• givesomefucks
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    The state’s three investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric, aren’t in imminent financial danger and last year saw profits rise. But fire costs have contributed to Californians paying the second-highest electricity rates in the country, and lawmakers and Newsom’s office worry that if it becomes harder for utilities to borrow money those bills will continue to climb. The utilities together provide power for about three-quarters of the state.

    Newsom and the lawmakers say utilities are held responsible for too much after a wildfire and that bad actors like hedge funds are taking advantage to get a cut. If another devastating wildfire triggers damages too high for a utility to pay, the potentially resulting bankruptcy would make it even harder for victims to collect.

    Trickle down and too big to fail…

    We’re fucked if it’s Newsome in 2028, because the incoming Dem president picks the DNC chair

    And Newsom will take us back to neoliberals

    • sunbrrnslapper
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      He’s trying to keep electricity rates down for California residents (which are driven in part by wildfire costs). Is this the best way? I’m not sure. But if residents aren’t paying via electricity rates, they will pay another way. Insurance (if you can get it). Taxes (if voters will agree to it). Maybe other ways. None of them are that palatable.

      • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s very much not the best way. Utilities (and their high-level managers) should be held strictly liable for the cost of wildfires that they start. The reason it happens at all is that they’ve been diverting funds from maintenance and fire-safety improvements to executive bonuses.

      • Skyrmir
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        They could tax insurance sales to high risk or high value properties. They’re the ones that will ultimately be the biggest burden in a fire anyway.

        In reality the costs should fall on the utility companies that likely caused several of the fires. But that would raise prices for everyone.

        • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Insurance companies operating in California are already massively increasing homeowner premiums regardless of risk. Example: my homeowner and earthquake premiums are both up 60% year-on-year. I live in a low fire-risk area, and the risk of an earthquake hasn’t changed since last year. They’re seeing how far they can push it before the regulators stir themselves from their lethargy and actually do something. And Newsom has consistently shielded big corporations from accountability.

        • sunbrrnslapper
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          It’s tricky because the people who live in high risk areas live there because that is frequently what they can afford. It also means they may not be able to afford the rising costs of insurance. The issue is complex and the reality is that wildfire prevention and mitigation is expensive. We will end up paying one way or another.

    • frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Newsom wouldn’t even win California if a primary was held tomorrow at this point. Put up anyone decent and he’s not the pick for President.