Comment on [deleted]

givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• palordrolap@fedia.io ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  in America

  And you can almost cross out "with monopolies" too because there's a lot of tacit price-fixing in industries where there is competition.

  source

  • chuckleslord@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Oligopolies, monopolies. Potato tomato, potato tomato

    source
• Voyajer@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Not every area gets power serviced by a for-profit company. For those who don’t, my condolences.

  source

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    You’re acting like that’s a common scenario…

    There’s a few small slices of area in a minority of states where you might be legally allowed to pick, but that is not a guarantee there’s more than one option.

    To my knowledge most of them are artificial monopolies anyways.

    Like, in Perfectville your choice between any available provider is legally protected. However company A and company B made a handshake deal to draw a line down the area and not provide service on one side of the line.

    competitiveenergy.org/…/state-by-state-links/

    Very few of those green states are for electricity

    source
• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  You really think companies in America with monoplies would lower prices just because their costs went down?

  So, theoretically, there’s a point at which induced demand through lower prices can raise profits. Having a monopoly on an elastic good only benefits you when you’re onboarding new clients at an escalating pace. Private energy companies looking to increase energy consumption overall may well take an upfront haircut on the retail price in order to encourage more people to adopt hardware that consumes the commodity.

  But - over the long term - sure, the incentive is to capture more revenue in pursuit of higher profit. And that means raising prices faster than inflation.

  source