Replies

I usually take a VERY dim view on unions, seeing what they have done to the infamous "Rust Belt" (where I am). While there may well be a place for unions, given the unique leverages that they have over companies (can't discipline their members, can't do anything in case of a slowdown, can't permanently get rid of them even after a frivilous strike), we would be better off without them than with them.

Regarding the Kalifornia power crunch, the method of "semi-'deregulation'" that they used is what caused the problem, not the fact that things were somewhat deregulated. Nobody could own more than 2 pieces of the 3-piece power structure (generation, transmission and local delivery), the companies still in transmission/delivery couldn't sign contracts that were competitive, the generators essentially couldn't build new plants unless they were the highly-inefficient "renewable" power plants, and EVERYONE had to deal with a government agency to keep the power grid balanced (the ISO has had serious troubles keeping it balanced related to the fact that it is a government agency; latest in a series of threads here).

One more thing; the retail cost was still regulated. This is bad for 2 reasons. First, any incentive to conserve when supplies were tight (and wholesale prices went up) went out the window because as long as the juice flowed, there was no pain felt. Second, with the squeeze in "profits" (which were also regulated to a maximum but not a minimum), potential projects to increase capacity were discarded due to lack of cash.

"I usually take a VERY dim view on unions, seeing what they have done to the infamous "Rust Belt" (where I am)."

Funny how that works. I feel the exact same way about management, seeing as what they did to Silicon Valley with their H1-b workers. If you havn't been there, Silicon Valley is pretty much like Hong Kong nowadays, unless you are in the area that is pretty much like India or Mexico. The moral of the story is that we all fight "the last war", or those wounds that sting most recently are the ones we are most prompt to attend to.

Re California deregulation, no argument there save one. When I used to live there, I went out of my way to buy my house in Santa Clara. Why? Because the city of Santa Clara has a municipal utility! My power supplied from there was more reliable than the power that came from PG&E, and cost about %30 less. When everybody else was watching their power bills skyrocket, ours stayed reasonable. The utility had signed some long term contracts that kept them on a even keel. Although I do agree that their recent "deregulation" (note the quotes) was a disaster from the word go, neither public or private, badly conceived and executed.

Now, if you want to talk about government functions that should be privatized, say no more! Education is number one on my list! There is a government institution that very much needs to be defunded and disbanded. Let communities and individual citizens decide how they want to educate their children.

Electricity, however, is one of those private things that I'm wondering if maybe it wouldn't be better off in public hands.