi
This is an issue and a cost that affects every family and home in the country.


Not really. Water is bloody cheap considering it is safe, clean and delivered to my house. I only pay about £180 for the year - a family of 5 and we are metered so only billed for what we use. Anyone paying more than that is either leaving the shower on all day, has 100 kids or is a Dolphin. Thames Water charge less than 0.1p/litre for some of the cleanest drinking water you can find on the planet


Power_Semi
Right, so what you're saying is that all of the people extracting the water are right next door to a water company? Because whether they need to transport it, or the water company extracts it and needs to transport it - it's going to cost someone money, and it's going to be factored into the price we all end up paying.


Nope, that's not what I am saying, but distance is factored in when deciding where to get water from. Water is very difficult to move, so keeping things as close together as possible helps keeps costs down.


Power_Semi
Bottom line is it makes no sense to allow someone to do nothing more than drain water from a river and sell it to a water company, when the water company could do that without the expense of buying the water from a middle man.


And they do, in cases where they own or bought land next to a river to do so. But buying land is expensive, comes with it's own costs and saddles the company with something they may not want in 5 years time. Buying it in from a "middle man" allows flexibility and a fixed cost. You clearly don't do business very well, otherwise these things would make sense.


Power_Semi
There's a difference between leaving the employ of a government minister - and let's not be naive, if you work for one you certainly know others - and setting up your own business.


Of course there is a difference, although I think your sentence didn't come out as intended. If we remove the central hyphenated text, it reads:

"There's a difference between leaving the employ of a government minister and setting up your own business".

Clearly. Talk about stating the obvious! Did you know there is a difference between being a teacher and farming snails?


Power_Semi
But when you set up a business aimed at energy prices, politicians then announce an inquiry into energy prices, and those same politicians also recommend the business that's been set up about energy prices by an ex employee of another minister - that's collusion.


No, it isn't, unless you have evidence for it? If not, your in the realms of a libellous statement...

Seeing as energy prices have been a hop topic for several years now, it is hardly a great leap that someone set up a website to capitalise on that. In fact, I am surprised it took so long. The fact it was an "ex-employee" is neither here nor there. Essentially, your adding 2+2 to come up with a sheep. Business is about contacts, networking and knowing the right people.


Power_Semi
It isn't just a small business doing X that has a recommendation or testimonial from a minister, it's a website set up about something that every house in the country needs, the ministers responsible for that utility then start action against the companies that provide the utility, and at the same time forward the public to the website set up by an employee of another minister just 1 month after he left the ministers employment, and 2 months before the inquiry is announced.


To be honest, there isn't actually that much new about this new website that hasn't already been done. uSwitch did a similiar thing as the The Big Deal thing a few years ago and other countries have been doing them for a while. I think your making a connection where there is nothing.


Power_Semi
Plus they get national tv coverage, newspaper coverage, ministerial backing, etc.


Do point me to this "ministerial backing". A Minister shouldn't be making recommendations over a particular business and I suspect he/she wasn't, but do show me...


Power_Semi
Do you work for a minister? Because you sure sound like you're trying to brush this under the carpet.


Nope - nice try to paint me as a disinfo dude, but it ain't gonna fly.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse
 


Nope - Yorkshire Water is a owned by Kelda Group, based in Bradford, who themselves are owned by HSBC (UK Bank) and Citigroup (US Bank). No evil Chinese here...

The average household bill for Yorkshire Water is apparently £373. £31 a month for on demand, clean as you like drinking water. £1 a day.

All while millions around the world die from drinking the water they are provided..

Honestly, sometimes I do wonder if we in the West have any idea how good we have it...



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Joneselius
 





I'm just pointing out that people don't wrap their heads around scams because they're so busy looking for ways to scam other people. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...


LOL. That's people adopting the values of corporations. It's the American way. You're either scamming, getting scammed or you're a useless eater.

Think about how people, not just Americans, are constantly being influenced to make decisions that are not in their best interest. It's the essence of advertising. Some segments are worse than others but they all have the same theme. Kids need to be taught to resist this but I don't believe many are taught anything about marketing and advertising.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   

stumason
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse
 


Nope - Yorkshire Water is a owned by Kelda Group, based in Bradford, who themselves are owned by HSBC (UK Bank) and Citigroup (US Bank). No evil Chinese here...

