**************** TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*
1. "I'm conflicted on this" In response to Reply # 0
On one hand, they signed up for this. They had a choice: fixed rate or variable market rate. The variable rate is obviously riskier.
For the folks that chose variable rate, there are times when it works out for them. When demand is low, they pay lower prices. But with that comes the possibility that you'll sometimes pay higher rates. It doesn't make sense to be able to enjoy the good and then get bailed out when the bad happens.
On the other hand, this is an extreme situation and customers can't handle bills in the thousands of dollars.
The question then becomes, who should be responsible for paying for the expensive electricity that was used? I don't think it's fair for the company (Griddy) to pay it. From what I understand, they are just a middle man between the customer and the wholesale market.
The customer probably shouldn't pay the whole cost either. That's just an unconscionable amount for one person to pay.
legsdiamond Member since May 05th 2011 79594 posts
Fri Feb-26-21 12:15 PM
2. "no one should have rates that high just because of an outage" In response to Reply # 1
there needs to be a cap on how much they can charge during natural disasters.
**************** TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*
4. "it's the test case in how libertarianism is bullshit" In response to Reply # 1
your government has to say "you can't do this"
because expecting individual random people to be ready for a black swan event and prepare appropriately, with real understanding of what they've signed up for or what could happen, is just unrealistic
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
General Discussion
