California Expected to Authorize Fixed Fee on All Electicity Customers

A few days back we discussed the report published by the Edison Electric Institute which raised alarm bells about the threat that electric utilities from an increasing number of customers producing electricity on site, rather than purchasing it from the grid. In order to mitigate revenue losses, the institute recommended that utilities levy fixed fees on all customers to cover maintenance costs, regardless of what their source of electricity was.

It seems that their recommendations have been taken seriously. Legislators in California are expected to pass a energy-related bill which, among other things, allows the California Public Utilities Commission to charge a fixed grid maintenance fee of up to $10 per month. The bill is expected to pass the California state assembly easily.

This measure has been opposed by the Sierra Club as, according to state director Kathyrn Phillips. the measure “has no real purpose other than to discourage investment in roof-top solar and energy efficiency” because it provides a disincentive for people to adopt domestic energy production measures.

It’s quite possible, I think, that this kind of measure will be adopted in other areas, if utilities see increased adoption of more home-based production of electricity. Rooftop solar is becoming more attractive to consumers as prices of solar cells drop. Domestic LENR units seem unlikely to be available in the near future, but down the road, I think it’s certainly possible the they will become available, and could put further pressure on electric companies — who may feel forced to take more defensive action.

More information is available in this Los Angeles Times article.

  • NT

    What happens when customers “take defensive action themselves” against this form of legislation by disconnecting from the grid altogether? This could happen if and when home e-cats ever become available in the future or some other technological breakthroughs occur with electrical storage, etc.

    • Good question, NT.

      In the Edison Electric Report there is this long-term recommendation:

      “Consider a stranded cost charge in all states to be paid by DER and fully departing customers to recognize the portion of investment deemed stranded as customers depart”

      I am still trying find out exactly what a “stranded cost charge” is, but it sounds something like an exit charge on customers who decide to disconnect from the grid.

      • Roger Bird

        The “stranded cost charge” seems to me to be immoral. Charging for being still connected to the grid does not strike me as being immoral. The folks who invested in the grid HAVE to accept the risks. It is not our job to solve their problem. They will, however, try to use the power of government to force us to solve their problem. Please resist them.

      • fortyniner

        According to Wikipedia (surely neutral on something like this!) a stranded cost is basically the difference between what a business invests in infrastucture, and the profits deriving from that investment, when the infrastructure becomes prematurely obsolete.

        In other words the inevitable result of a business failing to anticipate innovation and market changes. IMO, utilities have no business attempting to pass on such losses to anyone other than their shareholders – and most certainly not to the competition, in this case DER innovators.

        The ‘stranded costs’ of the nuclear fission industry will be inimaginable, when the costs of mothballing, waste processing and eventual decommissioning are taken into account. When the station is a new build, such as the proposed 16+ £billion Hinkley point PS in the UK, the potential losses are absolutely eye watering — and the British government is proposing to underwrite them using taxpayer’s money.

        • Thanks, 49er. I should have checked there myself!

        • Roger Bird

          What happens when the stranded cost is greater than the value of the total stocks outstanding? People will try to sell their stocks, obviously. The price will go down. I am all for making the owners pay for the stranded costs. But what if there aren’t any owners, or the owner’s stock values are less than the stranded costs. This scenario could happen with LENR coming on strong.

          • fortyniner

            I suppose the simple answer is bankruptcy, unless the govt. starts pouring taxpayer money into the utility co. That way the usable infrastructure could be broken up and re-used within local ‘grids’ and the rest, including remotely located, over-large and inefficient power stations, sold as scrap during the receivership process.

        • Linda

          Looks like censorship is back again. I have a perfectly reasonable comment awaiting moderation, that should have sailed through. Unless of course it doesn’t fit with the admins politics, is that how it works?

          • Iggy Dalrymple

            I’ve been under continuous moderation since my bout with the ScornMeister. But I have not been censored.

          • Morgan

            seems like it. almost all my posts get rejected.

          • Roger Bird

            Linda, we could start a library with all of my posts that have been moderated and that have been just deleted. But, I am on Frank’s side rather than my own side because I want Frank’s website to thrive, so if he wants to toss a comment or two every day of mine to keep his website attractive for other commenters and for advertisers, I can accept it.

        • Omega Z


          In the U.S. Concerning power plants, they already charge a decommissioning fee that is placed in an invested trust. The aim is to have costs covered when end of Life-Cycle arrives. These fees are a legitimate consumer cost of energy.

