how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
4204 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | reply to pnh102
Re: full steam ahead at your cost said by pnh102:
The short version is that California decided to cap the amount of money paid by subscribers to electric utilities without capping the amount of money that the utilities paid to resellers. Because of California's wacky environmental laws, among which prevented new power plants from being built to meet increasing demand, the supply of electricity in-state remained constant while demand increased, and because no new in-state generation could occur, PG&E and SCE had to buy energy from out of state at very high prices. Sounds like a major government screw up to me. Granted, a bunch of companies did try to exploit the situation, but once again it is the state government's fault for creating the environment in which this kind of exploitation could take place to begin with.
You forgot about how the the instate power companies signed on to the deregulation plan with the future hopes of reaping huge profits -after they fulfilled certain requirements- to become full deregulated and allowed to pass costs on to customers. PG&E and SCE dragged their feet do meet those requirements and were caught with their pants down when the suppliers started gouging. It's also ridiculous to say that the state deregulation process caused power suppliers to become dishonest. Evidence points to the desire to simply gouge California. It didn't matter who was paying the bill.
Now if you want to talk flawed as in deregulation came about because the power companies wanted huge profits and their large corporate customers wanted cheap power while the individual user was barely considered, I'd agree, but something tells me you're one of those black and white "free market" types.
said by pnh102:
A specific example, like the one I cited with PGW is not a generalization. However, a specific example is all that is logically required to disprove your original generalization that municipally run services are inherently better than privately run services.
It's anecdotal and you imply that's how it will be everywhere, then you go on to say there are private companies for which you can buy power from. Just as you wouldn't buy services from an overpriced, poorly run private company. So what's the problem?
said by pnh102:
Ruby Ranch comes to mind, and then there are also the hundreds of WISPs that are springing up all over the country as well.
You do remember the hell Ruby Ranch has to go thru to get to the point they're at now, and the length of time and legal hassle they had to go through, right? Imagine how hard it's going to be if they want to go farther than just basic DSL to a small collection of homes. The WISP market isn't as big as you'd like to think it is right now, and the bells are encroaching on the WISP market too. I expect some kind of lobbying effort by them in the next year or so in an attempt to hurt the small providers in that area as well.
said by pnh102:
Many municipally run broadband providers rely on some other municipally run service to keep them afloat (e.g., the cable network in Glasgow, KY, relies upon the municipally run power company). If that other service wasn't their to prop up the internet service, where would this money come from? More taxes? On the other side of this coin, how much money could these municipally run services be returning to the ratepayers if they were not involved in subsidizing other non-essential municipal services?
And it's because of those other municipal services they're able to offer something extra. There's nothing wrong with that. And since the power services are already there, your scenerio doesn't apply since the power services aren't going to be uprooted tomorrow to have a negative impact on additional services. Your's is a straw man argument since what you're saying can be applied to the telcos and cablecos, except replace "taxes" with "price increases". Speaking of subsidized services, how's your residential phone line working out for ya? | |
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by JakCrow:
You forgot about how the the instate power companies signed on to the deregulation plan with the future hopes of reaping huge profits -after they fulfilled certain requirements- to become full deregulated and allowed to pass costs on to customers.
So why did the legislators cave into the power companies? The legislators in other states aren't giving into the demands of SBC when it comes to deregulation. As elected officials, the legislators have a moral duty to prevent these kinds of screwups.
said by JakCrow:
Evidence points to the desire to simply gouge California. It didn't matter who was paying the bill.
But that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If this scheme made Enron and other companies so rich, why wasn't it done on a national basis?
said by JakCrow:
Now if you want to talk flawed as in deregulation came about because the power companies wanted huge profits and their large corporate customers wanted cheap power while the individual user was barely considered, I'd agree, but something tells me you're one of those black and white "free market" types.
Damn right, I am a Yankee-imperialist capitalist pig and damn proud of it.  This freedom includes the right for companies to make stupid decisions like was the case with PG&E and SCE. But this begs my original question, why didn't California's legislators think before they passed this law? Certianly legislators in other states see the problems with giving SBC what amounts to a "blank check." California's legislature should have had some foresight. You can't sell something for less than what it costs and you don't need to be brain surgeon to realize that.
said by JakCrow:
It's anecdotal and you imply that's how it will be everywhere, then you go on to say there are private companies for which you can buy power from. Just as you wouldn't buy services from an overpriced, poorly run private company. So what's the problem?