The average household bill for Yorkshire Water is apparently £373. £31 a month for on demand, clean as you like drinking water. £1 a day.

All while millions around the world die from drinking the water they are provided..

Honestly, sometimes I do wonder if we in the West have any idea how good we have it...


i dont know why i bother with you as you have been shown to have no integrity in your posts.
Are you saying there is no rich chinese who own shares in y water? Are you saying that my water bills non metererd are not over 520 pounds a year? If not why post anything?
You muddy the waters that much its ridiculous.
edit on 27-3-2014 by symptomoftheuniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse
 


Haha, that's rich...

No integrity says symptom, who is well known for talking total bollocks then wandering off as if he won... At least what I say can be verified, I deal only in facts, not emotionally charged BS. I'm sure there are some "rich Chinese" who have shares in one of the firms who own YW, but in the same vein there are probably some "rich English" and "Rich Nigerians" but that is a world away from what you claimed.

And you have the audacity to claim I have no integrity.... If anything, I cleared the waters up, not "muddied" them, which is what you did with your quip about the Chinese taking over YW.

And if your water bills are over £520 a year, your being ripped off or something is wrong. Maybe you should get yourself on a meter and pay for what you use? Or do you have a massive house, because un-metered rates were set back in the 90's by local authorities, much like Council Tax and is based on a properties value.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   

stumason
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse
 


Haha, that's rich...

No integrity says symptom, who is well known for talking total bollocks then wandering off as if he won... At least what I say can be verified, I deal only in facts, not emotionally charged BS. I'm sure there are some "rich Chinese" who have shares in one of the firms who own YW, but in the same vein there are probably some "rich English" and "Rich Nigerians" but that is a world away from what you claimed.

And you have the audacity to claim I have no integrity.... If anything, I cleared the waters up, not "muddied" them, which is what you did with your quip about the Chinese taking over YW.

And if your water bills are over £520 a year, your being ripped off or something is wrong. Maybe you should get yourself on a meter and pay for what you use? Or do you have a massive house, because un-metered rates were set back in the 90's by local authorities, much like Council Tax and is based on a properties value.


You've got a very abrasive tone and seem to have a way of avoiding the issue and talking at tangents to try and obfuscate the issues - you're not one of those paid shill posters are you that are trying to protect the status quo?

Or in your case it's probably black lace.

gedit?



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Power_Semi
 


Actually, with you, I don;t think I have been "abrasive" - However, when someone jumps in with both feet saying such things as "I lack integrity" and that I am "muddying the water", they can expect some abrasion back.

I also do not believe I have "avoided" anything you have said - in fact, I've taken great care to go through you posts in detail. I do have to laugh though at your stock answer of calling me a "paid shill", the standard fall back tactic when all else is lost.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   

stumason
reply to post by Power_Semi
 


Actually, with you, I don;t think I have been "abrasive" - However, when someone jumps in with both feet saying such things as "I lack integrity" and that I am "muddying the water", they can expect some abrasion back.

I also do not believe I have "avoided" anything you have said - in fact, I've taken great care to go through you posts in detail. I do have to laugh though at your stock answer of calling me a "paid shill", the standard fall back tactic when all else is lost.
i dont know why i bother.
People only have to read through this thread www.abovetopsecret.com... to see how you "only deal in facts"
The fact that you never appologise only infuriates people further.

A howling wolf muddying water equals the blues



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse
 


Ah, attacking the poster - classic!

And I have nothing to apologise for in that thread - not that has anything to do with this thread and you're only bringing it up try and discredit the poster, classic ad hominem...

I don't know why you bother - you rarely make a valid point and just ramble, but each to their own.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Im attacking your posts,your posts have no integrity. You say you only deal in facts i say your posts indicate nothing of the sort.
I openly admit i post a substantial amount of bollocks. The difference between us is i admit it,thus keeping my integrity.



posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   

stumason if you want to get ahead in business, as in life, it pays to be informed.



and pays even better to be crooked, amoral and psychotically greedy.



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 05:49 AM
link   
Well, In America if a stream of water runs through your property like a creek you don't own the water or the creek. I should know I got 9 of them. You must get permission to block up the flow and the amount going downstream can't change.

Any water taken from large rivers to water companies would be managed by The Corps of Engineers Nationally and TVA locally. So that would never work.

The second part I don't understand. Here you get you power from TVA or you don't get any at all.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join