"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Proctologically Violated©®" wrote:

Awl --

Looked at my gas bill(s) (natural gas, from ConEd, or, more
affectionately,
Conned), and my knees buckled -- not just from the cost, but from the
effing
irony of it all.... if I have perceived correckly....

Here's the deal:

I am regularly pounded with pitches from "other energy suppliers", and
figgered, Oh Goody, they must be keeping Conned at least somewhat in
check.
NOT.

What appears to be happening is that now the bill is divided into two
portions: The charge for the gas itself, and now, a charge for DELIVERING
the effing gas!!

Which is almost as much as the gas itself!!!! No foolin....

That is called 'Infrastructure' It costs real money to build and
maintain.

I'm just realizing this now, cuz Le Wife takes care of the bills, and I
haven't seen a gas bill in about 10 years.

So it seems to me, Conned said, OK, Competition??
Fine.
NOW, we'll just tack on charges for using our own proprietary
*infrastructure*.

Ass, Grass, or cash, nobody rides for free.


IOW, Yeah, you can buy your gas from another energy mutha****a, but NOW
you
gotta STILL pay us to allow them to use our pipes'n'****....

And pay you will!!!!!

Do I have it right? Is this what happened?
""Competition"" was enabled, and the effing price consequently
*doubled*????? goodgawd.....

Well as the enviro types ban coal fired plants in favor of NG you are
going to experience
the results of supply and demand.

I called Conned, asked for a VP to call me back. I said to the very nice
lady,
Look, I know Conned paid a bunch of Pols to allow this to happen. I
just want to know the names of these Pols....

Majority members of Congress.

Stupid me....

Actually, there may not be the logical conundrum I posited.

It would appear that it isn't just "competition drives prices up", which IS
pretty illogical, but rather, "competition under deregulation" causing
higher prices than a "monopoly under regulation".

I guess we've learned, repeatedly, which is worse.

Con Ed did in fact call me back, had an inneresting conversation.
Of course they didn't outright concede anything, but they didn't dispute
much, either.

They did concede that deregulation certainly was not in the consumer's best
interest, and that their "energy competitors" were, by and large, scam
artists. Which you would figger ConEd might say, but I have independent
evidence for this being true.

--

Mr. PV'd

Mae West (yer fav Congressman) to the Gangster (yer fav Lobbyist):
Hey, Big Boy, is that a wad (of cash) in yer pocket, or are you just
glad to see me??




Wes