51 ms·

But regular consumers weren't aware of the increased astronomical prices. Joe plumber wasn't aware that running his lights would cost so much money. The prices

by jrs235 5y ago

But regular consumers weren't aware of the increased astronomical prices. Joe plumber wasn't aware that running his lights would cost so much money. The prices weren't dissuading or decreasing demand.

iso1631 5y ago
The free market only works when everyone has full information and a realistic alternative. When the alternative is "freeze to death" and the information is "you'll get a bill next month between $500 and $500,000", it doesn't work, and something needs to step in and protect people.
- sixothree 5y ago
  I feel like this thread is brigaded to death. The fact of the failure is clear. But the one constant in all of these arguments is to introduce uncertainty and attempt to shift blame. I think it is an odd choice to blame the consumer in this scenario since customers just one state over did just fine throughout this ordeal.
tristor 5y ago
Joe Plumber didn't have to pay any more... and the fact people continue to not understand this makes /every/ thread about the Texas incident last February pointless.
- jrs235 5y ago
  I don't know who's telling the truth: https://news.yahoo.com/5-152-power-bill-texas-192316981.html https://news.yahoo.com/5-152-power-bill-texas-192316981.html Edit: Perhaps in the end consumers didn't have to pay. I haven't found anything saying they didn't.
  - tristor 5y ago
    The very article you link is talking about exactly one small provider that has an entire business focused on consumers signing up to pay wholesale rates live (which are generally much lower than the contract rates) called Griddy. Griddy customers are the ONLY individuals in the entire state who had their power bill go up last February during the storm. According to Griddy they had around 29000 customers in Texas last year and there are roughly 29 Million people in Texas, so that means less than 1/10th of 1% (0.001) of the Texas population had to pay an increased power bill last February. There are different systems in different municipalities. Houston and Dallas both have systems where multiple providers can offer service which are distinct from the providers responsible for the actual utility infrastructure (power lines to your house). Austin and San Antonio both have municipally owned utilities (CPS Energy in San Antonio, Austin Energy in Austin). For the majority of households they either have a contracted rate based on their agreement when they signed up for service (just like a cell phone contract), or they have a legally set rate which requires a ballot issue. This is WELL established. There's no dispute here, and if you can't "tell who's telling the truth", it just means you haven't bothered doing any research before deciding. The national media used the snowstorm in February as a political tool to kick Texas while it was down because they see it as a Republican bastion (even though the majority of the population lives in reliably blue cities in national elections and Texas is purple now), and used something truthful for less than 1/10th of 1% of the population to act like it was that way for everyone to make the issue seem larger than it was. Also from your article "Despite the astronomical prices, Scott-Amos is considered one of the lucky ones, as millions of people across Texas are still without power while temperatures remain perilously low." Griddy customers pay the live wholesale price, they were also immune from forced load-shedding meaning they didn't go without power during freezing weather like most other Texans did, so true to their contract they paid the live wholesale price and in return received guaranteed service. Sounds like they got exactly what they signed up for at the risk they decided to take which 99.999% of Texans opted not to take for the safer (but generally more expensive) financial bet.
    - jrs235 5y ago
      Thank you and thank you for the information/numbers. In regards to "The national media used the snowstorm in February as a political tool to kick Texas while it was down because they see it as a Republican bastion" I agree. However, it didn't help that this problem was spun around by the opposite side and used to blame solar and wind energy sources as the reason for the problem. From what I gather(ed) the root problem was the lack of winterization to [all] energy infrastructure. But perhaps I'm misinformed on this too. Do you have additional insight? Thanks.

by jrs235 5y ago

iso1631 5y ago

The free market only works when everyone has full information and a realistic alternative. When the alternative is "freeze to death" and the information is "you'll get a bill next month between $500 and $500,000", it doesn't work, and something needs to step in and protect people.

sixothree 5y ago
I feel like this thread is brigaded to death. The fact of the failure is clear. But the one constant in all of these arguments is to introduce uncertainty and attempt to shift blame. I think it is an odd choice to blame the consumer in this scenario since customers just one state over did just fine throughout this ordeal.

tristor 5y ago

Joe Plumber didn't have to pay any more... and the fact people continue to not understand this makes /every/ thread about the Texas incident last February pointless.

jrs235 5y ago
I don't know who's telling the truth: https://news.yahoo.com/5-152-power-bill-texas-192316981.html https://news.yahoo.com/5-152-power-bill-texas-192316981.html Edit: Perhaps in the end consumers didn't have to pay. I haven't found anything saying they didn't.
- tristor 5y ago
  The very article you link is talking about exactly one small provider that has an entire business focused on consumers signing up to pay wholesale rates live (which are generally much lower than the contract rates) called Griddy. Griddy customers are the ONLY individuals in the entire state who had their power bill go up last February during the storm. According to Griddy they had around 29000 customers in Texas last year and there are roughly 29 Million people in Texas, so that means less than 1/10th of 1% (0.001) of the Texas population had to pay an increased power bill last February. There are different systems in different municipalities. Houston and Dallas both have systems where multiple providers can offer service which are distinct from the providers responsible for the actual utility infrastructure (power lines to your house). Austin and San Antonio both have municipally owned utilities (CPS Energy in San Antonio, Austin Energy in Austin). For the majority of households they either have a contracted rate based on their agreement when they signed up for service (just like a cell phone contract), or they have a legally set rate which requires a ballot issue. This is WELL established. There's no dispute here, and if you can't "tell who's telling the truth", it just means you haven't bothered doing any research before deciding. The national media used the snowstorm in February as a political tool to kick Texas while it was down because they see it as a Republican bastion (even though the majority of the population lives in reliably blue cities in national elections and Texas is purple now), and used something truthful for less than 1/10th of 1% of the population to act like it was that way for everyone to make the issue seem larger than it was. Also from your article "Despite the astronomical prices, Scott-Amos is considered one of the lucky ones, as millions of people across Texas are still without power while temperatures remain perilously low." Griddy customers pay the live wholesale price, they were also immune from forced load-shedding meaning they didn't go without power during freezing weather like most other Texans did, so true to their contract they paid the live wholesale price and in return received guaranteed service. Sounds like they got exactly what they signed up for at the risk they decided to take which 99.999% of Texans opted not to take for the safer (but generally more expensive) financial bet.
  - jrs235 5y ago
    Thank you and thank you for the information/numbers. In regards to "The national media used the snowstorm in February as a political tool to kick Texas while it was down because they see it as a Republican bastion" I agree. However, it didn't help that this problem was spun around by the opposite side and used to blame solar and wind energy sources as the reason for the problem. From what I gather(ed) the root problem was the lack of winterization to [all] energy infrastructure. But perhaps I'm misinformed on this too. Do you have additional insight? Thanks.