How much money should the government spend to extend the life of an 80 year old sickly person?

Don't turn into David Miller, Boiler, by labeling everything you scrape up from the internet "THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!"

I notice that like him, you had to say it three times in the same sentence, just to reinforce your own doubts. "This absolute truthy truth is 100 percent true!!!!"

So, this rather vital information is in a webpage blog post on the website of one of Texas's electricity companies--buried on the second page. So everyone who takes the time to go delving into the details of their electric bill "plan" might see the small-print "buyer beware" at the end of one paragraph.

Of course, a company that provides a vital service shouldn't be allowed to upcharge people by TEN THOUSAND PERCENT, under ANY circumstances. It would be like providing medical insurance with the provision that any services rendered during a full moon will cost 100 times what they normally would, so be sure not to have a heart attack on that day!

I don't know why Boiler wants to be an apologist for these assholes, but perhaps that's because in his addled conservative mind, "Big Business" can do no wrong. "Buyer beware," indeed! Boiler actually thinks a free-for-all environment where public utilities are allowed to rape their customers is perfectly acceptable.

And yeah, if I found myself in Texas (please shoot me), I probably would be very very careful in choosing what plan to pick. But what about the elderly, those with limited English comprehension, etc. etc.? They might not know how to ferret out the deadly details.

Also, maybe some people are just too busy to minutely scrutinize every page of every website to find out if they're going to get shafted. Maybe they grew up in a state where public utilities aren't allowed to increase people's bills by ten thousand percent. Maybe they grew up in a place where the government doesn't allow "private enterprise" in the provision of vital services to be totally unregulated. So they assumed that a $30 electric bill wouldn't jump to $10,000. So sure, it's on them. Buyer beware.

Ain't unbridled capitalism grand, though? A year's worth of profits in two days! YEEHAW!!!

Why would the opt in when they know conservative politicians are going to force the taxpayers to cover their losses? Only a chump would opt in. 

Kevin is now complaining about people being offered options. 

Kevin is now complaining about people being offered options. They can buy a fixed rate plan or they can buy a plan that saves them money in normal times and costs them money during crazy times.  Crazy times happen, and Liberals whine.

How predictable.

Yes, as a matter of fact, I am--not generally, but specifically, in the case of signing up for a vital service, which no one can do without, and offering an "option" that can result in $10,000 electric bills.

Maybe people should have been more cautious or knowledgeable, or something. But it's pretty shitty to even make it possible for people to get crushing electrical bills. I'm certain that virtually no one would have signed up for the wholesale plan if it had been made much more explicit that doing so might result in a gigantic bill.

But the power companies didn't do that! Why did they bury it on page two of a website blog post? Because they didn't want people to know or understand the risk! They made tremendous profits during the outages because of this!

I consider taking advantage of people for profit to be immoral. You don't. That pretty much ends any chance of real discussion.

Once again, a Liberal complains about choice.  Each one of these people had the opprtunity to buy a fixed rate plan.  Only a Liberal would complain about not buying insurance, then not being covered by insurance.

Liberals set up systems wherein public utilities that provide essential services can't rape their customers for the sake of opportunistic, massive profits.

How snowflake pinko commie bleeding-heart socialist of them.

The comparison with buying insurance is idiotic.

Kevin, a fixed rate plan insures one against a spike in power costs.  Had the greedy paid a little more up front, they would not have had the price spike that they agreed to.

Once again, Kevin argues against choice.