←back to thread

Deregulated energy markets accelerate solar adoption

(seanobannon.substack.com)
71 points seanobannon | 3 comments | 24 Mar 25 16:05 UTC | HN request time: 0.648s | source
Show context
nomercy400 ◴[24 Mar 25 17:06 UTC] No.43463163[source]▶
Deregulating a basic human need and leaving it to the 'market' to solve this. This sounds a lot like other privatization efforts of the past decades.

In my country healthcare, child support, energy, national railway, postal services, public housing, banking and more have all been privatized.

I worry about this. Not for now, but for 20 years in the future, where all energy is managed by companies and the government can no longer control the market due to being 'too big too fail' and because it gave all control away.

replies(4): >>43463263 #>>43463345 #>>43463387 #>>43463619 #
naasking ◴[24 Mar 25 17:16 UTC] No.43463263[source]▶
There is nothing wrong with markets solving basic human needs as long as the incentives are properly aligned.
replies(5): >>43463319 #>>43463343 #>>43463395 #>>43463408 #>>43463458 #
CooCooCaCha ◴[24 Mar 25 17:31 UTC] No.43463408[source]▶
Company and customer incentives are fundamentally not aligned.

Companies want to maximize profit and minimize cost, while customers want as much as possible for the lowest price.

replies(1): >>43470438 #
1. naasking ◴[25 Mar 25 12:32 UTC] No.43470438[source]▶
And companies have to compete for customers on cost, which yields an equilibrium that works out well for customers on most goods and services. This is well established at this point.
replies(1): >>43472163 #
2. CooCooCaCha ◴[25 Mar 25 14:59 UTC] No.43472163[source]▶
It is not well established at this point. I get the impression you're reading a textbook on economics, and not how it works in the real world.

Take covid inflation for example. Covid caused supply chain issues which then caused a temporary bout of inflation, however, companies took this as an opportunity to increase their profit margins more than they need to. They specifically bragged about this in quarterly earnings calls.

If companies truly compete on cost then how does stuff like that happen? Shouldn't it have been corrected by now? But that's not what we see, we see companies continue to increase prices with little consequence.

replies(1): >>43473198 #
3. naasking ◴[25 Mar 25 16:34 UTC] No.43473198[source]▶
> It is not well established at this point. I get the impression you're reading a textbook on economics, and not how it works in the real world.

You're writing this from the comfort of your home where you're enjoying the fruits of the most significant quality of life improvements over 200 years. Hedonistic adaptation has blinded you to all of the evidence that's staring in the face, like the screen you're reading on right now.

> however, companies took this as an opportunity to increase their profit margins more than they need to. They specifically bragged about this in quarterly earnings calls.

Temporary aberrations from extreme disruptions do not refute the general rule.