[amitparikh]

The real evil here is that the surcharges are "all on top of the price that regulators have agreed customers should pay for their electricity service."

Utilities support basic human necessities. We need power for light and heat. When the base cost for these necessities rises (to subsidize infrastructure projects), the poor are the hardest hit. And the fact that these governments are essentially "hiding" taxes inside of utility payments is outrageous.

[lotsofpulp]

The proper way to help the poor afford utilities is to just give them cash, or pay for the utilities on their behalf with cash. Obfuscating prices distorts the market, and that leads to opportunities for corruption and inefficient allocation of resources.

[maxerickson]

Power plants and distribution infrastructure are not built in some abstract market, they are built in the real world and regulated for good reasons.

If you regulate entry, you probably better at least keep an eye on prices.

If you want to argue that it should be possible to build whatever power plant wherever, go ahead, but most people don't agree with that.

[lotsofpulp]

I agree that the power and distribution infrastructure hold special status as utilities, subject to whatever regulations as needed since it doesn't make sense to run wires from 5 different sellers to each home.

What I am saying is the price of a utility (or anything) should not be based on how much a person earns. If the utility needs to raise prices to cover their costs, they should raise prices. If the government wants to help poor people, the government should give cash to poor people, or pay the utility on their behalf. But the price of whatever is sold should not be masked.

And if the utility needs to raise prices, they should be raising the prices, not adding fees. I can understand splitting out the cost of delivery vs cost of generating electricity, but beyond that is just unnecessary confusion for a buyer.