          Problem: Many are short of projected costs. Some severely short. Presently 30 to 40 plants are headed for decommissioning time, about 30 prematurely. As these costs were calculated for expected life-cycles & spread out accordingly, many will fall far short of necessary funds for the decommissioning costs.

          Most of these issues were caused by short sightedness of both business & Government. Government will have to pick up the shortage. The issue is taxes will not come from the generation who gain from it’s use but the generation who didn’t.

          As far as the $10 fee in this thread, I take it that it’s to maintain the Grid itself. As far as dismantling when no longer needed, Salvage companies would likely deal with this & Many would actually pay for the right. Some do it now without even being requested while their still in use 🙂
          Aside from scrap wire price, The Poles have an after market. 20 to 30 years as fence posts.

          Each pole costs around $5K implanted in the ground(10 year average life). There Tree farmed & require 25 to 35 years to produce. I’d hate to think what the steel towers cost. But all have an after market value.

          As for Government underwriting, Subsidies- This seems to be the norm in most places where a perceived risk is considered to high according to business. Governments should take heed. Unless Government has their own agenda. Then the public should take heed. The public’s tendency is to do this after the fact. When it’s to late.

          • Roger Bird

            “Some do it now without even being requested while their still in use :)” LOL. What if we asked them nicely to not do this?

      • theBuckWheat

        Close- the utility projected the life-cycle cost of providing service to your meter and made capital investments and commitments for future investments to ensure reliable service based on usage averages for your area. This might amount to several thousands of dollars per meter. If you want to no longer be a customer, they want government to allow them to collect your pro-rated share of that capital. Never mind that this is really the risk that shareholders are buying so they can earn a return on the capital that they put at risk. It is one more aspect of the collusion of government monopoly utilities.

    • AlainCo

      if they can be independent ok, but most solar and wind electricity producer simply exploit the flat rate to sell theyr juice when it is not needed, and pump it when it is needed.

      the good method would be variable rate. or real disconnection.

      if you have to store, wind and solar are not producer.
      (eurekalert is very pro-renewable, so…)

      solar today is parasitic. wind plus the gas turbine backup may be not bad, but expensive.

      • LilyLover

        “Solar today is parasitic” – like the babies that will grow up to make the future generation.

        • Omega Z

          I think what AlainCo alludes to is like in the U.S. If I build a wind farm, I get paid for the Electricity whether you use it or not. It’s figured into you bill.

          This is a mixing of economic theory/policy. Command or Demand.

          The U.S. is basically a demand economy. If there is demand, business will provide it at market cost.

          Command is more of a- We will provide it & you will pay for it regardless of need, use or want.

          In the U.S, we pay people to sit at home while at the same time we have roads in disrepair.

          Paying people to sit at home is parasitic in devaluing everyone else’s earnings.

          Paying these people to do that repair work provides a value to the tax payer dollar. Added value equals economic growth, additional demand, more jobs.

        • Reboot

          $10 mantenience bill… Well, it’s not that much. Just google a bit and look for the new Spanish laws against self-powering. They call it “electricity toll” but it’s more that they pretend to tax roof-top solar power.

          Take a look at this:

  • GreenWin

    California has or will soon pass legislation requiring utilities to accept and invest in DERs. But there are factions who rightly fear a massive move to distributed energy resources will leave utilities out in the cold. The monthly “maintenance” charge is a way to plug the revenue loss from DERs. The stranded cost charge sure looks like an exit fee.

    On the positive side, if the monthly “maintenance” charge actually delivered a maintenance service, e.g. a service contract on approved PV/wind/DERs – this would begin the revenue transition for utilities. IF utilities want to remain in the energy business, they will have to convert ratepayer income to service contract income.

    IF your utility approves your rooftop PV rig, (they must approve the grid connects) you pay a “maintenance” charge that guarantees your utility will service the system like a maintenance contract on cell phones or big ticket appliances. Or some variation.

    The only way the utilities survive the transition to DERs in to convert ratepayer loss to design, manufacture, install and maintenance revenue. Not surprising, the fees discussed here appear to be steps in that direction. That’s good in my book.

  • LCD

    another example of quantum processes behaving in ways we don’t intuitively expect

  • Jim

    Unbelievable. In the 90’s, california was experiencing rolling blackouts because the grid couldn’t handle the demand. So people have been switching to solar, and now the grid isn’t in danger anymore and the utilities want extra fees? They brought it on themselves by not maintaining the grid as they should have.

