Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!reader5.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richmond Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Residents Of =?utf-8?B?8J+HuvCfh7g=?= Lake Tahoe Losing Their Electricity Supplier To AI Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 16:14:22 +0100 Organization: Frantic Message-ID: <82wlx4vh69.fsf@example.com> References: <10u5joq$1110u$1@dont-email.me> <82a4u183n3.fsf@example.com> <821pfcx2dp.fsf@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: solani.org; logging-data="317666"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@news.solani.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cancel-Lock: sha1:fULkZO1ggYnNvAcsU4M8wWLgNaU= sha1:PlnTCz+Afva4Zdb92Qm8Xp3u940= X-User-ID: eJwFwQEBACAIA7BKoP68DiL0j+CGTWfFIXgwGO0pZKsLrQsLa5XpaXKtfEO3oDH9xs2K/C3DEbs= Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:28593 oldernow writes: > On 2026-05-15, Richmond wrote: >> oldernow writes: >> >>> On 2026-05-15, Richmond wrote: >>>> Lawrence D’Oliveiro writes: >>>> >>>>> From the “only in the USA” file: an electricity supply company has >>>>> decided that it is not profitable enough to continue serving any >>>>> residential customers at all, and is abandoning all of its ones so >>>>> it can concentrate entirely on feeding the much more profitable >>>>> AI-server market >>>>> >>>>> . >>>> >>>> Capitalism is working exactly as intended. >>> >>> I come across a statement like that from time to time, but for the >>> life of me can't see capitalism as something *intended*. Doesn't >>> "intended" imply someone sets out to make something happen? But >>> isn't capitalism actually simply an emergent property of people >>> being people? >>> >>> The way you put it, it's as though you think one or more people sat >>> down and said to each other, "Hey! Let's create capitalism!" But >>> when was that? Who were the creators? >>> >>> To me capitalism looks more like people attempting to do what they >>> consider in their best interests, followed by some people imagining >>> there being some real thing or force ("capitalism") driving the >>> situation. >> >> In the UK in the not so distant past, the energy was supplied by a >> government owned organisation. It was privatised and split up. This >> was a deliberate intentional act to introduce market forces. It >> didn't work very well in my opinion, but there is nothing natural >> about it. People being people, if your neighbour asks you for a wheel >> barrow to you sell it to him? rent it to him? no, you let him borrow >> it. That is people being people. The transactional view of everything >> it imposed from the top. > > Okay... but isn't your UK example different > than capitalism because there is clearly > and act to affect the market, whereas in > the case of capitalism it's rather the > opposite, i.e. the act of not acting > to affect the market? Said that way > makes it look as though not acting > is a form of acting, but my > initial reply considered > not acting, well, *not* > acting. :-) How did the energy company come to own the energy in the first place? e.g. English enclosures (15th–18th centuries), where common land was seized and converted to private property, dispossessing peasants and creating a landless labour force. Without people forced to sell their laboor, wage-labor capitalism couldn't function. What is a corporation? Something declared to exist and have rights by law(yers).