Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

on socialism.

badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 2:45:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
i was reading an article in my company's newspaper kinda thing, and it made what seemed like a good enough argument for socialism if i'm not missing something. i work for a state owned monopoly on electricity distribution, and they're currently working on having 10% of our motoring fleet driving electric cars by 2020, supposedly for the sake of society and the environment lol. clever little investment for them really i'd say, but that aside, they claim that this would not be possible were it not that they are a state owned monopoly and thus are able to keep prices low enough for people to be able to afford them, and not need to look for large profit right off the bat. their employees are also probably the highest paid in the country. the size of our country obviously helps a lot though.
signature
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 3:01:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 2:53:56 PM, theLwerd wrote:
But they're paying those high paid employees with your money? :(

i'm one of 'em :) but i'd say the company makes more than enough to pay it's employees itself. it's the country's biggest asset.
signature
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 3:15:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

the only way they could rob anyone is by overcharging for electricity, but i'm not sure whether they are or not. have any prices for me to compare to?
signature
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 3:18:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 3:16:43 PM, badger wrote:
and they're most certainly not operating at a loss. like i said, it's the country's most valuable asset.

Then what is it that makes them better than private companies? Otherwise, the only problem is that you are witholding a more efficient system from taking place.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 3:18:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 3:15:15 PM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

the only way they could rob anyone is by overcharging for electricity, but i'm not sure whether they are or not. have any prices for me to compare to?

I'll have to check my electric bill.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 4:27:58 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
the only way they could rob anyone is by overcharging for electricity, but i'm not sure whether they are or not.
They already admitted they are. That's what it means when someone says they can't allow competition, unless they can prove that the competition is free riding on something inherent to the business being applicable (like, say, if that company INVENTED power lines, or the "Competition" consisted of using that company's power lines, instead of building their own-- neither of which is the case). It means "I am ripping you off. There are people who could give you a better deal, using none of my property to do it, but I will shoot them if they do it. You really ought to shoot me."

And yes, the owners of that company really ought to be shot, assuming any worse rivals they have get shot first.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 4:40:30 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 4:27:58 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
the only way they could rob anyone is by overcharging for electricity, but i'm not sure whether they are or not.
They already admitted they are. That's what it means when someone says they can't allow competition, unless they can prove that the competition is free riding on something inherent to the business being applicable (like, say, if that company INVENTED power lines, or the "Competition" consisted of using that company's power lines, instead of building their own-- neither of which is the case). It means "I am ripping you off. There are people who could give you a better deal, using none of my property to do it, but I will shoot them if they do it. You really ought to shoot me."

And yes, the owners of that company really ought to be shot, assuming any worse rivals they have get shot first.

it's actually not a monopoly really. it's actually just state owned and nobody can compete with them. endessa, a spanish company, bought a few power stations from us recently, but they haven't really been put to much use. not sure if it's cos they can't compete though, but the stations are in pretty good shape. dunno what they're doing. i'd say there're a few other companies supplying into the grid too.
signature
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2010 4:41:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 4:40:30 PM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 4:27:58 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
the only way they could rob anyone is by overcharging for electricity, but i'm not sure whether they are or not.
They already admitted they are. That's what it means when someone says they can't allow competition, unless they can prove that the competition is free riding on something inherent to the business being applicable (like, say, if that company INVENTED power lines, or the "Competition" consisted of using that company's power lines, instead of building their own-- neither of which is the case). It means "I am ripping you off. There are people who could give you a better deal, using none of my property to do it, but I will shoot them if they do it. You really ought to shoot me."

