Well, of course, the deregulation of the electrical energy system in California was an unmitigated disaster. Particularly revealing were the taped conversations between Enron energy traders, as they reveled in gouging "Grandma Millie". Very amusing that Arnie is thinking of reviving this aborted experiment.

Can't say too much for airline deregulation either. Before deregulation, I actually looked forward to/enjoyed air travel. The last time I flew to a conference in the Caribbean from California, two elbows were shoved into me from either side (I was in a middle seat) and all I could say over and over was: "This is a piece of cake". They say it's much cheaper to fly now, and this may be so. Still, it's no improvement if I do everything possible to avoid flying - anywhere.

-- Modified on 6/6/2004 3:34:15 PM

...  I'm saying this as a man who lost a decent career position in telecom because of deregulation.  Consumers benefit whenever the share of income they have to pay to buy something falls from what it was before (it's the definition).  

It's easy to "run the #s" and show that this has indeed happened in transportation, telecom, energy (outside California), ,,,  Regulation costs a lot.  Those costs tend to increase over time because eventually regulators and suppliers get cozy when the supplier realizes the real decision maker is the regulator.  The consumer never wins.

Regulation may be necessary to protect health and safety or to maintain social values.  They may also result in more uncomfortable flights, poor service, and telephone salesman who call you at night.  Still, you are traveling for less, talking for less, ...  Companies make it up by selling more goods and services or selling new services.

All those who want to go back to paying $0.40 / min for a long distance phone call, please raise their hands.

Harry