  • Paul Bennett

    If/when LENR home power becomes available, the transition will create a welfare problem. The cost of installing a LENR home system will certainly be more than 1,000 dollars. Although the return on investment will be fantastic (I hope), many poorer households, especially renters will not be able to afford or not be allowed to install LENRs.

    As the customer base for current power companies decreases (particularly since the richer folks use more power then the poorer ones) they will be forced to increase their charges due to increased maintenance costs for the grid (still as many miles or distribution lines, but fewer and fewer customers using it). They will also progressively lose the efficiencies of scale as the amount of power demanded decreases. The only thing that might mitigate this situation is the drop in the price of oil and natural gas.

    If the loss of customers does result in climbing cost for the remaining customers, the impact will all be born by the poor. I expect government will step in to prevent this.

    • Linda

      You have good reason to expect the government should do something about this, but they will not, unless the government gets rescued from the icey grip of Neo-Liberalism. Rise up!

    • Omega Z


      A complete system, Cooling, Heating, & electrical Power system(CHP) will probably run between 30K & 50K installed depending on the size required whether retro-fit or new home construction. These likely will need to be in an out building piped in to the home.

      For better understanding of the costs, consider this a conventional system. Now replace the Gas burners with the E-cat for that heat generation. This E-cat exchange will actually cost more then the Gas burners it replaces.

      Cost savings will Not be in the hardware, But, The cost of natural gas to power it. Note a bi-annual Nickel Recharge- probably $100 each minimum.

      Rossi says the Core will likely be good for 25 to 50 years, But the electronics Etc will not. The heating & cooling portion of the system will likely have an average life-cycle of 20 years. The Generating part of this system will require regular maintenance & possibly replaced every 5 plus years. Reason is these will be of no comparison(Not Industrial Grade) to centralized power generators as to do so would likely be cost prohibitive.

      Other then supplemental heating in the winter, These systems are not economical at this time. In fact, a CHP system could cost more then our present energy for individuals plus all the headaches to boot.

      Other technologies are needed & are easily a decade away. The biggest being a (TEC) Thermal to electric convertor in the 40% efficiency range.

      Once engineering problems are solved, These would likely be a great fit for a micro-grid system with local Generation instead of the present centralized system. Also a fair amount of savings.

  • Linda

    The Capitalists will have their rents no matter what we do or invent. The same was true in the phoney socialism of Soviet Russia, which practiced State Capitalism. We need true Socialism, which puts the benefit of society ahead of the private profits of greedy individuals.

    Socialism is the only economically viable model in the long term. Let the people decide what kind of electrity grid we should have and they would naturally choose a clean, safe and sustainable one.

    • Iggy Dalrymple

      Are there any examples of “pure socialism” that you approve of? What about N.Korea, where tree bark is freely available to each according to his hunger.

      • Jean

        Linda, take a look at Barcelona in 1936 when the Anarchosindicalist established Libertarian Socialism, it’s the future.

        • Linda

          Thanks, will do 🙂

        • Roger Bird

          That one really worked out really well. (sarcasm) I never heard of it before. They did so well that everyone is scrambling to copy it. (more sarcasm)

          I’d try Mondragon if I was you guys. It is not the least bit offensive to captialists, liberatrians, or socialists, and it is succeeding and spreading. The City of Richmond California is trying to adapt it. But, of course, it is not based upon hatred and rage and anger, so I suppose it won’t appeal to some people.

          • Linda

            Good comment Roger (not sarcasm). Mondragon is an excellent example of a successful Socialist economy with full employment, out-growing and out-performing capitalist Spain (not sarcasm).

            Thank you. See, you can do it when you try (not sarcasm).


          • Roger Bird

            I tend to dislike large groups of people. It’s just me. It’s not that I don’t have any social skills; it’s just that I don’t let them get in the way of my opinionated and fiery individualistic nature. (:->) In fact, I HATE parties and other large groups of people.

            I see absolutely, positively nothing wrong values-wise with Mondragon. I have always known that ALL businesses, no matter how hard they try to be liberal and good to their employees, are at their heart authoritarian operations. So we can agree about that. And the only freedom that we have during our working hours is to work for authoritarian operation #1 rather than authoritarian operation #2. And if you want to change from AO #1 to AO #1, you are taking a big risk because AO #2 may not hire you. So, land of the brave and home of the 2/3 free, and this doesn’t take into account crony capitalism and big government that says that I can’t buy raw milk.

