4 ms·
It's like they're trying to get nationalized
by unlinked_dll 7y ago
It's like they're trying to get nationalized
- Consultant32452 7y agoAt some levels of regulation, there is no meaningful difference between private and nationalized. Owning the means of production includes certain rights like deciding what to do with the capital/equipment. Every regulation that controls your actions with the equipment or what your workers can do is, in part, the state seizing the means of production. Similarly with taxes. The difference between a nationalized PG&E and a private one is that if the state lights a forest fire due to poor maintenance on the lines, the state isn't going to allow you to sue them.
- baddox 7y agoWell, since they have a government-granted monopoly, and they have been doing a very terrible job, the only group that can seemingly improve things is the government. Now, it may be true that there isn't a huge difference between the state taking full control, or the state finding another private utility company, or the state implementing more regulations on PGE. I agree that may not matter that much, but the point is that the state government absolutely needs to fix this, because no one else will.
- unlinked_dll 7y ago>At some levels of regulation, there is no meaningful difference between private and nationalized. The one regulation missing for this in PG&E's case is mandating profit reinvested in infrastructure ahead of shareholder dividends, buybacks, and|or executive compensation.
- Consultant32452 7y agoI think you'd get better results with a system that increases competition and incentivizes things like quality of service. The competition has the side benefit of decreasing those profits you seem concerned about. Forcing them to spend money internally just incentives internal costs to increase, not to improve quality of service.