Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims • Hacker News Board

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#61

Post by refurb » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 9:51 AM UTC

jonplackett wrote: post #41

This is the side of privatisation that gets ignored. When private companies screw up, who gets left with the bill? Private companies have no incentive to be ready for really big problems because they know they’ll get bailed out, or just not have to pay. Privatise the profit, socialise the losses.

Private investors get left with the bill. If it was a public utility it would be tax payers. That would be socializing losses.

Edit: people really don’t know how bankruptcy works? Equity holds get wiped out first followed by bond holders.

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#62

Post by croon » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 9:52 AM UTC

hurril wrote: post #56

jonplackett wrote: post #41

This is the side of privatisation that gets ignored. When private companies screw up, who gets left with the bill? Private companies have no incentive to be ready for really big problems because they know they’ll get bailed out, or just not have to pay. Privatise the profit, socialise the losses.

Who foots the bill with non-private companies? If anything, _that_ is what's ignored.

The same people, without losing the profits.

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#63

Post by adwww » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 9:55 AM UTC

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #60

pmiller2 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With all the extreme weather events, wildfires, and sea level rising that will be caused by climate change, I would not be surprised.

Insurance companies in the UK have been discussing this for over a decade. There have been some consequences. It's no longer possible to get buildings insurance or mortgages in certain flood prone areas. This effectively makes them uninhabitable, because uninsured flood damage can easily bankrupt a house owner.

> uninhabitable

Surely just unmortgageable?

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#64

Post by guerrilla » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 9:56 AM UTC

waterhouse wrote: post #20

bsder wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could say that CA and TX are demonstrating that deregulation is a failed strategy. "Vital infrastructure" and "market driven" are rarely a good match.

The infrastructure to produce food is pretty vital, but I think it's also mostly market-driven and works well. I think the issues around power utilities are more to do with a lack of competition, and legislation that creates perverse incentives. (I don't know what the current perverse incentives are, but at least as of 2010, an energy startup founder said[1] that power companies were legislated monopolies that were "…

> The infrastructure to produce food is pretty vital, but I think it's also mostly market-driven and works well.

You're talking about on of the most subsidised matkets on Earth. It's hardly market-driven.

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#65

Post by cies » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 9:58 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #61

jonplackett wrote: post #41

This is the side of privatisation that gets ignored. When private companies screw up, who gets left with the bill? Private companies have no incentive to be ready for really big problems because they know they’ll get bailed out, or just not have to pay. Privatise the profit, socialise the losses.

Private investors get left with the bill. If it was a public utility it would be tax payers. That would be socializing losses. Edit: people really don’t know how bankruptcy works? Equity holds get wiped out first followed by bond holders.

Nope. They file bankruptcy. And the bill is left on the table. Only profits (divident) go to investors. If a company becomes insolvable the investors are shielded. Similar to when a company operated against the law: profits were taken by investors, now they can sink the shop when the law suits start.

> If it was a public utility it would be tax payers. That would be socializing losses.

No-one is arguing against that! In both cases the tax payers pay. Just in the privatized case the investors got the profits out year after year, and now threaten to sink the shop in order to get bailed out: that's what sets privatization apart from operating as a public company.

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#66

Post by adwww » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 9:59 AM UTC

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #57

dragonwriter wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to be born in America to be President, but you do need to be a natural-born citizen. Of course, the idea of amending the Constitution to remove that requirement to clear the path for a particular candidate (not that long ago, Arnold Schwarzenegger was mentioned) has come up before; current restrictions won't necessarily apply indefinitely into the future.

Is your distinction that it has to be USA territories - colonies like Guam, Puerto Rico? - but not necessarily USA proper, so military bases and consulates count (?) but could be termed 'outside USA' or is something else going on here?

Yes, but also includes a person born abroad to parents who are United States citizens.

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#67

Post by jonplackett » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 10:01 AM UTC

croon wrote: post #62

hurril wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who foots the bill with non-private companies? If anything, _that_ is what's ignored.

The same people, without losing the profits.

Exactly!

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#68

Post by jonplackett » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 10:03 AM UTC

dan-robertson wrote: post #51

jonplackett wrote: post #41

This is the side of privatisation that gets ignored. When private companies screw up, who gets left with the bill? Private companies have no incentive to be ready for really big problems because they know they’ll get bailed out, or just not have to pay. Privatise the profit, socialise the losses.

When a politician enacts a policy that ignores some big tail risk, they won’t be in office when it eventually blows up. Who foots the bill in that case? Certainly the politician and maybe their party won’t suffer election losses from it.

I think this is the reason politicians all around the world have been so ill-equipped to deal with Covid - they are used to their decisions having 10 / 20 year repercussions, by which time they're well out of the blame-zone.

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#69

Post by Dma54rhs » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 10:04 AM UTC

jonplackett wrote: post #41

This is the side of privatisation that gets ignored. When private companies screw up, who gets left with the bill? Private companies have no incentive to be ready for really big problems because they know they’ll get bailed out, or just not have to pay. Privatise the profit, socialise the losses.

But it is, or was, or cooperative, what investors are you talking about? Stop spreading disinformation for heavens sake.

Re: Texas electric firm files for bankruptcy citing $1.8B in claims

#70

Post by baxtr » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 10:12 AM UTC

jonplackett wrote: post #41

This is the side of privatisation that gets ignored. When private companies screw up, who gets left with the bill? Private companies have no incentive to be ready for really big problems because they know they’ll get bailed out, or just not have to pay. Privatise the profit, socialise the losses.

> Privatise the profit, socialise the losses.

I always wondered about that. Maybe because I don’t understand what it’s trying to say. I mean profits of companies benefit many, don’t they? Through jobs, taxes, dividends in case it’s a public company and so on.

What am I getting wrong here?