The teacher's mistake was teaching high school. If the students were three years older, he'd be given an award instead of a suspension.
The Left's High School Teacher of the Year
- Thread starter hapaboy
- Start date
Quote from dddooo:
What part of
"The deregulation of the California energy market was supported by both parties in the California legislature and signed into law by then-Republican Governor Pete Wilson in 1996."
do you not understand?
Right. Wholesale prices were deregulated and wholesale prices went up. Kudos to price lowering free competition.
I agree with you - both parties supported it - in 1996.
But what about the 2000 changes by Davis, etc....
And later, Davis ran on the platform that he would freeze retail rates. And Democrats could do it here since they rule the legislature. He did it to get votes. What part of that do YOU not understand ? It was a popular promise......
Prices went up because demend outstripped the local supply. This wasn't brought on by partisan politics. This part was in your article also. Did you read it and understand that part yourself ?
I see you haven't yet rented the DVD:
<img src=http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000C3L2IO.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg>
Enron energy traders were caught on tape manufacturing fake shortages. They would call up power plants, and tell them to find an excuse to shut down production for a few hours.
It's ironic that I find myself recommending a documentary which is philosophically biased against Capitalism. The narrator repeatedly confuses cronyism and political favoritism with free market economics, and never bothers giving the other side of the story. Still, the film does help one understand what happened to enron.
But why was the state of California buying power from Enron in the first place ?
Many levels to explain here....
Because the power retailers were close to bankruptcy and the wholesalers wouldn't sell to them anymore. Legislation passed in 2000 restrained them passing on any increased cost to consumers - restraint of free trade. It did, however, allow local wholesalers to charge the retailer more to cover the expense of building new plants. But it came too late to help much. Sounds like a recipe for disaster, right ? But popular with the voters...
Nobody had been building power generation plants for a while, and when the economy boomed, power demands boomed, and local power generation couldn't keep up. So the reatialers were forced to buy from out of state.
However, they were also prevented from entering into long term contracts which would have hedged price increases during high demand periods. Again, restraint of free trade. SOunds like another recipe for disaster, right ?
Even further, if reatilers would have been able to pass along the cost, people would have conserved, and perhaps no outside buying would have been necessary. And I thought conservation was a key position in the Democratic platform. Hmmmmm...
Maybe even with the increased cost of power, alternative sources may have become 'doable' again - wind, solar, tidal, etc.
What Enron did - while unethical, was actually good business - but also cutthroat, outside the lines of decency.
But it never should have gotten there in the first place....
Many levels to explain here....
Because the power retailers were close to bankruptcy and the wholesalers wouldn't sell to them anymore. Legislation passed in 2000 restrained them passing on any increased cost to consumers - restraint of free trade. It did, however, allow local wholesalers to charge the retailer more to cover the expense of building new plants. But it came too late to help much. Sounds like a recipe for disaster, right ? But popular with the voters...
Nobody had been building power generation plants for a while, and when the economy boomed, power demands boomed, and local power generation couldn't keep up. So the reatialers were forced to buy from out of state.
However, they were also prevented from entering into long term contracts which would have hedged price increases during high demand periods. Again, restraint of free trade. SOunds like another recipe for disaster, right ?
Even further, if reatilers would have been able to pass along the cost, people would have conserved, and perhaps no outside buying would have been necessary. And I thought conservation was a key position in the Democratic platform. Hmmmmm...
Maybe even with the increased cost of power, alternative sources may have become 'doable' again - wind, solar, tidal, etc.
What Enron did - while unethical, was actually good business - but also cutthroat, outside the lines of decency.
But it never should have gotten there in the first place....
Regarding the Cal energy "crisis", It was deregulation in name only. In fact, it's an excellent example of "how not" to do it. The fact that Enron and traders took advantiage of the situation is a side story....there actions were a result of the problem, not the cause of it. To say Enron "caused" the Ca. crisis is like saying wet sidewalks cause it to rain.