Wind Power is a Complete Disaster

**Big Dog** · April-27-09, 09:22 PM

Should we socialize utility companies, like we're doing to financial and auto manufacturers?

**rb336** · April-28-09, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by Big Dog

Should we socialize utility companies, like we're doing to financial and auto manufacturers?

several studies have shown that community-owned energy companies provide more reliable service at a lower cost than private companies. they also upgrade their equipment more often

ccbatson · April-28-09, 03:20 PM

Myopic...in the long run lack of competition gives declining quality and rising costs.

**3WC** · April-28-09, 04:53 PM

What happened to Speramus? He had a post on here I wanted to respond to when I had time.

**jams** · April-28-09, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Myopic...in the long run lack of competition gives declining quality and rising costs.

At what point would the 19th century Cc have approved the internal combustion engine?

**rb336** · April-29-09, 07:36 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Myopic...in the long run lack of competition gives declining quality and rising costs.

your proof?

**3WC** · April-29-09, 09:27 AM

I'll answer that question. Probably a 100 books on marketing and economics. One doesn't have to get a Harvard MBA to understand the concept. Ever hear of the anti-trust laws? Read the 1000's of studies that have been written about the issue. I'm not going to spend any time digging up specific sources. Your tactic, Rb, is if someone tells you the sun rises in the East, you respond with: "Source?"

**rb336** · April-29-09, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by 3WC

I'll answer that question. Probably a 100 books on marketing and economics. One doesn't have to get a Harvard MBA to understand the concept. Ever hear of the anti-trust laws? Read the 1000's of studies that have been written about the issue. I'm not going to spend any time digging up specific sources. Your tactic, Rb, is if someone tells you the sun rises in the East, you respond with: "Source?"

actually, i don't

books on economics aren't "proof" -- they are not even theories. they are mostly untestable hypotheses.

I do agree that in most things, corporate competition is good. in utilities, it is defacto impossible and time and again publicly owned [[as opposed to publicly traded) utilities give better service, better prices, etc. numerous consumer satisfaction studies back that up

**ghettopalmetto** · April-29-09, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by 3WC

Your tactic, Rb, is if someone tells you the sun rises in the East, you respond with: "Source?"

It's not unreasonable to ask someone the basis from which they draw their conclusions. If said person can't explain how he reached his conclusion, then he's full of shit, plain and simple.

For what it's worth, that's the entire premise of our judicial system, and in academia, so I assume such a premise is worthy of the great minds who post here.

**rb336** · April-29-09, 10:30 AM

Why did the economists invent astrology?

They needed something that would make economics look scientific

ccbatson · April-29-09, 04:26 PM

History is even better proof. Look at the course and plight of the more socialist systems. Look at Europe and Russia for a present tense illustration.

**Detroitej72** · April-29-09, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

History is even better proof. Look at the course and plight of the more socialist systems. Look at Europe and Russia for a present tense illustration.

Many in Europe seem to be just fine with their systems.

Next!

**Glowblue** · April-29-09, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

History is even better proof. Look at the course and plight of the more socialist systems. Look at Europe and Russia for a present tense illustration.

Most of Europe has a better electric grid then the US, and all European utilities are government-owned.

**rb336** · April-30-09, 07:41 AM

WARNING!

you are not playing fair by letting actual facts get in the way of the dogmatic doggerel

**3WC** · April-30-09, 01:55 PM

Re: Rb post #206@ 9:21 A.M. yesterday [[one of several # 206 posts)

You state that publicly owned utilities give better prices, service etc and "numerous consumer studies back that up." Source? Proof?

Let me give you an example of how wrong you are and one doesn't have to look beyond detroit's Mistersky Powr Plant. It provides electricity to Detroit municipal buildings, street lights, traffic lights etc. It is far more expnsive, less efficient and less reliable than DTE. DTE has offered to buy the plant several times to use as back-up generating capacity, and has agreed to lock-in a lower rate that the cost of Mstersky's electricity, but the geniuses always reject the offers.

**rb336** · April-30-09, 02:27 PM

Omaha Public Power , the community-owned power company, is the #1 electrical utility in terms of customer satisfaction not just in the Midwest, but nationwide. Det Ed and Con Power are among the worst

ccbatson · April-30-09, 03:32 PM

You make my point for me...Why, and by whose actions, is our energy/electricity infrastructure lacking?? Yep, public/big government doing its' usual incompetent job.

**rb336** · April-30-09, 03:39 PM

by pointing out that a PUBLIC utility, Omaha Public Power, is THE BEST utility for public satisfaction, and that the private DTE and CONsumers are among the lowest rated, I am making YOUR point? Is today opposite day and no one told me?

ccbatson · April-30-09, 03:45 PM

Clearly you missed my point which was to explain that the lacking infrastructure that has been blamed for the relative weakness [[US versus Europe) is a consequence of big government regulation.

Your point [[a completely subjective and biased one BTW) is not what I was referring to. Sorry if you misunderstood...just check the content to avoid this problem.

**rb336** · April-30-09, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Clearly you missed my point which was to explain that the lacking infrastructure that has been blamed for the relative weakness [[US versus Europe) is a consequence of big government regulation.

Your point [[a completely subjective and biased one BTW) is not what I was referring to. Sorry if you misunderstood...just check the content to avoid this problem.

and that point, which you evedently made in your head and no where else, is false. my point was not subjective or biased. i simply reported the results of a very comprehensive study by a well-respected private corporation.

ccbatson · April-30-09, 03:53 PM

It would be a good idea to inform readers of the source [[other than you) next time, don't you think? Sheesh.

**Redford Kid** · April-30-09, 04:23 PM

Is CBATSON the bossy, always right, never wrong type, VERBOSE in all topics? Am I mistaken? So many seem so logical on here, then he just seems to ruin everything from a intellectual perspective.

**3WC** · April-30-09, 04:49 PM

Yes, you're mistaken.

Tell us what you mean by "intellectual perspective." Are you claiming to be an intellectual, whatever that means?Perhaps your name should be added to the fuzzy thinker list on here

**Redford Kid** · April-30-09, 05:12 PM

If the label "fuzzy thinking" means thoughtful discussion leading towards bountiful solutions for all including those outside the debate you may label me one if you wish, but labels as applied to people tend to not recognize the true nature of the person, rather they expose the labeler.