It's not my opinion. I would add that the whole "deregulation" (actually: restructuring) undermined the incentive to build power-plants, which encouraged the short-fall of supply behind demand. But I'm not an expert on this issue: ask Gene Coyle.
Jim Devine provided this opine on 12/21/00 8:17 A but didn't extend whether the opine represented his own view or he was simply searching for further opinion.
>LA TIMES, December 21, 2000 (op-ed) > >Electricity Deregulation Was Doomed From Start > >By PAUL RICHINS JR.
If opinion, I'd opine that the threat of outages and bankruptcy disappears with the rate increase passage. Purely politics of fear.
Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
- Re: Re: Economists surprised???, (continued)
- Re: Re: Economists surprised???, Eugene Coyle Fri 22 Dec 2000, 03:05 GMT
- Re: Economists surprised???, Lisa & Ian Murray Fri 22 Dec 2000, 04:28 GMT
- California energy "deregulation", Jim Devine Thu 21 Dec 2000, 16:26 GMT
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: California energy "deregulation", martin schiller Thu 21 Dec 2000, 19:36 GMT
- Re: Re: California energy "deregulation", Jim Devine Thu 21 Dec 2000, 19:59 GMT
- FW: Urgent sign-on letter to ban Burmese Imports, Max Sawicky Thu 21 Dec 2000, 16:24 GMT
- Business & Economics Conference / Paris - France, Helen Kantarelis Thu 21 Dec 2000, 13:09 GMT
- The Emperor's Naked Army Marches On, Yoshie Furuhashi Thu 21 Dec 2000, 08:32 GMT
- William Mandel: Saying No To Power, Yoshie Furuhashi Thu 21 Dec 2000, 07:01 GMT