pull down to refresh

Here in New Zealand previous right wing governments sold off the state owned electricity generators - they are now all partly owned by private shareholders. When power generators can form a cartel as these now do they have limited incentive to build more power generation capacity as limiting supply means they can charge much higher prices for what is available. This is precisely what has happened- introducing private ownership and the profit motive has resulted in rising power prices and a deficit of new power generation. Libertarians seem totally blind to the reality that private for profit operators of strategic assets can and do use their market dominance to extract maximum profits...in the case of power generators this places an additional cost burden on all downstream businesses and consumers reducing the competitive advantage of the entire nation. Why are libertarian 'free market rules' ideologs blind to this reality???
I don't know how it is in New Zealand, but here things usually work way better when they're private and the government just regulates it. energy is a perfect example.
reply
Usually is probably correct- I agree most/many markets are perfectly well served by a free market but my argument remains that some markets require government involvement and if left to 'free market' are vulnerable to cartels, cronyism, rentseeking and damaging effects on the wider economy. A contemporary example of considerable significance and effect that I have given elsewhere on this thread is the rare earths supply chains. Free enterprise alone has not not been adequately incentivised to invest and compete in this market meaning government involvement is required unless you want to become hostage to Chinese supply chains.
reply