2 ms·
Where do you think the money to pay it back over 30 years comes from if not the consumer? Breaking up the company doesn't achieve a damned thing beyond employi
by Ntrails 8y ago
Where do you think the money to pay it back over 30 years comes from if not the consumer? Breaking up the company doesn't achieve a damned thing beyond employing more people doing the same job. Wiping out equity changes nothing beyond bankrupting the company.
The mind boggles. You cannot change behaviours/regulate infrastructure maintenance or safety through fines to shareholders (and, by proxy, consumers).
- reissbaker 8y agoWith infrastructure you have a few options for managing risk: 1. Stiff regulation for "natural monopolies," or for effectively state-monopolies. The state legislature then prevents the company from raising rates in order to pay back loans or pay off fines. Negligent behavior is punished by the state. 2. Competition, e.g. the Ma Bell breakup. Break up PG&E and have its small companies compete with each other. Any one company can't raise rates to pay off negligent behavior, because they'll lose out to their competition. Negligent behavior is punished by the market. 3. Ajit Pai yourself into a few monopolies with no regulation, and rejoice as you live with whatever Comcast deigns to give you. Actively malicious behavior goes unpunished, or is even rewarded.
- abakker 8y agoit is entirely possible to pay back money without raising prices. Yes, money flows from the consumer, but, you can: a) reduce profitability b) issue more equity and use the proceeds to pay back debt c) increase efficiency/lower cost to deliver services.