For my Libertarian friends

Slartibartfast wrote: I have to speak with the experience we had in this state with natural gas "deregulation".  Instead of one well regulated statewide gas company the legislation gave us a bunch of gas marketers.  This was supposed to lower prices.  When you introduce a whole crop of competing middlemen, that weren't present before, that doesn't actually happen.  You just introduce another layer of corporate bureaucracy.  Natural gas bills have never been so high in this state and never will be as low again as they were.  The damn gas still is delivered over the same lines.  The original company still looks after the maintenance of those lines.  They're into the gas marketing racket now, too. You've got a whole confusing range of rates and plans to "choose" from.   Despite the Public Service Commission (largely owned by the private utility corporations through campaign contributions), there's no real way to tell what the cheapest plan is.  The next harebrained Republican utility deregulation scheme will probably go through because too many people in this state are too brain dead.

Yeah, we've got that over here too - finest confidence trick known to modern business - by the time we work out how the scam works they will have cooked up a different one.

I have to speak with the experience we had in this state with natural gas "deregulation".  Instead of one well regulated statewide gas company the legislation gave us a bunch of gas marketers.  This was supposed to lower prices.  When you introduce a whole crop of competing middlemen, that weren't present before, that doesn't actually happen.  You just introduce another layer of corporate bureaucracy.  Natural gas bills have never been so high in this state and never will be as low again as they were.  The damn gas still is delivered over the same lines.  The original company still looks after the maintenance of those lines.  They're into the gas marketing racket now, too.

You've got a whole confusing range of rates and plans to "choose" from.   Despite the Public Service Commission (largely owned by the private utility corporations through campaign contributions), there's no real way to tell what the cheapest plan is.  The next harebrained Republican utility deregulation scheme will probably go through because too many people in this state are too brain dead.


Edited by Slartibartfast - July 02 2010 at 12:17

Padraic wrote: Dean wrote: Slartibartfast wrote: Well, the party part sounds good.  The tea however frightens me. As an Engishman I find the terms "tea" and "party" to most favourable - it's when you put the two words together I feel offended. Still offended?  That was a long time ago.

Epignosis wrote: City lays off all city employees and relies on contractors...and things are better for them financially.

How does that work exactly? Private companies are not charities, they have to make a profit. If they are providing the same services at the same manpower then their wage bill will be the same, the cost of materials and supplies will be the same and their overheads (management staff, support staff, vehicle maintenance, health & safety, buildings etc) will also be the same. So if their outlay is the same and their income is less (as implied in the article), then how do they turn that deficit into a profit?

City lays off all city employees and relies on contractors...and things are better for them financially.

Easy Money wrote: I was wondering if any of you guys get into Henry George influenced Libertarianism which espouses land ownership and taxes and has community needs paid for by use of the land?

Never heard of him, but from that quick thing...sounds almost like a very very old school system? Like, I'm talking Purtian days of state granted land to a community that divided it up as each "town" wanted, and you know it was a real communal thing.
Could be way off though

But Bob Barr has one killer 'stache.

But I'm assuming she doesn't have one herself. Could be wrong....

Yeah Mary Ruwart by far deserved the nomination. Barr is a fashionable, old media darling libertarian. 

stonebeard wrote: Did anyone actually vote for Bob Barr in 08? I did. I don't regret it either. I'm actually confused as to why anyone would want to vote for a Republican. The most rational idea I can come up with that is not based on imposing morality on people is to get vaguely restrictive economic policies in the White House. But then we end up with trickle-down economics and tax cuts that favor big businesses, corporations, etc. and giving them a free ride in raping and pillaging the landscape...lest we forget. I just think the White House is too important to endow to another Bush administration, which is why I'll never vote for Republicans as they are now. I usually say Democrats aren't much better. They're very much better when it comes to social issues and all, but they need to grow some damn spines and make good decisions, not bulky sh*t like the Health Care bill. For the love of god who besides a paid intern is going to read that piece of sh*t?

And besides, it was the Indians that did it.