5 ms·

There should not be "THE" water company. There should be many of them. Then we don't have to discuss which price is fair. Maybe some of them want to sell water

by wayn3 9y ago

There should not be "THE" water company. There should be many of them. Then we don't have to discuss which price is fair. Maybe some of them want to sell water at 1k/litre. Others won't. The market will figure it out. This is price fixing. If microsoft and apple collude to fix the price of an engineer, you outcry. If you discuss what utilities should cost, prices fixed by monopolies is somehow ok. That's why politics doesn't work. Not a lot of people have the balls to vote on principles instead of what they want for themselves.

JoeAltmaier 9y ago
Utilities are formed when the product is necessary but selling it would be hard (low marginal value). Like water and electricity. In the rural area where I live, we wouldn't have electricity without a federally created cooperative. And we don't have water utilities at all - I have my own well and septic system. Like all my neighbors. So in a sense there are many water companies?
- wayn3 9y ago
  If you have lots of small companies that do not compete with each other, for whatever reason, we are still talking about monopolies. If utilities are operated not for profit but as a form of charity, pricing of their services should be determined by how much they need to charge in order to stay in business (as low as possible). -> that makes arguing over pricing based on value irrelevant.
  - JoeAltmaier 9y ago
    Well, all but the 'charity' part. My cooperative is benefitting ourselves. Is that 'charity'? Anyway, agreed.
    - wayn3 9y ago
      I don't mean "charity" in a demeaning way. If you operate a business, and a business is really anything that engages in trade but is not a real person, and that businesses purpose is not solely the optimization of profits, then it is, at least in part, a "charity". There's nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying that a monopoly that is not maximising its profits acts in a charitable way. Either by choice or by force. Kinda irrelevant.

by wayn3 9y ago

JoeAltmaier 9y ago

Utilities are formed when the product is necessary but selling it would be hard (low marginal value). Like water and electricity. In the rural area where I live, we wouldn't have electricity without a federally created cooperative. And we don't have water utilities at all - I have my own well and septic system. Like all my neighbors. So in a sense there are many water companies?

wayn3 9y ago
If you have lots of small companies that do not compete with each other, for whatever reason, we are still talking about monopolies. If utilities are operated not for profit but as a form of charity, pricing of their services should be determined by how much they need to charge in order to stay in business (as low as possible). -> that makes arguing over pricing based on value irrelevant.
- JoeAltmaier 9y ago
  Well, all but the 'charity' part. My cooperative is benefitting ourselves. Is that 'charity'? Anyway, agreed.
  - wayn3 9y ago
    I don't mean "charity" in a demeaning way. If you operate a business, and a business is really anything that engages in trade but is not a real person, and that businesses purpose is not solely the optimization of profits, then it is, at least in part, a "charity". There's nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying that a monopoly that is not maximising its profits acts in a charitable way. Either by choice or by force. Kinda irrelevant.