🚀 go-pugleaf

Phil Hughes claims that Seattle City Light's lower rates than Puget Power
somehow ``proves'' that government can do business better than private
industry.

It does no such thing.

It proves that providing utility service to an almost entirely urban or
suburban customer base is considerably cheaper than providing utility service
to a customer base that includes super-remote rural areas -- especially when,
by government regulation, the cost of providing service to the expensive areas
is spread out over the entire customer base so that everyone pays the same low
rate.

If Puget Power were allowed to charge customers what it really cost to provide
them with service, people in places like Bremerton would see a bit cut in
their rates, people in places like Bainbridge Island would see a moderate cut
in their rates, and people in the boonies would see such a massive increase in
rates that they'd no longer be able to afford electricity.

If Seattle City Light were to take over Puget Power, Seattle customers would
see an increase in rates at least to present Puget Power levels.

What is surprising is not that Puget Power is more expensive than Seattle City
Light, but that it is not *much* more expensive.  With the remote areas served
by Puget Power, it's a miracle they can keep it down to 6 cents/KWH.

One might want to investigate how long-distance calling subsidized local
calling during the Bell System years, and why our local bills soared
afterwards.