Its perfectly fine for private companies to take risks like these because they're the ones who will go under as a result, provided that the government doesn't step in to "save the day." However, if a government does this, taxes will go up to pay for it (see my previous posts regarding western Penna. school districts). California created an electric power deathtrap that didn't exist in any other state and now people like you have no choice but to pay. Had deregulation been done right (or not at all), the state would be in a better position.
said by JakCrow:
You do remember the hell Ruby Ranch has to go thru to get to the point they're at now, and the length of time and legal hassle they had to go through, right?
Nothing worth doing is easy. If they didn't go through all that heck, they wouldn't be doing business.
said by JakCrow:
the bells are encroaching on the WISP market too.
The bells don't want WISPs to take away their customers, if WISPs encourage the bells/cable companies to expand service then this is a good thing.
said by JakCrow:
I expect some kind of lobbying effort by them in the next year or so in an attempt to hurt the small providers in that area as well.
As we can see with what's happening in Indiana and Nevada, it not a sure thing that these will pass.
said by JakCrow:
And it's because of those other municipal services they're able to offer something extra. There's nothing wrong with that.
If I am paying $100 in electric bills and I know that $50 is going to subsidize internet service that I don't use, I would be a bit steamed that my bill couldn't be reduced by $50.
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over! | |
 morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:
said by morbo:
yes and the health care system in cuba is f-ing amazing. wonder why? not because the private sector stepped up to the plate.
LOL! That's only if you have money to pay for the best care available (usually if you're a rich Western tourist). Of course the same thing is true in any country. If you're a poor Cuban though, as most Cubans are, then you get to wait in line at the socialist medical clinic like everyone else. If you're lucky you may get care.
And another thing, what kind of healthcare do you think the refugees fleeing Cuba that are intercepted by the Cubans get?
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over!
[text was edited by author 2003-03-26 15:24:15]
you obviously don't know what you're talking about. i suggest you do some research before you open your mouth and look like an idiot.
healthcare in cuba is free.
--
R. Kelly = child molester/ child pornographer | |
morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | reply to BBC4544
said by BBC4544:
hahahahahahahahahahahaha
it is so amazing people flee the country in homemade rubber rafts!
hahahahahahahahahahahha
the people aren't fleeing because of the healthcare. they are fleeing because of the lack political freedoms.
maybe you should do some research before posting your first instinct.
--
R. Kelly = child molester/ child pornographer | |
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to morbo
said by morbo:
you obviously don't know what you're talking about. i suggest you do some research before you open your mouth and look like an idiot.
Here you go, straight from the horse's mouth.
said by morbo:
healthcare in cuba is free.
And the Cubans get exactly what they pay for. Maybe if you bothered to do some research of your own, you would see past the Cuban propaganda machine and learn the facts.
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over! | | |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | reply to BBC4544
said by BBC4544:
"You're obviously mistaken. I didn't apologize"
i was giving you the benefit of doubt. you have showed i was mistaken about you being an adult.
An adult would use a little rational thought regarding this matter. You however.....
said by BBC4544:
check OK. i know you live in the socialist state of CA but in the rest of the country companies exist to make a profit.
Last I checked, some of the OK legislators were a little pissed off at SBC for not living up to its promises (meanwhile SBC plays fast and loose with interpretations). And guess what state a significant amount of SBC's profit came from bucky?
said by BBC4544:
it is not for you or a government to decide the needs of the private market. the private market determines the needs.
Uh, yes, it is up to the government, and by extension, the people to decide the "needs" of the private sector, especially when it comes to industries with monopolistic participants that try to manipulate the market. The "private sector" works for the customer, not the other way around, and operates at the "blessings" of the governments involved, local, state, and federal. For example: if a city wanted to legally end a contract with a cableco, there's not a damn thing the cableco could do about it.
said by BBC4544:
if a gas station is needed at elm and main then it is up to the private sector to research and discover this. it is not the governments role to compete with the private sector.
In this case, the private sector isn't competing at all, which is why this matter exists. Do keep up.
said by BBC4544:
as far as who needs to stop talking "mr brownout", you live in a state that is eyeball deep in debt due to getting involved in the private sector.
Oh, there's that name calling you were talking about. Good going. And you're telling me to shut up because I disagree with you AND I live in a particular state? You're a conservative, aren't you? I was right. You are whining.
said by BBC4544:
"You realize you can replace "government" with "telcos/cablecos", don't you?"
ahhh, NO. government has elected officials and collect taxes on an involuntary basis.
Many taxes are approved or denied by the voters in such "backwards" states like, oh, California. Imagine that. We can repeal taxes too. I hope you're able to rise to having such ability if you already do not.
said by BBC4544:
telcos/cablecos are companies that are there to make a profit and sell stocks on a voluntary basis. if you do not subscribe to their service, they do not collect money.
