Seriously, I think that there is an argument for shared Fed/State maintenance of the network and for paying power companies to get the power to the network.
Bill On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:43:45 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > It depends. > > Whether you believe in universality or whether you believe in > competition. > Belief plays a strong role here. > > What is one's conception of a "good" society? What is the dominant > preferred value. Competition or universality. What sort of balance > should > be established? When? > (I don't think one can have both) > > arthur > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 4:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Futurework] Power-ful thoughts and big distractions > > > Here's how it looks to me: > > The electric power producers want deregulation > so they can make as much profit as possible -- > but they want the power grid to be heavily > regulated to guarantee power delivery so that > they will be able to make their > profits without being DISTRACTED (the Bush > word do jour!) by having to make the grid > work. But a grid robust enough to > handle the unpredictably > fluctuating loads from competition will have to have > substantially more capacity than if it only had > to handle minimized managed transmission > from tightly regulated producers. > > So the empirical question for economists > arises: Which will cost more, for the whole > package of transmission and production: > Deregulated production with extra > transmission capacity, or a less expensive > transmision network with regulated > producers? > > This leads to the SOCIAL question: Even if > competition costs MORE, do we still want competition > instead of regulation, because > what we want in life is not lower costs, > or leisure or anything else, > but the joys of competition as a good in > and for itself? > > -- > > Last week, Paul Krugman spoke of: > > faith-based deregulation > > -- > > Also, a senior Bush official described > religious opposition to the U.S. in Iraq as a: > > distraction > > the U.S. could not afford at this time, > presumably like the possibility of Gore > winning in Nov. 2000 was a DISTRACTION > the Bush admiistration could not aford at that > time. > > \brad mccormick > > -- > Let your light so shine before men, > that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16) > > Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) > > <![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
