Last month, Texas resident Royce Peirce paid $387.70 to heat his two-story house. This month, he owes $8,162.73 — and counting.

Amid freezing temperatures and another looming winter storm, Texans are facing a second crisis: astronomical power

Why are these energy bills so high? You can thank Texas’s power grid for that.

The U.S. is divided into three grids: one covers the eastern states, another the western states, and then there’s the Texas grid, ERCOT, which covers nearly the entire state.
Now you might be wondering: Why does Texas have its own power grid?

If you’re familiar with the state’s history and public policy, you probably already know the answer. In short, Texas has its own grid to avoid dealing with the federal government.
https://t.co/SBIV5ThNNs
What we’re witnessing now is a collapse of the state’s power grid.

Amid freezing temperatures, the imbalance between Texas’s staggering electricity demand and its limited supply caused prices to skyrocket from $20 per megawatt hour to $9,000 per megawatt hour — a 450% increase.
One wholesale power supplier, Griddy, made a surprising decision.

CEO Michael Fallquist told Griddy’s 29,000 customers to abandon his service and switch providers: “We want what’s right by our consumers, so we are encouraging them to leave.”
https://t.co/Fv12irm0xG
But Democrats like @JulianCastro are calling out Republican leadership for exacerbating the issue:

“This is becoming the worst state-level policy disaster since the Flint water crisis … This is not the breakdown of the system. This is a system that is broken down by design.”
Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is promising “some form of” federal investigation into Texas’s power situation, headed by the Energy and Commerce Committee.
So will Royce Pierce have to pay that $8,162.73 bill? For now, he’s saying “this is a later problem.”

He hopes a relief package from the state will help cover the costs.
Are you a Texas resident who’s been personally affected by the skyrocketing cost of energy bills?

Tell us your story below.

More from Economy

It's always been detached, and it's always made the real economy worse.

[THREAD] 1/10


What is profit? It's excess labor.

You and your coworkers make a chair. Your boss sells that chair for more than he pays for the production of that chair and pockets the extra money.

So he pays you less than what he should and calls the unpaid labor he took "profit." 2/10

Well, the stock market adds a layer to that.

So now, when you work, it isn't just your boss that is siphoning off your excess labor but it is also all the shareholders.

There's a whole class of people who now rely on you to produce those chairs without fair compensation. 3/10

And in order to support these people, you and your coworkers need to up your productivity. More hours etc.

But Wall Street demands endless growth in order to keep the game going, so that's not enough.

So as your productivity increases, your relative wages suffer. 4/10

Not because the goods don't have value or because your labor is worth less. Often it's actually worth more because you've had to become incredibly productive in order to keep your job.

No, your wages suffer because there are so many people who need to profit from your work. 5/10

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x