|
I appreciate how much people think of me in various threads even if I don't post or comment on anything. All the speculation about how I spend my free time when not posting on D&D is slightly disturbing, but I guess that's just how nerds go about their business...
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 03:32 |
|
|
When I grow up, I wanna be like unca Ligur!
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 19:32
|
|
|
Hob_Gadling posted:When I grow up, I wanna be like unca Ligur! You already are.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
We Daily Fail famous nau 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Rexroom posted:Great argument. Really convincing. Maybe read the post after his next time. The prices are pushed to the maximum (well, profits are) by everyone, Finnish governmental players and foreign privatized players. The article is just stupid. Of course everyone wants a higher return. The point is that the return is capped by the government. When people bought Caruna, they knew this. All the power companies aim for the maximum allowed return, regardless of who owns them. It has absolutely 0 to do with then being privately or foreign owned. The government allowed higher profits for a while to encourage further investment. Both Caruna and Finnish companies responded to these incentives. Caruna hiked prices more, so they presumably invested more as well. The profit they're allowed to make is also proportionate to investment as it's measured by return on capital. If it was a private sector thing, Elenia, another power network operator (owned by freaking Goldman Sachs instead of a Canadian pension fund), would also be under fire. It really is ridiculous how low the level of general understanding around this issue seems to be. Normally you have people here who understand at least some basic concepts around the issue. Now it's like I'm talking to 10 SnowblindFatals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Maybe read the post after his next time. The prices are pushed to the maximum (well, profits are) by everyone, Finnish governmental players and foreign privatized players. The article is just stupid. Of course everyone wants a higher return. The point is that the return is capped by the government. When people bought Caruna, they knew this. All the power companies aim for the maximum allowed return, regardless of who owns them. It has absolutely 0 to do with then being privately or foreign owned. The government allowed higher profits for a while to encourage further investment. Both Caruna and Finnish companies responded to these incentives. Caruna hiked prices more, so they presumably invested more as well. The profit they're allowed to make is also proportionate to investment as it's measured by return on capital. If it was a private sector thing, Elenia, another power network operator (owned by freaking Goldman Sachs instead of a Canadian pension fund), would also be under fire. I think we have an agreement over that companies play for profits. The problem is that Caruna is a sähkösiirtoyhtiö, who you can't switch to another competitor like in any free market utopia, because they own the electricity grid in the region. So as a consumer you're getting a pretty raw deal. Why Fortum/government thought it was worth the risk to create a private company with a natural monopoly is anyone's guess, but it should be pretty apparent now why privatizing infrastructure is problematic, to say the least.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
We should privatize Kehä 1 and let the free market solve the traffic problems.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
jos maahanmuutto-ongelmaa ei saada kuriin ja kyttiksiä ja paskalakkien virkoja lakkautetaan jatkuvasti, katunatsiryhmien määrä tulee kasvamaan ja yksityiset turvafirmat hyötyy kanssa, nyt jo löytyy julkisia tiloja joissa kyttien hommat on ulkoistettu niille
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Rexroom posted:I think we have an agreement over that companies play for profits. The problem is that Caruna is a sähkösiirtoyhtiö, who you can't switch to another competitor like in any free market utopia, because they own the electricity grid in the region. So as a consumer you're getting a pretty raw deal. Why Fortum/government thought it was worth the risk to create a private company with a natural monopoly is anyone's guess, but it should be pretty apparent now why privatizing infrastructure is problematic, to say the least. As I mentioned 3 times in the post you quoted and many more in this thread, the government has, by law, restricted the profits these companies are allowed to make... And that the system seems to be working fine for other privatized operators in the same field, and that public operators also increase prices when they make investments. Pretty basic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
http://www.hs.fi/m/talous/a1379664130915 Lol. The date on the article. In 2013 it was clear that prices would rise because of investments, privatization or not. Amazing how difficult this is to understand.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:As I mentioned 3 times in the post you quoted and many more in this thread, the government has, by law, restricted the profits these companies are allowed to make... And that the system seems to be working fine for other privatized operators in the same field, and that public operators also increase prices when they make investments. Indeed they diddley-do. Caruna only decided to put the price hike to the maximum allowed, which is - at worst - a 27% increase. They're saying this is for financing the electric grid conversion work to a buried ground cable, but one could argue they could've gone another route, like Pohjois Karjalan Sähkö, who are upgrading theirs when need be, rather than all-at-once, which would mean replacing parts that are nowhere near their end-of-use period. Geriatric Pirate posted:Amazing how difficult this is to understand. Couldn't have said it better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:http://www.hs.fi/m/talous/a1379664130915 that news article also states that 2/3 fortum's power grid is already good enough for the new standards? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
