if my primary concern is that they're changing the system so that poor people lose their rebates, and, again, they were targeted because they need it the most, what's the solution?

you boost the oesp amount by the amount that you expect the average price to increase by.

so, if $45 was the average value of x+f, and you're increasing x by 55%, then you make the following adjustment:

1) x + 27 = 45 <-----> x=18
2) 18*1.55 = 27.9
3) 27.90 + 27 = 54.90

so, if they increased the amount from 45 to 55, as the data will instruct them to do within a few months, then they can alleviate the issue where it's most important.

the validity of this argument is in realizing that $45 was not chosen arbitrarily. it is the average price. if you increase the rates, the average price shifts with it, and the oesp amount should change to reflect it. otherwise, you're just taking money away from poor people, and giving it to utility companies.

as was the case with the carbon tax oversight, this is just bad governance. they should have done this. it should have been obvious.

for me, that would mean that if my x is 19 and it goes up by 55%, then my new price before taxes is:

19*1.55 + 27 = 56.45.

subtracting out the $55 would leave me with a bill for $1.45 - which, after accounting for rounding errors on a small number, is close enough to a 55% increase.

1.13*1.45 - .318*1.13*1.45 = $1.11.

that's a $0.03 increase - which is roughly in line with inflation.