Comment by monero-xmr
3 days ago
Most people agree that we need utilities to be monopolies. PG&E, for all intents and purposes, is an arm of the state. Perhaps it’s private in some sense but we all know it’s the government. It has to abide by all manner of government mandates, there is no competition. If you want it to go bankrupt just let it go bankrupt. Whatever replaces it will be the same thing. I don’t have a solution but all the teeth gnashing isn’t going to change the fact that electricity is a government issue and whoever runs it will work at the behest of the California government and the voters.
Pass whatever rules you want. It isn’t going to change the fundamental nature of the org, which is a reflection of the voters. This is a government problem, through and through
> electricity is a government issue and whoever runs it will work at the behest of the California government and the voters.
That's hilarious. The CPUC is regularory-captured like nobody's business, and our governor has been in the pocket of the utility for as long as I can remember. I guess in some sick way that's "at the behest of the government", but it sure as hell isn't at the behest of voters.
Unfortunately, we rarely have choices in every aspect of political candidates in order to change this state of affairs.
I've never heard of any monopoly that worked "at the behest of the California government and the voters."
Monopolies work to enrich themselves, not to provide social benefit.
Perhaps that's in alignment with California government :)
It's not government in at least one major way: there are private shareholders which dividends are paid out to.
This incentive structure perfectly aligns with most of the dysfunction of PG&E.
So no, it isn't really comparable with a truly government owned public utility.