> They have to get government approval for their rates.

We need laws that prevent government employees from directly or indirectly investing in utilities.

The California Public Employees' Retirement System for example directly holds over 6.4 million shares of PG&E, and an additional 52 million shares via intermediaries.

▲

nl 3 days ago | parent [-]

> We need laws that prevent government employees from directly or indirectly investing in utilities.

> The California Public Employees' Retirement System for example directly holds over 6.4 million shares of PG&E, and an additional 52 million shares via intermediaries.

This seems.... good?

Put it like this - would you prefer public employee's retirement scheme did Nnot hold shares in it?

▲

mike_d 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Put it like this - would you prefer public employee's retirement scheme did Nnot hold shares in it?

Yes? Regulators should not financially benefit from doing or not doing their job.

	▲	ethbr1 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Also, other government employees who work with (and sometimes over) regulators. It's a clear conflict of interest, in the same way post-regulator industry employment is.

▲

rkomorn 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm guessing the argument would be whether that gives PG&E the right incentives or oversight.

I don't think it would seem good If the government were inclined to favor PG&E over consumers because "it's better for government employees", for example.

	▲	3 days ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]