            Linda, when you take over, can I buy raw milk? If so, I will vote for you. (:->)

          • Linda

            Most certainly you can buy raw milk, I promise 🙂

          • MStone

            hmmmm…why don’t you just buy a cow?

          • Roger Bird

            Our property is way too small. It is even too small for our two dogs.

        • orsobubu

          Jean, anarchists were crushed by stalinists. All communists are anarchists, in perspective, but I think anarchism cannot provide a viable organization for revolutionary transition from capitalism to socialism. If you search about other parties against spanish stalinists, you we’ll find the trotskysts. Trotsky changed his mind during bolshevik revolution and civil war in russia, recognizing his theoretical errors and Lenin’ strategic leadership. Being well ahead of their times, in the end bolsheviks were wiped out too by imperialistic state capitalis (and WW2 was the necessary outcome of this defeat), both in russia and spain and everywhere, but I believe their strategic heritage, incomparably superior to anarchists’ one, is the right example to follow.

          • humblemechanic

            orsobubu, your Hectoring arrogance and certainty
            in your beliefs beggar belief.

          • orsobubu

            explain this to me please

          • orsobubu

            Ok, you were in hungary in ’56, but I can assure you (even if I have no time at all to explain) that state capitalists was the killers and libertarian communists were among the victims. It is a big error associate marxism with bourgeoise capitalistic dictatorship. If you study yhe Antiduhring, you learn a lot about violence and capitalism.

      • Linda

        North Korea is a Military Dictatorship, not Socialism. You can’t have a “Socialist Dictatorship”, it’s an oxymoron.

        • humblemechanic

          North Korea is a Kingdom. Newly minted but after the
          3rd succession it is now an established and stable one
          with a much loved monarch.

        • orsobubu

          But communism is proletariat dictatorship, in the sense that – during the critical phase of transition to socialism – the great majority outlaws by force the private ownership of the means of production, just like capitalists, during their economic, social and military crisis, restrict by force the democratic liberties (which would naturally aim to the socialized ownership of the means of production).

          • Linda

            All theories of force, beyond the essential prevention of violence and crime are now basically discredited as failures, whether we are talking about capitalism or socialism. The new model of society must be so naturally superior that there should be little if any need for compunction. Its complex and difficult, but it is possible.

          • Roger Bird

            “1. A strong uneasiness caused by a sense of guilt. See Synonyms at penitence.
            2. A sting of conscience or a pang of doubt aroused by wrongdoing or the prospect of wrongdoing.”

            Linda, you may have misused the word “compunction” or else I don’t understand or agree with you. We need all of the compunction that we can get. Well, not quite. A joyful and loving desire to help others should not need compunction, but people need inner controls to not harm others. Brevik could have used a great deal of compunction.

            But I envision a future with coercion and anger and hatred greatly reduced. Again, what is the difference between Sweden and the old Soviet Union? Almost the same economic system. I would be delighted to visit Sweden and even immigrate there. The old Soviet Union, not a team of horses could have dragged me there. The differences are due to hatred and anger.

      • Roger Bird

        Iggy, you are one first class wit.

    • Roger Bird

      It’s funny how every attempt to establish a utopia based upon socialist idealism never seems to pan out. And hindsight always blames it on bad guys getting in there and fouling things up.

      Part of the problem is that desires always expand and become needs, and they march the individual over the cliff of selfishness and competition. That is current human nature.

      Another part of the problem is that people prefer incentives that they can see and feel and touch, and socialist idealism just doesn’t cut it for them. If I am working hard and my neighbor is slacking, I am going to slow down. That is current human nature.

      Another problem is that any regime established in hatred and anger is going to be ugly for it’s entire history. Sweden and the Soviet Union are examples. Both have almost the same economic system, but they were (are) world’s apart.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        Freehope, Alabama is an example of an old utopian dream that has survived. In Freehope, all real property reverts back to the utopian colony. You cannot own land in Freehope but can only buy 100 year leases from the colony. What’s the advantage? None, that I can determine. The ad valorem taxes seem just as high as other traditional towns and cities in the South.

        Why would any citizen spend money to keep up or improve his home if he knew his home would soon revert to the socialist colony?

        • Roger Bird

          Socialist idealism is supposed to be the driving force of socialism. But socialist idealism gets old after a while. It doesn’t have a lot a juice. In North Korea, they just use fear when socialist idealism doesn’t work.

