Mostly because power should be available to all as long as you are willing to pay (and they do pay, quite a bit, it’s their primary expense).
Mostly because power should be available to all as long as you are willing to pay (and they do pay, quite a bit, it’s their primary expense).
dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Why should power be available to all? If the activity is both incredibly wasteful and brings no value to the public or to the state or to the utility company, why should the utility not be able to prioritize getting power to people who need power to live?
There are these huge crypto mining farms in Texas, and people are literally dying each year from the power grid failing. Why should the crypto farms be protected when they could be cut off in times when human survival is at risk?
SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 3 months ago
It comes back to the age old question: how should goods and services be distributed. It’s the base of every civilization. By religious edict? By a study of who needs it the most? A system of reciprocal gifting? Precious metals? Or by some tokens for exchange?
We went hard for the latter so history books can write why this is a bad idea.
RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Whoever can eat the most sloppy joes in an hour gets to decide how goods are distributed.
BombOmOm@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Power is taxed and the proceeds go toward what the public has deemed important. The value to the public is clear.
In addition to taxes, it brings money into the state rather than allowing that money to go elsewhere. This means jobs at the power plants and more economic activity in your your state, which is is a positive feedback loop of goodness.
The utility company i getting lots of sales. Kinda hard to imagine how this isn’t good for the one selling more power.
BassTurd@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Your examples operate under the assumption that power is limitless. If people don’t have power because crypto cunts are bogarting it, they won’t care at all that there is tax money coming in. Further, since it is a limited resource, there isn’t an increase in tax revenue, it’s just being paid by someone else at the expense of people not having access to power. Likewise, the power companies are still serving the same amount of juice, so they aren’t getting more money, it’s just coming in from a single entity instead of from thousands of individuals.
I haven’t read any of the agreements these crypto companies have, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they got tax and other financial breaks, further hurting people that are losing out on power.
There is little to no benefit at all for the general population by allowing unlimited access to power for crypto. Maybe it brings in a couple more jobs, but it’s not like a power plant has a linear scale of employees required to power output. So it could enrich a handful of people by taking resources from many more people.
reddig33@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Lol. There’s no proceeds from taxing power when you’re paying cryptominers not to use it. The grid in Texas is so horribly mismanaged. If we’re going to offer something to these customers, it should be free solar panels to help wean them off the grid.