4 ms·
Right, I'd be sympathetic to this liability argument if they weren't extracting profits and neglecting maintenance. Obviously the fire issue is bigger than a si
by james-mcelwain 7y ago
Right, I'd be sympathetic to this liability argument if they weren't extracting profits and neglecting maintenance. Obviously the fire issue is bigger than a single utility, but their actions here leave them little public good will.
- ncmncm 7y agoI would demonstrate my sympathy for their desire not to be a public utility anymore by confiscating their assets, firing their management, and turning their assets over to someone who does want to be a public utility.
- lmilcin 7y agoWhat you describe is called communism. PG&E is a company with owners and while you may not like it you can't just take other peoples' property. There are appropriate venues to vent your frustration. There is judicial system where you can go and defend your own rights if you feel PG&E stepped on it. You can go and vote for somebody to step up and solve the problem. You can also make other people aware of the problem by using your right to free speech.
- ncmncm 7y agoNo. A public utility is permitted what would be anti-trust violations, and handed a monopoly, in exchange for acting in the public interest. When they abandon the public interest, they have violated their end of the bargain. The stockholders are responsible to prevent that; if they fail, they lose their investment. The educational system has failed you if you never learned about this. Anticipating your next objection: no, public education is also not Communism. Communism, by numerous well-attested examples, means exterminating millions of citizens for no offense but existing. I don't find anyone proposing that. Here.