And yes, the owners of that company really ought to be shot, assuming any worse rivals they have get shot first.

it's actually not a monopoly really. it's actually just state owned and nobody can compete with them. endessa, a spanish company, bought a few power stations from us recently, but they haven't really been put to much use. not sure if it's cos they can't compete though, but the stations are in pretty good shape. dunno what they're doing. i'd say there're a few other companies supplying into the grid too.

or at least nobody's really tried to compete with them anyway.
signature
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 12:59:59 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Subsidising or price capping the electricity means they will run for 0 profit or at a loss - either way the amount of time able to prop up such enterprises is limited. Sounds suspiciously similar to the precursor of the current cluster f*** Canada is going through.

http://blog.paulmckeever.ca...
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 9:54:11 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

didn't properly catch this last time. they are operating at a profit, and a huge one at that, but how's it robbing the tax payer? the company is state owned so profit goes to the state i'd imagine which would probably bring down the amount the tax payer has to pay. i've not got any cold hard facts here really, but it just makes more sense this way... how else could it be the state's biggest asset?
signature
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 9:59:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
badger, ESB is dandy, but there are private companies, and ESB are jacking up the rates which means we are helpless unless we switch to a rather small private sector incapable of providing us with electricity. Furthermore, just because ESB works doesn't mean nationalising everything will work.

And it isn't our greatest asset you eijit.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:01:30 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 9:54:11 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

didn't properly catch this last time. they are operating at a profit, and a huge one at that, but how's it robbing the tax payer? the company is state owned so profit goes to the state i'd imagine which would probably bring down the amount the tax payer has to pay. i've not got any cold hard facts here really, but it just makes more sense this way... how else could it be the state's biggest asset?

They take your money, put it into their business, charge you to use their business run by your stolen funds, and don't even redistribute this in the form of a tax break or reduced rates.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:07:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
it's actually not a monopoly really. it's actually just state owned and nobody can compete with them. endessa, a spanish company, bought a few power stations from us recently, but they haven't really been put to much use.

So it's legal to compete? That's a whole different story.

Although if there's subsidies that's still bad stuffs.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:09:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 12:59:59 AM, Puck wrote:
Subsidising or price capping the electricity means they will run for 0 profit or at a loss - either way the amount of time able to prop up such enterprises is limited. Sounds suspiciously similar to the precursor of the current cluster f*** Canada is going through.

http://blog.paulmckeever.ca...

they're definitely profiting off electricity distribution though. how else would the company be the country's biggest asset? subsidising these new e-cars as they're calling them will probably put a significant enough dent in that profit, but it's a smart enough investment really if it's affordable, because it could stand to make the company a fortune in the long run. let's hope anyway, they've already made deals with two or three big car companies.
signature
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:13:52 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 9:59:48 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
badger, ESB is dandy, but there are private companies, and ESB are jacking up the rates which means we are helpless unless we switch to a rather small private sector incapable of providing us with electricity. Furthermore, just because ESB works doesn't mean nationalising everything will work.

we're gonna have to check prices. endessa isn't small and the stations they bought are perfect.

And it isn't our greatest asset you eijit.

so what is? i've just heard that it was plenty of times.
signature
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:15:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:07:08 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
it's actually not a monopoly really. it's actually just state owned and nobody can compete with them. endessa, a spanish company, bought a few power stations from us recently, but they haven't really been put to much use.

So it's legal to compete? That's a whole different story.

Although if there's subsidies that's still bad stuffs.

just making electric cars cheaper for us to buy. good investment don't ya think? otherwise they're operating on a huge profit.
signature
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:18:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:01:30 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:54:11 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

didn't properly catch this last time. they are operating at a profit, and a huge one at that, but how's it robbing the tax payer? the company is state owned so profit goes to the state i'd imagine which would probably bring down the amount the tax payer has to pay. i've not got any cold hard facts here really, but it just makes more sense this way... how else could it be the state's biggest asset?

They take your money, put it into their business, charge you to use their business run by your stolen funds, and don't even redistribute this in the form of a tax break or reduced rates.

the only money they take from you is what you pay them for electricity. you don't think we should be able to profit from the sale of electricity?
signature
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:25:05 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:18:02 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:01:30 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:54:11 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

didn't properly catch this last time. they are operating at a profit, and a huge one at that, but how's it robbing the tax payer? the company is state owned so profit goes to the state i'd imagine which would probably bring down the amount the tax payer has to pay. i've not got any cold hard facts here really, but it just makes more sense this way... how else could it be the state's biggest asset?

