3 ms·
The real guilty party here is the state government for privatising a natural monopoly/utility and therefore having introduced a profit motive. If PG&E is effec
by learnstats2 7y ago
The real guilty party here is the state government for privatising a natural monopoly/utility and therefore having introduced a profit motive.
If PG&E is effectively a state run corporation (which is correct - providing essential utilities will ultimately fall upon the state as a provider of last resort), then it's most efficient to remove the private elements of it.
- dehrmann 7y agoNo, it's for not regulating them more strictly. But as monopolies, the California Public Utilities Commission does regulate them somewhat heavily compared the average business. > If PG&E is effectively a state run corporation There's a long enough track record of mismanagement in government that 1/3 of people ~anywhere in the US would say government management is a problem, then point to FEMA and the DMV. There's also the issue that the government's not liable for mistakes, so you have no recourse for run-of-the-mill accidents.
- learnstats2 7y ago> No, it's for not regulating them more strictly. I disagree - regulation is another inefficiency. Why would you privatise and then spend money on regulating, when you could spend that directly on providing the service?