Just a quick question to address something a fellow on youtube put forward.
That being this
"And you dont see the fact that you need that car and that the government can provide it to you cheaper as a good thing?
Let me ask you, how come the price of electricity went up in Norway when we privatised the electrical companies?"
I asked him how he could know this as a fact considering how difficult it is to get the hard numbers on tax funded endeavors.
"LOL.
The price went up compeated to what it was of course, idiot. The price WENT UP (what do you think went up means). It got MORE expensive.
And no, the price was not hiddin, obviously you dont know jack shit about this topic. WHen the were state owned, you paid for them the exact same way you do today. The only difference was ownership (aka, who owned it). THe price went up, and it became more expensive when it was privatised. "
I have two theories.
1. The electricity before was tax funded as well as the fees and he's only counting the latter.
2. The electricity they have now is corporatized which would explain why if they really are overcharging, nobody's stepping in to undercut them.
Anyone know any further details that could help?
Did he adjust for inflation?
And what was the nature of the "privatization"? Was it fake privatization like in California?
According to this website: http://actrav.itcilo.org/actrav-english/telearn/global/ilo/frame/energyun.htm#Finland,%20Norway,%20and%20Sweden (emphasis mine):
QuoteAfter the United Kingdom, Norway has been the most aggressive of the European countries in introducing competition into electricity markets. Norway deregulated its electricity markets in 1991 and 1992. The 1990 Norwegian Energy Act, which became effective in January 1991, calls for increased competition in the production and sale of electricity. It also allows consumers to select their suppliers. Statkraft, the state power company, was divided into two independent government-owned companies; a production company (Statkraft SF) and a transmission company (Statnett SF). Since privatization, there have been some regional mergers in Scandinavian electricity.
Also, according to
Privatization and restructuring of electricity provision by Daniel Z. Czamanski (emphases mine):
QuoteThe various utilities transmit electricity through a grid owned jointly by Statnett, the state-owned Norwegian Power Grid Company (80%), and by counties, municipalities, and private companies (20%)...The largest producer is the state-owned Norwegian Energy Corporation, Statkraft...The other utilities are owned by municipalities and are relatively small. Some 15 percent of capacity is owned by fifty-seven private corporations. Many of these produce electricity for their own use only.
Looks like fake privatization to me. GovCo ownes and controls most of it.
Don't forget the OTHER reason for the mess California made of 'deregulating' and 'privatizing' their electricity 'market': They allowed unlimited exports of electricity to other states, which often have higher electricity rates, while refusing to allow internal electricity rates to rise. OF COURSE nobody was willing to sell electricity in California when they could export it for more.
Yeah, they capped the delivery rates without capping the generation rates. They then made it almost impossible for people to import power from other states or to build new power plants. The obvious result is a price below equilibrium, which results in shortages, in this case, the rolling blackouts. How anyone with a basic knowledge of economics would have expected any other result is beyond me.