http://m.taloussanomat.fi/energia/2016/02/05/elenia-maksaa-voitoistaan-veroja-viela-carunaakin-vahemman/20161380/12 It's not hard to understand why you would raise prices to invest, but it is hard to understand how these arrangements are acceptable for socially critical monopolies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 08:41
|
|
|
Paavo Väyrynen just had his press conference. His new Citizen Party is taking influences from the British parliamentary system. As a weird quirk, you can be a member of another political party as well. The party's first and foremost agenda is to exit from the euro currency. Along that comes the core values of the Center Party's conservative wing, you know, Paasikivi policy and all that. Also, Paavo Väyrynen might have retreated from the core Center Party political machine, but he's still a member due to a technicality in the rules that doesn't forbid dual membership.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 08:52
|
|
|
http://www.iltalehti.fi/uutiset/2016020521072644_uu.shtmlquote:Väyrynen lyttää Vennamo-vertauksen - "Koen olevani pikemminkin Urho Kekkonen" Magical. Just, wunderbar. I have sneaking suspicion that Sipilä will just give him some kunniavirka to massage his ego and that will be that but let's fear for the best and hope for the worst.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 09:55
|
|
|
Puistokemisti posted:I have sneaking suspicion that Sipilä will just give him some kunniavirka to massage his ego and that will be that but let's fear for the best and hope for the worst. Well, he was up to now an "honorary chairman" of CP, so I doubt that'll placate Väyrynen anymore. He wants Finland out of the euro, and that's that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 10:04
|
|
|
Rexroom posted:Well, he was up to now an "honorary chairman" of CP, so I doubt that'll placate Väyrynen anymore. He wants Finland out of the euro, and that's that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
Kuule hain nussivan posted:Well, he wants to be a minister, and that's that. Well, yeah. That's one way to get there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 10:20
|
|
|
Good interview with Markku Kuisma: http://www.uusisuomi.fi/kotimaa/170832-professori-markku-kuisma-aimana-suomi-teki-taas-digitat-miksi-poliitikot-myivat
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
I might just vote for pikemminkin Kekkonen. He has promised to save mankind with ihmiskuntapolitiikka and is now revolutionizing the party system.  The cult of personality is too strong, send help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 11:02
|
|
|
all the parties are poo poo so i'd vote kekkonen just for shits and giggles
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 11:33
|
|
|
I'll film out a kannattajakortti in the hopes that his bluff fails and he'll have to run. IF he steals votes from Kepu, even better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 11:49
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Nobody here is making any sense except me and Heikki Pursiainen
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 11:52
|
|
|
Mulli posted:that news article also states that 2/3 fortum's power grid is already good enough for the new standards? Which leaves 1/3rd? I'm not a power network expert, so I can't comment except to say that if the problem is that they overinvested, then that's not something thats been brought up on this thread or the media until the post before yours. Everyone is just crying about thr tax arrangements (which is dumb because it would be reflected in purchase price for a tax free investor) and price increases. No "god drat foreigners buying our power grid and over investing in it". And to be honest, had they not invested and there was another big storm, the same goons crying about investments here would be crying about how we let the drat forriners buy our power grid and not invest in it, leading to power cuts. Same goons would be crying either way. I mean the whole thing is just a ridiculous whinefest, which seems to be why people like Markku Kuisma are the people being cited instead of the normal economics commentariat or energy economists. The price hikes are basically meaningless for most people, it's companies who are hit the hardest since they consume much more power than anyone else yet of course goons do the whole "this is terrible for the poor"  ing. The tax argument is easy to counter by just noting that the tax is probably reflected in the purchasing price. And people seem to be completely ignoring that the push to invest started from the government jn the first place, they allowed companies to make higher profits to encourage investment and forced them to do at least some investments.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
At this point I'm convinced that Geriatric Pirate is either himself, or has someone related to him that is, in the upper management of whatever the gently caress that energy company was called.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:And people seem to be completely ignoring that the push to invest started from the government jn the first place, they allowed companies to make higher profits to encourage investment and forced them to do at least some investments. Anyways, PK-S's plan seems more sound and Caruna just comes off greedy they way they're doing it. Geriatric Pirate posted:The price hikes are basically meaningless for most people Terveisin, Carunan asiakas Golden Gate Bride fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