Except when they're the only game in town. Then they need to be smacked down when they behave badly. You consistently and purposefully ignore the fact that -if SBC and Comcast were providing the services and support the people had wanted in the first place, this wouldn't be happening-. If SBC and Comcast (and their supporters here) weren't going around saying there was no profit in providing broadband in the markets that propose city run broadband projects, then backtrack and blitz people with ad campaigns against the city providing services that they didn't want to provide anyways, then perhaps people would have given them yet ANOTHER chance to redeem themselves, but they blew it. You really have no other argument outside of some ill-conceived ideology.
said by BBC4544:
if the government collects a tax that does not mean you are entitled to all services. actually to the contrary, the more taxes you pay the less service you get.
That's why we have elections to vote abusers out if we so choose. We also have the right to approve a municipal services if we so choose. Isn't America great -for everyone-? I'm sorry you don't feel the same. | |
morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:
And the Cubans get exactly what they pay for. Maybe if you bothered to do some research of your own, you would see past the Cuban propaganda machine and learn the facts.
straight from the horse's mouth? lol. you might as well say "because i say so". the link you gave me is from an organization dedicated to anti-castro propaganda.
--
R. Kelly = child molester/ child pornographer | |
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:
So why did the legislators cave into the power companies? The legislators in other states aren't giving into the demands of SBC when it comes to deregulation. As elected officials, the legislators have a moral duty to prevent these kinds of screwups.
Probably for the same black and white free market ideology that doesn't look at the big picture except for PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT. Wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last. If I remember correctly, all the western states were seeing the high prices as well, but were not in the midst of a deregulation process.
said by pnh102:
But that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If this scheme made Enron and other companies so rich, why wasn't it done on a national basis?
Calfornia was a current target? Other states were next? I don't know, do you? I don't think it mattered who paid the bill, customers or power distributors.
said by pnh102:
Damn right, I am a Yankee-imperialist capitalist pig and damn proud of it.
You misunderstand: I have no problem with a capitalist society. I have a problem with the die hard free marketeers that want deregulation no matter how many people have to be stepped on get it (usually the individual consumer). I'm also tired of deregulation that comes about because the industry wants to make more money, or large customers of said industry want to spend less, and damn anyone that gets in the way, while yet again, the individual is left out of the equation but has the most to loose.
said by pnh102:
This freedom includes the right for companies to make stupid decisions like was the case with PG&E and SCE.
I agree
said by pnh102:
But this begs my original question, why didn't California's legislators think before they passed this law?
Bribery? Blind free market proponents? This kind of thing doesn't just happen in CA either.
said by pnh102:
Certianly legislators in other states see the problems with giving SBC what amounts to a "blank check." California's legislature should have had some foresight. You can't sell something for less than what it costs and you don't need to be brain surgeon to realize that.
PG&E and SCE signed on to the process, so I assume the hope was for a speedy transition, which obviously didn't happen because of PG&E and SCE. If you want to talk "blank checks" in general, there's the matter of the states that are giving the bells free rides without foresight.
said by pnh102:
Its perfectly fine for private companies to take risks like these because they're the ones who will go under as a result, provided that the government doesn't step in to "save the day." However, if a government does this, taxes will go up to pay for it (see my previous posts regarding western Penna. school districts). California created an electric power deathtrap that didn't exist in any other state and now people like you have no choice but to pay. Had deregulation been done right (or not at all), the state would be in a better position.
And if a government run program is failing, it's up to the people to vote the ones out responsible. I'm not saying all these city run broadband projects are going to work 100%, but it's obvious WHY they're coming about.
said by pnh102:
Nothing worth doing is easy. If they didn't go through all that heck, they wouldn't be doing business.
It wouldn't have been a problem if Qwest hadn't tried to kill the project to begin with. Earning its reputation again, after all.
said by pnh102:
The bells don't want WISPs to take away their customers, if WISPs encourage the bells/cable companies to expand service then this is a good thing.
Would you be happy if the bells killed WISP competition? I know I wouldn't.
said by pnh102:
As we can see with what's happening in Indiana and Nevada, it not a sure thing that these will pass.
Good, but don't think the bells won't keep trying.
said by pnh102:
If I am paying $100 in electric bills and I know that $50 is going to subsidize internet service that I don't use, I would be a bit steamed that my bill couldn't be reduced by $50.
Stuff like this is more like pennies on the dollar, not half the bill, and that implies no basic user fees. Bur anyways, we're getting sidetracked on the whole CA power dereg now.
[text was edited by author 2003-03-26 16:32:43] | |
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to JakCrow
said by JakCrow:
That's why we have elections to vote abusers out if we so choose.
