Privatisation of power (1 Viewer)

I would rather have


  • Total voters
    26

dieburndie

Eat, Sleep, Repeat
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
971
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
You might want to elaborate some.
Like maybe saying what you think and why or something.
I don't know. It just seems a little pointless.
 

Nebuchanezzar

Banned
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
7,536
Location
Camden
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
dieburndie said:
You might want to elaborate some.
Like maybe saying what you think and why or something.
I don't know. It just seems a little pointless.
I would have expected that as the thread progresses, that discussion about the issues would develop on its own.

But ok. I feel that the benefits of 15 billion dollars being invested into public transport (amongst other things) by far outweighs anything negative that can come from privatisation of state owned electricity. That there'll be an independant watchdog to ensure that NSW citizens won't be ripped off at all by any of this increases my belief that it's a good idea. Infrastructure around and in Sydney is becoming crippled. Something has to be done and even though it's not my most preferred option (massive federal investment would be optimal), it looks to be the most likely option that'll acheive the most.

EDIT: I just flicked through yesterday's Herald and noticed that there won't be a watchdog, but that the prices will be set by that independant pricing dealie thing. That doesn't really change my opinion...
 
Last edited:

Iron

Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
7,765
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Id like to know whether it would complicate limitations on emissions, or whether carbon trading schemes would be more efficient in private hands
 

townie

Premium Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
9,646
Location
Gladesville
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2009
that poll is very biased


edit: saw title of poll, makes it slightly better
 

townie

Premium Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
9,646
Location
Gladesville
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2009
an objective poll would simply ask whether electricity should be privately of publicly owned.

the current poll implies that if you have publicly owned electricity, you cant have infrastructure investment, which isnt necescarily true. it also implies that if it is privately owned, you will have investment in infratructure, again, not necescarily true.
 

Foxodi

Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
308
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Agree... bias poll.. I mean.. just read what you wrote as possible options ^^
 

Dumsum

has a large Member;
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
1,552
Location
Maroubra South
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
It's about the first good thing Mr Iemma has ever proposed... and I still have my reservations. Hasn't it been shown that after privatisation, the cost of electricity in other states has gone up? And I think electricity is more of a fundamental necessity than top-notch infrastructure (and could this government be trusted to know how to best spend/invest the $15 billion and NOT just waste it?)

Add to this that any infrastructure upgrades would be far off when I would most likely be living elsewhere that has decent infrastructure already, while rising electricity costs would affect me in the short term.

On the other hand, if they propose to ensure that things will be kept underwraps then I'm totally for it. There is no doubt Sydney has serious infrastructure issues, it's just a matter of whether or not these are more important than keeping electricity costs relatively low.

At this point I'd have to say I lean towards the "go for it" side of things, but I really want to wait on some more details of how it's all gonna be managed and implemented.
 

volition

arr.
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
1,279
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Privatise electricity, 'spend' the money on tax cuts. This will bring more freedom to the people.
 

townie

Premium Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
9,646
Location
Gladesville
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2009
no utilities should ever be entirely privately owned, under any circumstances.
 

jb_nc

Google "9-11" and "truth"
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
5,391
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
I don't see how the poll is bias because this is what Morris is planning to do either:
a) sell off retail arms of power companies and use the profits to build stuff
b) don't sell off anything and don't build infrastructure.
 

volition

arr.
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
1,279
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
townie said:
no utilities should ever be entirely privately owned, under any circumstances.
So even if some private businessman wanted to build his own, the govt should stop him?
 

Nebuchanezzar

Banned
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
7,536
Location
Camden
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
townie said:
an objective poll would simply ask whether electricity should be privately of publicly owned.

the current poll implies that if you have publicly owned electricity, you cant have infrastructure investment, which isnt necescarily true. it also implies that if it is privately owned, you will have investment in infratructure, again, not necescarily true.
But the issue isn't whether you like or dislike privatisation, it's about a very specific event that's going to happen. Iemma and his cronies want to sell off their electicity assets to pay for several specific infrastructure developments.
 
Last edited:

volition

arr.
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
1,279
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Musk said:
well if hes gonna be a monopoly then yes

Its like if you dont like Sydney water, where are you gonna go to?
Do you realise that you're trying to solve the problem of a non-coercive monopoly, with a coercive monopoly (govt)?

Resorting to the govt to solve the problems of society is madness people.
 

Iron

Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
7,765
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
hahaha
I love Schro
 

townie

Premium Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
9,646
Location
Gladesville
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2009
Nebuchanezzar said:
But the issue isn't whether you like or dislike privatisation, it's about a very specific event that's going to happen. Iemma and his cronies want to sell off their electicity assets to pay for several specific infrastructure developments.
yeah, but your making a major assumption that they will actually follow through
 

townie

Premium Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
9,646
Location
Gladesville
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2009
volition said:
So even if some private businessman wanted to build his own, the govt should stop him?
no, not at all, i have no problem with competition, but i feel the government should have a hand in all utilities incase the private companies fuck up
 

volition

arr.
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
1,279
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Musk said:
You don't like the coercive monpoly(govt) you can sack them in every 4 yrs
It's not just the politicians, but also the ever-growing bureaucracy they create, which does not disappear when you "vote the bastards out". Once those jobs are 'created', people will fight tooth and nail to preserve them, which means its kinda hard to back down from. Besides, you only end up with one choice so you have to balance your vote amongst every candidate/policy. This could hardly be considered a good check system against the abuse of power.

townie said:
no, not at all, i have no problem with competition, but i feel the government should have a hand in all utilities incase the private companies fuck up
So do you also think we should have *SOME* government food stores? And govt car tire stores? and govt car radio stores? etc I think you get the point.

Unless you're going to draw the distinction between "utilities" and "non-utilities" in which case I'll ask you: why do you think this is a crucial distinction?
 

veridis

droog
Joined
Oct 17, 2004
Messages
716
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Nebuchanezzar said:
But the issue isn't whether you like or dislike privatisation, it's about a very specific event that's going to happen. Iemma and his cronies want to sell off their electicity assets to pay for several specific infrastructure developments.
if you want to be specific then be specific, the question currently makes investment in infrastructure sound like a good thing, but when morris is planning to piss it all up against the wall by building a metro that duplicates half of the shittyrail system, giving his mates millions for reports on desalination and helping private developers then the investment is near worthless. when there are some decent proposals that need funding i may change my mind on the privatisation matter, but with whats on the table right now it's not worth selling out for.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top