Quote:
Originally posted by seretogis
First off, Enron is one power company. One corrupt power company. To suggest that because of one company that privatization is a failure, is ridiculous. Wherever you have positions of power (no pun intended), there will be corruption. The only difference between corrupt private companies and corrupt government agencies, is that private companies are eventually caught and held accountable (as much as rich white men can be held accountable in our legal system  ).
A government agency is held much less accountable by the people, as there really is very little way for them to exercise power over it. If AT&T suddenly is revealed to be a corrupt bunch of hooligans, consumers can switch their local phone service to another provider. Hopefully, eventually, there will be several options for each consumer for any utility.
|
Actually, it was found that several power companies were culpable in the deregulation fiasco in CA.
Enron's actions in this were just the tip of the iceberg,
their scandal & downfall were mostly related to the fact that they had cooked the books in their accounting and actual worth,
their actual assets didn't match their "claimed" assets.
The various power companies are still in court as the govt. tries to get back monies overcharge...and of course, they will only recover a fraction.
Even though I do agree with many Libertarian ideals,
it is an unfortunate necessity to have overview regulations
for certain industries...
since the scale of these industries affect the state & national infrastructure.
Utilities, Air Industry, Chemical, Oil, Some Environmental, etc.
Why?
Because these have become NECESSITIES for the stability of the nation & the lives that make it.
We cannot allow it to get out of hand in the first place, because too many people & business rely on it to survive.
The damage can be profound, even if caught after a reletively short time.
If released to supply and demand, the companies that already hold the majority, will milk the citizens & govt. for their profit.
As shown in CA, there are too few, and the costs of developing are too large to allow common business practices sway what we now live on.
Or at least as fast as CA allowed it, without tight rein as they released it.
It took YEARS to massage out the kinks of MA Bell and the split,
and even now, these (the Baby Bells, MCI and Sprint) are still much regulated.
But it DOES allow competition, just monitored.
As we have seen, each govt. philosphy is not good when the ideals are absolute.
We are really not a democracy, we are a federal republic.
And we are not completely capitalist, there is a bit of socialism as a safety net.
And we are not completely deregulated, there is a bit of control needed.
There is a balance to everything.