A company that makes birthday party banners that fails can be replaced. If your electric company runs itself into the ground, there is no replacement without government assistance. So why add the overhead of a for profit company?
Moreover, Eversource has their hands in any solar projects. They drag out the process to approve any installations and fight you tooth and nail to make sure you can’t install a big enough system because they are mandated to buy electricity at the same rate as they sell it. They fully captured the market and are essential to the state’s functioning so whenever there is an issue the government backs them. When there isn’t, they post billions in profits.
What part of that sounds correct to you?
Here's the important part. Regulatory capture and monopolies don't want or need things to be implemented well, because that leads to alternative options.
No, there are not. You can't have 15 different companies running 15 different cables over 15 different sets of electric poles into a house, each competing on delivery of electricity (or water, or sewage, or...).
Well, you can, but there's nothing good or efficient about it.
First you claim oversimplification and then you write a sentence that feels like a "but when implemented well".
Tell me how this is a market in a reasonably sized city, and how many parallel electric lines, water and sewer pipes you can run for the market to be well implemented?
Bonus question: how many competing power lines can be run from a single power plant? 1? 2? 10?
Of course a privately-owned one doesn't work either, because there's no competition.
Private companies are inefficient by definition when individuals are able to extract millions to billions of dollars from the market.
Yes, the participants of those markets are various degrees of willingness. No, I do not agree that makes them efficient.
It's especially ironic because if markets actually worked the way the "free market" dogma supposes they do, central planning would also work.