They take your money, put it into their business, charge you to use their business run by your stolen funds, and don't even redistribute this in the form of a tax break or reduced rates.

the only money they take from you is what you pay them for electricity. you don't think we should be able to profit from the sale of electricity?

People should. Thieves shouldn't. What money did they use to establish ESB and build new power plants?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:25:54 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:13:52 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:59:48 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
badger, ESB is dandy, but there are private companies, and ESB are jacking up the rates which means we are helpless unless we switch to a rather small private sector incapable of providing us with electricity. Furthermore, just because ESB works doesn't mean nationalising everything will work.

we're gonna have to check prices. endessa isn't small and the stations they bought are perfect.

Wut?


And it isn't our greatest asset you eijit.

so what is? i've just heard that it was plenty of times.

People's incomes. It's called PAYE.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:31:12 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:25:05 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:18:02 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:01:30 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:54:11 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

didn't properly catch this last time. they are operating at a profit, and a huge one at that, but how's it robbing the tax payer? the company is state owned so profit goes to the state i'd imagine which would probably bring down the amount the tax payer has to pay. i've not got any cold hard facts here really, but it just makes more sense this way... how else could it be the state's biggest asset?

They take your money, put it into their business, charge you to use their business run by your stolen funds, and don't even redistribute this in the form of a tax break or reduced rates.

the only money they take from you is what you pay them for electricity. you don't think we should be able to profit from the sale of electricity?

People should. Thieves shouldn't. What money did they use to establish ESB and build new power plants?

dunno. probably tax money. it's been going probably 30 or 40 years now. good thing they did though. seems to have worked out for the best. again, not sure about the prices, but they're not crippling i'd say. i've not heard any complaints.
signature
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:36:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:25:54 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:13:52 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:59:48 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
badger, ESB is dandy, but there are private companies, and ESB are jacking up the rates which means we are helpless unless we switch to a rather small private sector incapable of providing us with electricity. Furthermore, just because ESB works doesn't mean nationalising everything will work.

we're gonna have to check prices. endessa isn't small and the stations they bought are perfect.

Wut?

they're rates aren't that high as far as i know. and endessa is a huge rival company operating in the country at the same time, but they're not providing anything to the grid. likely because it's not profitable for them to yet, and their stations are the exact same as ours... we sold them to them.

And it isn't our greatest asset you eijit.

so what is? i've just heard that it was plenty of times.

People's incomes. It's called PAYE.

knew you were gonna say that :) true. besides that the esb is.
signature
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:41:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:31:12 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:25:05 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:18:02 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:01:30 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:54:11 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

didn't properly catch this last time. they are operating at a profit, and a huge one at that, but how's it robbing the tax payer? the company is state owned so profit goes to the state i'd imagine which would probably bring down the amount the tax payer has to pay. i've not got any cold hard facts here really, but it just makes more sense this way... how else could it be the state's biggest asset?

They take your money, put it into their business, charge you to use their business run by your stolen funds, and don't even redistribute this in the form of a tax break or reduced rates.

the only money they take from you is what you pay them for electricity. you don't think we should be able to profit from the sale of electricity?

People should. Thieves shouldn't. What money did they use to establish ESB and build new power plants?

dunno. probably tax money. it's been going probably 30 or 40 years now. good thing they did though. seems to have worked out for the best. again, not sure about the prices, but they're not crippling i'd say. i've not heard any complaints.

Private companies would make 'em lower through competition, and wouldn't steal in the process.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:47:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:36:08 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:25:54 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:13:52 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:59:48 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
badger, ESB is dandy, but there are private companies, and ESB are jacking up the rates which means we are helpless unless we switch to a rather small private sector incapable of providing us with electricity. Furthermore, just because ESB works doesn't mean nationalising everything will work.

we're gonna have to check prices. endessa isn't small and the stations they bought are perfect.