      • Linda

        The problem with “slackers” and incentive is artificially created, by usary through the banking system, driving growth at any price.

        The financial system is a beast that is never satisfied. It will consume us all in the end, and lay waste to everything. Interest is never repaid, it is only ever deferred till the day of reckoning, when only a collapse can wipe it out.

        Not the kind of world we would have planned if we’d taken the trouble to think about it. But now that we see it for what it is, we can change it.

        • Roger Bird

          You are over-reaching, Linda. The world is filled with slackers. There are even slackers in the banking system and in Cuba and perhaps even in Mondragon. Long before the banking system was invented there were slackers; that is why the early Christian church included ‘sloth’ as one of the seven deadly sins. I see no mechanism why the banking system would cause laziness. I have seen it in myself, and it had nothing to do with the banking system.

          Furthermore, many people get out of debt. I have getting out of debt. In 3 years or better we will get out of debt. It is really quite easy. Use only cash, no cards. Budget, and discrimate between your wants and your needs. Then you can start being an owner of the means of production rather than a slave to the banking system.

        • Iggy Dalrymple

          So usury and banksters spoiled utopia at the Plymouth Colony.

      • humblemechanic

        Roger, I am not sure about the similarities between the Swedish and Soviet system. You may have studied both from afar
        but I was there and damn it, it was the worse one I had the first hand experience of, Hungary was a clone of the Soviet Union. Later on I had met many Swedish people and discussed the differences. Unless you have lived in Hungary or devoted considerable time and effort to it you could not have seen trough the smoke screen and systematic falsification. It was
        nothing like that in Sweden. All the ‘consciousness raising’
        meetings we had to attend to hear the Party Functionary telling us that the capitalists in the West are unlikely to give up their privileges without armed struggle and the people of Hungary must be ready for it when the hour strikes.
        The pay structure, the piece work rates and pay slip with all the deductions was impenetrable and controlled by local Party cadres. When, after escaping to the West I read Orwel’s book ‘The Road to Wigan Pier’ the unemployed miner’s benefits and the prices food, accommodation, etc. in 1936 had indicated standard of living just about double that of an employed miner in Hungary (my good self) in 1956.
        And the Party was telling us of the poor oppressed masses in the West, the ‘factory fodder’ of big Capital.
        And how this state of affairs comes about after the socialistic/communistic ideas attain dominance? As you say, lack of incentive but there is more to it. The people, the godforsaken or goddamn people, does not know what is good for
        them and will not do what is expected or even obliged to do.
        Applying some corrective measures on the more recalcitrant ones begets more resentment and obtuseness until some really
        strong force is necessary to save the Glorious Revolution from
        reactionaries fomenting ‘counter revolution’. And the leaders
        are ‘Riding the Tiger’, they daren’t get off for fear of being
        devoured by the Tiger. And the Tiger can be a another communist.
        This impasse, this paradox of social engineering never seems to penetrate the communistic perception: they keep on assigning to people qualities that do not fit.


        • Roger Bird

          humblemechanic, When I say “system”, I do not mean how practical life was in both countries. I am talking about the economic theory of socialism and communism. You wrote in your comment of how life was in Hungary. I appreciate your efforts; the world needs to hear more of this. However, the difference between Sweden and the Soviet Union with regard to daily life is tremendous, and the reason that it is tremendous is mostly to do with the quality and quantity of the hatred/venom which both moved towards their socialist/communist systems. As far as I can tell, Sweden simply voted themselves into socialism without ANY venom that I can preceive, and they could just as well vote themselves out of a socialist system. The Soviets, on the other hand, being grievously oppressed by the Tsars, developed such sytemic hatred for all things capitalist, individualist, Western, American, etc. etc. etc., that their system was basically hell.

          These dictators who oppose democracy and socialism perhaps think that they are doing their nations a big service by doing so. In fact, they are not. The more hatred, the more oppression, the more coercion, the more the society is and will become phucked up. All political and economic philosophies are just going along for the ride.

    • orsobubu

      Linda, I tried talking here for months about differences between state capitalism and communism, but nobody listened, Roger Bird above all the others. I wish you good luck. I would like ask you which town do you live in, and your reference textbooks analyizing soviet economy, critics of political economy, etc. Here is my personal list of e-catworld readers believing that LENR technologies could be a step towards socialism rather than another illusory capitalistic solution to unavoidable overproduction, unemployment and fall of profit rate:


      can I enlist you too linda?

