THEFT BY EUPHEMISM
I.
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER:
The great Utility Price Theft
Can you handle a provocative question? Why are we a nation of such lambs when it comes to our government and its actions? This 200-year-old experiment we’re currently in calls for the people to run the thing, and to do it by sending their representative to Washington to speak – and vote - for them. OK. But where that breaks down is that a check for $1000 speaks to your representative a lot louder and more urgently than a thousand voices back home. You know that – everybody knows that. So you can imagine how well a check for $10,000 works.
Is everybody out there as sick and tired of the enormous bills we’re now paying for electricity and gas for homes? As of July 14, 2005, thanks to large amounts of money to Congresspersons and Senators, the marvelous system of providing electricity for homes that was the envy of the entire world, was shattered, on the altar of greed. See, we’ve been here before. FDR handled this identical theft perfectly in 1935, thus beginning a 70-year run of unparalleled calm, fairness and honesty in the electrical utility world. Here’s how it happened.
IN 1935 Samuel Insull of Chicago Edison began gouging electric customers to the point that the President had a law passed, the Public Utility Holding Company Act. The law:
· required electricity producers to keep the power coming, regardless
· rates were computed to cover salaries and all maintenance expenses
· barred "trading" electricity (FOR PROFIT) and, most importantly
· banned money donations by power giants to politicians
Bottom line: Insull was indicted soon after for crimes against the stockholders, and fled the country to Greece. He was extradited back to the United States by Turkey to face federal prosecution on mail fraud and antitrust charges. So yeah, we’ve been here before.
Euphemism #1: A few years ago, when the word started to get out about money in politics; money influencing bills that would become law, and money donations to Congress to influence laws, the good old boys in Washington trotted out two absolutely clean euphemisms. First they called all this money “Campaign Contributions.” They endlessly pushed this pretense, saying that, without money given to them, they couldn’t campaign, and the voters wouldn’t know who to vote for.
Euphemism #2: When that, too, came under very mild examination by a former generation of lambs, the Good Old Boys in Washington tied the practice of money influence firmly to the Constitution, declaring it “Free Speech.” That one became the gold standard, because no one would have the nerve to go against the Constitution, right?
What all this has to do with the obscene price of electricity and gas now is that this money given to lawmakers results in laws favorable to electric producers, which favoritism ultimately manifested in de-regulation of electric rates. The drumbeat cry of those pushing de-regulation was that if electricity were de-regulated, a lot of competition would spring up, and of course competition would bring the cost of electricity to the consumer down sharply.
TWO THINGS WRONG with that reasoning:
1> De-regulation created a lot of other competition, like they said, and prices dropped – for about a month or so. Then the biggest providers before de-regulation quickly bought out the new competing companies, and we were back to one provider, only now that one provider was DE-REGULATED, and could charge whatever he wanted. (And boy, did he !!!)
2> The proof is in the pudding, isn’t it? I personally paid $12-14 a month for YEARS until July 14, 2005, and since then have paid $300 on several occasions, and NEVER under $125 a month.
What I would like every reader to do is seek out euphemisms. They are the device being used to control us, and rob us. Someone once said: “…You can steal a lot more with a briefcase than you can with a gun.”
I.
LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER:
The great Utility Price Theft
Can you handle a provocative question? Why are we a nation of such lambs when it comes to our government and its actions? This 200-year-old experiment we’re currently in calls for the people to run the thing, and to do it by sending their representative to Washington to speak – and vote - for them. OK. But where that breaks down is that a check for $1000 speaks to your representative a lot louder and more urgently than a thousand voices back home. You know that – everybody knows that. So you can imagine how well a check for $10,000 works.
Is everybody out there as sick and tired of the enormous bills we’re now paying for electricity and gas for homes? As of July 14, 2005, thanks to large amounts of money to Congresspersons and Senators, the marvelous system of providing electricity for homes that was the envy of the entire world, was shattered, on the altar of greed. See, we’ve been here before. FDR handled this identical theft perfectly in 1935, thus beginning a 70-year run of unparalleled calm, fairness and honesty in the electrical utility world. Here’s how it happened.
IN 1935 Samuel Insull of Chicago Edison began gouging electric customers to the point that the President had a law passed, the Public Utility Holding Company Act. The law:
· required electricity producers to keep the power coming, regardless
· rates were computed to cover salaries and all maintenance expenses
· barred "trading" electricity (FOR PROFIT) and, most importantly
· banned money donations by power giants to politicians
Bottom line: Insull was indicted soon after for crimes against the stockholders, and fled the country to Greece. He was extradited back to the United States by Turkey to face federal prosecution on mail fraud and antitrust charges. So yeah, we’ve been here before.
Euphemism #1: A few years ago, when the word started to get out about money in politics; money influencing bills that would become law, and money donations to Congress to influence laws, the good old boys in Washington trotted out two absolutely clean euphemisms. First they called all this money “Campaign Contributions.” They endlessly pushed this pretense, saying that, without money given to them, they couldn’t campaign, and the voters wouldn’t know who to vote for.
Euphemism #2: When that, too, came under very mild examination by a former generation of lambs, the Good Old Boys in Washington tied the practice of money influence firmly to the Constitution, declaring it “Free Speech.” That one became the gold standard, because no one would have the nerve to go against the Constitution, right?
What all this has to do with the obscene price of electricity and gas now is that this money given to lawmakers results in laws favorable to electric producers, which favoritism ultimately manifested in de-regulation of electric rates. The drumbeat cry of those pushing de-regulation was that if electricity were de-regulated, a lot of competition would spring up, and of course competition would bring the cost of electricity to the consumer down sharply.
TWO THINGS WRONG with that reasoning:
1> De-regulation created a lot of other competition, like they said, and prices dropped – for about a month or so. Then the biggest providers before de-regulation quickly bought out the new competing companies, and we were back to one provider, only now that one provider was DE-REGULATED, and could charge whatever he wanted. (And boy, did he !!!)
2> The proof is in the pudding, isn’t it? I personally paid $12-14 a month for YEARS until July 14, 2005, and since then have paid $300 on several occasions, and NEVER under $125 a month.
What I would like every reader to do is seek out euphemisms. They are the device being used to control us, and rob us. Someone once said: “…You can steal a lot more with a briefcase than you can with a gun.”
No comments:
Post a Comment