Your analogy is wrong.
<<If someone said "I will pay you anything for something you have in large quantity" what would be your response? First, you would double the price. Once you get this like taking candy from a baby, you double the price, then hey! this is easy, you double the price again. Since the buyer is not spending his personal money then who gives a shit about the price? That's your unregulated government in action fella.>>
The more apt analogy is, if someone held a gun to your head and says, 'what will you pay me to drop this gun and not shoot you?' what would you pay? Davis had to go into long term contracts, as that was the only way to stabilize the price w/o help from Washington, which was obviously not forthcoming. You say "unregulated government" is the problem, others say "unregulated industry" is the problem, I say both can be problems, and to ascribe problemmatic status exclusively to one or the other is a little stupid. Actually, a lot stupid. We need both spheres of power--along with a vigilant media--to achieve some sort of societal balance of power. Obviously money is their common denominator, and to get these different groups to act as intelligent adversaries is difficult, but it is possible, especially if the court system is reasonably honest and voters reasonably informed.
<<California was sitting on cash reserves of Billions of Dollars and Davis seized power and threw the check book at the generators and said "just write in the amount guys and deliver the juice". Now you and I have to pay for this stupidity.>>
If the smoking guns on odd plant closings and pipeline withholding that we have heard about are as powerful as have been suggested, I would venture to guess that some of these long term contracts may be modified and reduced, somewhat like an agreement to pay a blackmailer or a hostage taker is not enforceable. |