Which is exactly what happened in California after this power mess! Oh wait, never mind
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over! | |
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
| It wasn't for my lack of trying. I'm still trying to get Tauscher, Feinstein, and Boxer out of Congress. Snooty cows.
I almost forgot an appropriate comparison here: Just like voting against someone in office doesn't mean they'll lose, not buying service from a something like a telco doesn't mean they'll go out of business or have less an effect on the market.
[text was edited by author 2003-03-26 16:42:34] | |
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by JakCrow:
It wasn't for my lack of trying. I'm still trying to get Tauscher, Feinstein, and Boxer out of Congress. Snooty cows.
I understand and sympathize... I can't bear to imagine the kind of socialist paradise that Feinstein and Boxer help to create. But this goes back to my earlier point. Elected officials will stay in power by basically granting a majority of the constituents freebies from the treasury, no matter how ineptly or inefficiently they are run. This fact alone creates the kind of obstacles you face in throwing these bums out.
My example with PGW exacerbates this point. Every year many people in Philadelphia complain about PGW and say it should be privatized, but because PGW provides jobs for political hacks and cronies, and because it "gives" away so much product to so many people because the agency doesn't enforce billing, it makes it very hard to vote in politicians that will make the push to privatize the utility. Philadelphia has been run by the same flock of politicians for the past 50 years, its very hard to make anything change there.
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over! And don't forget, 2 out of 3 human shields agree! Saddam really is evil! | |
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
| said by pnh102:
I understand and sympathize... I can't bear to imagine the kind of socialist paradise that Feinstein and Boxer help to create. But this goes back to my earlier point. Elected officials will stay in power by basically granting a majority of the constituents freebies from the treasury, no matter how ineptly or inefficiently they are run. This fact alone creates the kind of obstacles you face in throwing these bums out.
See my addition. Much about government can be applied the industries like telcom with only a few powerful players stomping about like giants in a playground. As to Boxer and Feinstein being socialists? I prefer to catagorize them more plainly: elitist bitches that want to have more rights than the average person. Like Feinstein wanting more gun laws that hurt honest people while she has a concealed weapons permit.
[text was edited by author 2003-03-26 17:10:23] | |
 ravitalJust Another Pesky Independent Nh VoterPremium
join:2001-07-19
Merrimack, NH | reply to pnh102
Re: Hokey Math... said by pnh102:
said by 2farfromCO7:
ALL MONOPOLIES ARE EVIL.
Government is a monopoly, is it evil too?
Government is a monopoly? Let me see, cable franchises win 10-year contracts with no one moving in on their turf, ant that's called competition. Government needs your vote every 2-4 years depending on the area and the office, and that's a monopoly? | |
ravitalJust Another Pesky Independent Nh VoterPremium
join:2001-07-19
Merrimack, NH | reply to BBC4544
Re: full steam ahead at your cost said by BBC4544:
you make it sound like dsl is in the bill of rights.
So, how happy would you be to give up your dsl and go back to dialup? At the very least, the broadband capabilities of a town are a factor in attracting business, practically ANY business. Not to mention it raises property values - I know several folks looking for homes staying away from my town because they all know our broadband/cable stinks. But if/when we go FTTH, watch out. Now, are municipal power, electricity or sewer or good schools in the bill of rights? Get real. | |
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
| reply to ravital
Re: Hokey Math... said by ravital:
Government is a monopoly? Let me see, cable franchises win 10-year contracts with no one moving in on their turf, ant that's called competition.
No one is forcing local government to do this. If the people are pissed off with the cable company, the town can just dump the franchise altogether. I've suggested in previous posts that local people could form their own private cable company just for a given town that could provide the better service the people want.
said by ravital:
Government needs your vote every 2-4 years depending on the area and the office, and that's a monopoly?
If I live in an area in which the ambient political trend strongly disagrees with mine, (e.g., a right wing conservative living in Berkeley) then the odds are that the government is never going to see things my way. I can't throw out the government or get my government services from some other government so that is why its a monopoly. My only choice would be to move. On the other hand, there is some competition to cable TV service (satellite) as well as landline phone service (cell phones) and as WISPs become more prevalent, there will be more competition in the broadband arena too. I know that I would not want my town raising property taxes to pay for a municipally run cable network, but if my town decides to do it, I have no choice but to pay for it unless I move. However, if the people who actually wanted better broadband service got together and formed their own local high speed ISP (perhaps with assistance from the government in the form of tax breaks and/or grants of easements, etc.) then I would be all for it.
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over! And don't forget, 2 out of 3 human shields agree! Saddam really is evil!