Wut?

they're rates aren't that high as far as i know. and endessa is a huge rival company operating in the country at the same time, but they're not providing anything to the grid. likely because it's not profitable for them to yet, and their stations are the exact same as ours... we sold them to them.

Airtricity is in place, and is pretty cheaper and more ethical too. And provides a lot to the grid.


And it isn't our greatest asset you eijit.

so what is? i've just heard that it was plenty of times.

People's incomes. It's called PAYE.

knew you were gonna say that :) true. besides that the esb is.

Nope, sales tax is next, I think.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:47:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:41:35 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:31:12 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:25:05 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:18:02 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:01:30 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:54:11 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

didn't properly catch this last time. they are operating at a profit, and a huge one at that, but how's it robbing the tax payer? the company is state owned so profit goes to the state i'd imagine which would probably bring down the amount the tax payer has to pay. i've not got any cold hard facts here really, but it just makes more sense this way... how else could it be the state's biggest asset?

They take your money, put it into their business, charge you to use their business run by your stolen funds, and don't even redistribute this in the form of a tax break or reduced rates.

the only money they take from you is what you pay them for electricity. you don't think we should be able to profit from the sale of electricity?

People should. Thieves shouldn't. What money did they use to establish ESB and build new power plants?

dunno. probably tax money. it's been going probably 30 or 40 years now. good thing they did though. seems to have worked out for the best. again, not sure about the prices, but they're not crippling i'd say. i've not heard any complaints.

Private companies would make 'em lower through competition, and wouldn't steal in the process.

competition's not illegal.
signature
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:48:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/7/2010 2:45:24 PM, badger wrote:
i was reading an article in my company's newspaper kinda thing, and it made what seemed like a good enough argument for socialism if i'm not missing something. i work for a state owned monopoly on electricity distribution, and they're currently working on having 10% of our motoring fleet driving electric cars by 2020, supposedly for the sake of society and the environment lol. clever little investment for them really i'd say, but that aside, they claim that this would not be possible were it not that they are a state owned monopoly and thus are able to keep prices low enough for people to be able to afford them, and not need to look for large profit right off the bat. their employees are also probably the highest paid in the country. the size of our country obviously helps a lot though.

{checks badger's profile, discovers he lives in some deadbeat, one-horse-town in Kansas}

I don't know about you lot in the US but many European countries give generous grants to companies and individuals who choose to drive electric or hybrid vehicles. That's because they have carbon emission targets to meet as part of the Kyoto Treaty (which, disgracefully, America failed to sign of course).
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2010 10:49:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/8/2010 10:47:40 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:41:35 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:31:12 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:25:05 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:18:02 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/8/2010 10:01:30 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/8/2010 9:54:11 AM, badger wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:09:32 PM, innomen wrote:
At 9/7/2010 3:08:35 PM, mongoose wrote:
If they really don't concern themselves with profit, then they're operating at a loss, wasting tax payer money.

Of course if they were operating at a profit, or overpaying people they would be robbing the tax payer.

didn't properly catch this last time. they are operating at a profit, and a huge one at that, but how's it robbing the tax payer? the company is state owned so profit goes to the state i'd imagine which would probably bring down the amount the tax payer has to pay. i've not got any cold hard facts here really, but it just makes more sense this way... how else could it be the state's biggest asset?

They take your money, put it into their business, charge you to use their business run by your stolen funds, and don't even redistribute this in the form of a tax break or reduced rates.

the only money they take from you is what you pay them for electricity. you don't think we should be able to profit from the sale of electricity?

People should. Thieves shouldn't. What money did they use to establish ESB and build new power plants?

dunno. probably tax money. it's been going probably 30 or 40 years now. good thing they did though. seems to have worked out for the best. again, not sure about the prices, but they're not crippling i'd say. i've not heard any complaints.

Private companies would make 'em lower through competition, and wouldn't steal in the process.

competition's not illegal.

Exactly. And?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.