      • Linda

        Part of the trouble you’ve had may be due to the use of Marxist jargon and labels.

        Socialism should not be complicated. Even a kid in High School could deduce that it is impossible for society to endlessly exploit a finite set of resources for the benefit of one greedy group of individuals without there being some kind of Revolution eventually. You can only keep a lid on that pot for so long. So, society must be run for the benefit of the majority, if only to prevent that.

        You don’t need to study Marx to figure that out. But once you do figure it out you need to ask yourself what kind of Socialism you would like, and again, Marx can inform, but not dictate.

        Socialism begins in the mind and flows from the heart. It is ultimately nothing more than a way of thinking about solutions, always putting people before profits.

        • Roger Bird

          To put people before profits means that most people will have to change, if not almost everyone, if not everyone. Changing the structure of society won’t work. And that is why all of these schemes fail. You and I may put people before profits, but 99% of all modern people do not. And, as I have said so many times, if you want to change people, you have to change yourself first. A miracle has to happen, a change in human nature. I am ready for that miracle, but I am not holding my breath waiting for it.

          • Linda

            That is one of the most thoughtful posts you have ever written Roger 🙂

            I only disagree in one minor respect – I believe that together we can devise a way to make it so that everyone gets what they need and want, without compunction, provided what they want is reasonable.

            The way we do this is through technology, hence my involvement in this group. People always ask me to give an example of a Socialist system that works, and I often answer, “The Star Trek Universe”. When we have unlimited energy, it will spell the end of scarcity. The end of scarcity spells the end of inequality, and that spells the end of Capitalism, which relies on exploitation.

            That’s why I’m here, and I dare say, that is actually why many of us are here, even if we don’t understand it as plainly as that. In a sense, many of us are probably “Closet Socialists”, by this definition. 🙂

          • Roger Bird

            I will still have a fiery personality and no friends. I will still not want to hold hands and sing “kum ba ya”. There will still be problems.

            Life will certainly be better for the poor. For middle and upper class folks, problems will still persist. Desires have a funny way of becoming needs.

            And I say this in the (:->) possible way.

        • AlainCo

          On problem in the vision is that your definition of what is the problem is not happening as you say. you have a solution of an imagined problem, or at least it is debated. The key of Marxism is to assume that eternally the capitalist, assumed to be bourgeoisie capitalist of big companies, will try to exploit at the limit of starvation the workers class.

          Capitalism is much more varied, and there is a tendency to mismatch capitalism for crony capitalism, reinforced by state power concentration (which is maxium in communist system).

          Capitalism can better manage resources than shared property, provided there is incentive to protect ones asset.
          Shared property can lead to pure exploitation without any sense of responsibility.

          Capitalism can be human sized, like when someone invest his wages to buy a moped to be a taxi-mopped (as I seen), or when a car driver buy more cars with his earning, to employ neighbours, and organize a local transportation service…

          Marx see the capitalism as it was in London at the period, and around the place , of jack the ripper.
          I imagine that he would have thought differently in 1960 in France, or in 2000 in South Korea.

          sometime the solution proposed is not wrong because it is wrong, but because the definition of the problem is wrong.

          sometime too, the solution is wrong, not because it is wrong, or unjustified, but simply inapplicable and unrealistic. Ideal communism is not compatible with human psychology.
          It is better is social-democratic countries like France, but with longer time to correct it, it is also not adapted to human psychology. In france, social protection, was working with generation educated to work hard (like Chinese today), but when this system start to be assumed as normal and not as a progress, like in a communist system the effect on incentive start to block innovation, entrepreneurship, and globally reduce social and economic progress.

          there is no perfect system, like no perfect happiness. Because unhapiness like pain, like economic inequalities, are the error signal need to correct and develop. Life is complex and you need errors, pain, poverty, to push for corrective action.

          Communist systems pretend that an independent “smart and honest” decision system can correct the problems, but those “corrective bureau” are not working as dreamed. Since they have no flesh in the game, they have more incentive to be parasite than to solve the problem. they also have less information from local scale, and have less incentive to acquire local information and use it.

          as history shows, in USSR, in France, it does not work well.

          • Linda

            I would guess virtually your entire experience of Capitalism has been gained at the “benefit” side of the equation. All good things flow to you from Capitalism. You have really only experienced it as a net positive.