[text was edited by author 2003-03-27 08:32:39] | |
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to morbo
Re: full steam ahead at your cost said by morbo:
straight from the horse's mouth? lol. you might as well say "because i say so". the link you gave me is from an organization dedicated to anti-castro propaganda.
Well if Castro was such a good guy, and if Cuba's healthcare system really was that great, why are so many Cubans trying to leave?
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over! And don't forget, 2 out of 3 human shields agree! Saddam really is evil! | |
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to JakCrow
said by JakCrow:
You misunderstand: I have no problem with a capitalist society.
Sorry about that... That's just my standard honest reply to anyone who asks me that question LOL.
said by JakCrow:
I have a problem with the die hard free marketeers that want deregulation no matter how many people have to be stepped on get it (usually the individual consumer).
I agree with you 100% on this one, but I also think that what happened in California with regards to the electric companies should not have been called "deregulation" because it clearly wasn't that at all.
said by JakCrow:
I'm also tired of deregulation that comes about because the industry wants to make more money, or large customers of said industry want to spend less, and damn anyone that gets in the way, while yet again, the individual is left out of the equation but has the most to loose.
I believe there does exist a happy medium with regards to this. As I said before, regulation of electrical generation in Penna. has been successful on both fronts, it not only gives customers more choices with regards to price, but companies have continued to make money. Local governments here can now buy their power from the lowest bidder like they do with any other commodity. Some people I know here however don't use price as the sole criteria for their choice of electrical generation company. A lot of people choose "earth-friendly" power companies even though they cost more than what they paid before. I think its great that people actually have these choices now.
said by JakCrow:
And if a government run program is failing, it's up to the people to vote the ones out responsible.
Sigh... as long as people benefit from these "failed" programs (most welfare programs imo), they will never go away.
said by JakCrow:
Would you be happy if the bells killed WISP competition? I know I wouldn't.
Nor would I, but in the areas that WISPs operate there hasn't been too much of a move by the Bells to kill them.
said by JakCrow:
Stuff like this is more like pennies on the dollar, not half the bill, and that implies no basic user fees.
That's how it all starts. No matter how poorly a municipally run cable system is run, as long as it has a crutch to provide it with funding, it will continue to operate with no incentive to improve. Its very easy for a municipally run utility to jack up rates to subsidize internet access because everyone needs electric power. In Greece for example, the 3 government-run TV networks all get their funding by tacking on surcharges to the electric bill. There's no way to get out of paying for them.
--
Pissed off at traitorous, ungrateful musicians? Don't just boycott them! Trade their MP3s and really screw them over! And don't forget, 2 out of 3 human shields agree! Saddam really is evil! | |
morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:
said by morbo:
straight from the horse's mouth? lol. you might as well say "because i say so". the link you gave me is from an organization dedicated to anti-castro propaganda.
Well if Castro was such a good guy, and if Cuba's healthcare system really was that great, why are so many Cubans trying to leave?
i never said castro was a good guy. i never said cubans have political freedom that we (for the most part) enjoy in the u.s. i can assure you that cubans aren't fleeing because of the free healthcare.
my point is that cuba dedicates a huge portion of funding to public health care system so that everyone can enjoy needed healthcare - even the poorest of the poor. if the u.s. did the same we would have fewer homeless people on the street since a large number of these individuals suffer from mental illness.
--
R. Kelly = child molester/ child pornographer | |
 NevsterPremium
join:2002-04-06
Dalhousie, NB | reply to 2farfromCO7
Re: Hokey Math... said by 2farfromCO7:
No, governments will never be as efficient as cutthroat competitive companies that face stiff competition and worry about it every day.
In this context, a local government has clear growth boundaries. They can purchase the appropriate amount of infrastructure; they needn't worry about explosive growth. This article,
»www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,936031,00.asp
sums it all up. My network is not going to grow beyond the City limits of San Bruno. Therefore, I will not need 4 vastly expensive Sun E450 clusters to handle mail alone for our 16K possible households. The infrastructure to provide service to those 16K possible households has been in place for the last 5 years. If everybody signed up for Internet service tomorrow, our business plan would accommodate it, without significant infrastructure upgrades required. You don't have this luxury when you're national, expanding, and competing for market share.
I was working for ANS.net (known to members as AOLnet for dialup purposes) when the flat-rate service announcement came down. All modem banks went full-tilt-boogie immediately, and hundreds of millions of dollars had to be immediately invested in hardware, PoPs, backbone capacity, and POTS lines. Explosive growth will kill ya.
It's actually pretty cool to be able to forecast a worst-case expansion scenario.
Cheers,
-nevin | |
|