But why would one sell these assets in the first place? It's a valid question that you don't get to dodge by pretending that you have some uniquely pure understanding of corporate finance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Markku Kuisma posted:Meillä on pankkitileillä 80 miljardia euroa, jotka kaipaisivat nollakoron sijaan 2–3 prosentin tuottoa, hän sanoo. Ok. To me that sounds like a good point. But maybe I am brainwashed by MSM because I am citing Markku Kuisma and normal economics commentariat of energy economists. What are they saying?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
And yes, everyone understands that companies are being hit just as well as consumers. Why are you trying to perpetuate this idiotic false dilemma? If we are so stupid, don't obfuscate - educate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
it's not going to get any better, is it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
Pussy Noise posted:But why would one sell these assets in the first place? It's a valid question that you don't get to dodge by pretending that you have some uniquely pure understanding of corporate finance. If you're asking why they were sold, that was a purely corporate decision by Fortum, probably to free up cash for productive investments and avoid the reinvestment. If it's a more general why doesn't the government run everything, probably because the evidence suggests that private sector efficiency gains combined with strong regulation is an ideal model for situations like this one. The "bank savings" thing is also just dumb populism. Firstly, our money doesn't just sit in our bank accounts, it's loaned out which helps the economy. Secondly, people might prefer a bank account where they can take their money out at any time, have lower risk, avoid huge capital calls and in general not be invested into things we don't really have any expertise in managing. That being said, our (professionally managed) pension funds are minority partners in many of these, but these guys know their liquidity needs a bit better than Kuisma knows the liquidity needs of our general population. If there was a case for people putting their savings into this outside of their pensions, they could have invested in one of the funds involved here or in Elenia or someone could have organized them pooling their money for this. Ok, not that realistic, but the fact is people keep their money in their bank accounts instead of investing in many funds which are perfectly investable which invest in situations like this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Oh yes, private sector is so much more efficient with monopolies than public. Must be all that competition forcing them to improve quality and lower prices. The invisible hand saves us once more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Puistokemisti posted:Oh yes, private sector is so much more efficient with monopolies than public. Must be all that competition forcing them to improve quality and lower prices. The invisible hand saves us once more. Mountains of evidence suggest the private sector gets better quality per € spent on the production side. On the market/selling side, regulation caps prices, including in this case.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Mountains of evidence suggest the private sector gets better quality per € spent on the production side. On the market/selling side, regulation caps prices, including in this case. Yeah that's complete horseshit, isn't it. The "efficiency" comes from screwing over the workers, the environment and pretty much anyone else who isn't a shareholder. I don't give a flying gently caress what some fat corporate rear end in a top hat is making or if his shares just went up by 10%. I do care if our planet will be still here in 20 years time. All essential utilities and transport sector companies should be owned by the public sector. gently caress the profit motive if it comes at the expense of other workers and the environment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
BTW, did any of you plan to go to some kind of "pro-rape" happening that was cancelled at the last minute? Just curious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Did you look for us there, disappointed? Sorry, LOLdiers were expected to assault the place so it was moved to your moms bedroom.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
doverhog posted:Did you look for us there, disappointed? Sorry, LOLdiers were expected to assault the place so it was moved to your moms bedroom. Nice try, but "your moms bedroom" isn't the keyphrase.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
gently caress you for linking to nyt
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Geriatric Pirate posted:Everyone is just crying about thr tax arrangements (which is dumb because it would be reflected in purchase price for a tax free investor) Out of all the neolib 101 talking points, this is the most retarded. No, when a foreign tax-avoiding corporation buys a national asset, they don't include 60 years of lost-to-the-goverment tax income in the deal. Geriatric Pirate posted:The price hikes are basically meaningless for most people 30% price increase to something you can't do without is not meaningless. Are you one of those people who have no idea what a carton of milk costs because you have your butlers and servants do all of the shopping for you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 03:32 |
|
|
Darkest Auer posted:30% price increase to something you can't do without is not meaningless. Sure, but the choice was between paying it to the company via increased prices or paying it to the state via increased taxes. I know you won't be satisfied until your rectum is filled with taxes, so there's nothing to discuss about whether one of those would've been better than other. How often do you shine your golden ring, by the way?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 03:11
|
|