            But all the negative consequences are paid by others you do not see and will never meet. They suffer, but it has nothing to do with how hard they work… In fact they work harder than you could imagine for pennies an hour, while at the same time, their culture is destroyed, their ecology laid waste and their futures blighted with poisons and toxins that kill them and their children.

            To these people, it doesn’t matter if it is state capitalism, crony capitalism or “pure” capitalism that is killing them,, the results are they same for them; they live in sh*t so that you can live in luxury.

            Is that how you like it?

  • Chris I

    Over here we’ve always had a fixed rate to pay. It depends on various things, including the max allowable power. No great amount, it’s just the price of keeping the service available; we pay it even if we leave the main switch off while a house is idle, without calling off the contract.

  • kasom

    boring, even the endless dgt stream oprea at Mat’s Blog is closer to the LENR topic……

  • GreenWin

    OT, germane to knowledge suppression.

    Some here doubt the strident efforts to confine certain kinds of scientific evidence to closely held “Knowledge Monopolies.” (1) We have copious evidence of this is the cold fusion saga e.g. “Heavy Watergate,” “War on Cold Fusion,” Dr. Gene Mallove’s Special Report, etc.

    For 35 years NASA has been telling certain scientists to not talk about findings on Mars – starting with the Viking I & II landers.

    “NASA has often stated (e.g. MSL Science Corner) that it’s Mars Science Laboratory (MSL), “Curiosity,” Mission to Mars carries no life detection experiments. This is in keeping with NASA’s 36-year explicit ban on such, imposed immediately after the 1976 Viking Mission to Mars.” Dr. Gilbert Levin, Labeled Release life detection experimenter. Levin goes on to claim there are “stealth” life detection experiments on board Curiosity.

    The Viking data has been reanalyzed and a growing number of scientists agree, it detected life on Mars in 1976.

    Why doctor the color photos of the Martian atmosphere? Why stifle the LR experiment results? They’re just little bugs. Or do we need to call Ghost Busters.

    1. henryhbauer[dot]

    • georgehants

      GreenWin, your comment will I think go unheard, going by some of the comments on page today the level of debate here has fallen to that of a scientific conference.
      I have come, a long time ago to the conclusion that as the Evidence and my experiences for reincarnation are so strong, that I this time have chosen the wrong time and place to return (probably karma) and will make sure next time that I choose an existence where sanity, care and Truth are the norm.
      I am sure you and Peter have seen —–

      • georgehants

        Today we live in a society in which spurious realities are manufactured by the media, by governments, by big corporations, by religious groups, political groups. . . . So I ask, in my writing, What is real? Because unceasingly we are bombarded with pseudo-realities manufactured by very sophisticated people using very sophisticated electronic mechanisms. I do not distrust their motives; I distrust their power. They have a lot of it. And it is an astonishing power: that of creating whole universes, universes of the mind… the bombardment of pseudo-realities begins to produce inauthentic humans very quickly, spurious humans — as fake as the data pressing at them from all sides.

        Philip K. Dick

        • georgehants

          Unlike Dick I “distrust” their motives.

      • georgehants

        My Name Is Ben Swann and I left Fox 19 to Bring Truth To Media, Ask Me Anything

  • humblemechanic

    Linda, I am one of those you say capitalism destroys. I had to move up
    into the working class, there being
    classes in the social register below the proletariat. My father was a landless
    peasant, my mother had difficulty writing letters. My upbringing was from nothing to miserable. The highest position
    I reached was ‘chargehand toolsetter at
    Champion Spark Plugs, Sydney, Australia
    in 1970. I sometimes call myself the ‘last Mohican of the literate working
    class’ and I am the genuine article.
    I have no illusions about capitalism, in
    fact I have a book in me titled
    ‘Have you had a hard day at the office
    dear?: the cliché and its implications’
    I observed and realised that the choice
    in social systems is not between good and
    bad but bad and worse. All the good intentioned systems on the failed and will fail on the misreading of human nature. I have elaborated on this in my
    exchange with Orsobubu (was totally lost on him) and other comments on the 3D printer blog a few weeks ago. I have had
    experience of the two major ideologies as
    practised and looked at other lesser attempts at Social Engineering. Western
    European type industrial capitalism is the best of bad lot so too speak and all the others are pipe dreams. Some of these
    are quite murderous when put into practice

  • humblemechanic

    Linda, I have tried to reply to you just now but somehow it got to the top the page as comment.
    Please read my answer to Roger Bird too.