> We live in the digital age, so almost everything depends on data
Data that I can't consume if my house is browned out and my router doesn't work (on top of heating/cooling, lights, and other basic living-related services that are less essential than the almighty ONT).
> As in all mechanical devices, generators have a tendency to either break down(Let's not forget about associated switching gear.) or become subject to maintenance cut backs instituted my buffoons in management
Famously, power infrastructure relies on no moving parts whatsoever since the abolition of contactors, relays, rotors (but not stators), turbines (both water and wind), and control rod actuators, though even before abolition, none of these devices needed any maintenance.
> We cannot depend on human errors, we can depend on the electric grid, if properly handled and maintained
The electric grid, which famously has no human or mechanical errors like line sag or weirdly-designed interconnects or poorly-timed load shedding.
> Depending on generators just adds another link in the failure chain.
Weird way to frame a redundancy layer, but sure.
> Texas is the perfect example of how not to run an electrical grid by not allowing other states to assist in an emergency.
Again, weird way to frame this. You're actually technically right about this, but the redundancy offered through a better-integrated interconnect goes both ways, rather than just externalizing weaknesses in TX's own interconnect design.