Update, December 4, 2019: A New York Times story largely confirms the damning indictment of Pacific Gas and Electric here but also raises questions about the efficacy of regulatory supervision:
The report has also raised fresh questions about why the utilities commission did not identify PG&E’s safety lapses in previous investigations and audits of the company. The report did not address that issue but implied that the problems could have been discovered years earlier. It said that “long-duration exposure to higher winds, age and historical inspection methodologies likely all contributed” to the equipment failures that caused the fire.
Primary responsibility remains, of course, with the utility. But the deficiencies in oversight hint at regulatory capture, in which regulators become too friendly with and even defenders of the subjects of their regulation. Typically, such capture is at least partially the result of corruption (as with the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe); however, an anti-regulatory ideology (as under the Trump administration) can also be to blame. This hazard is inherent to regulated capitalism, implicitly raises the question of who will watch the watchers, and thus how they, in turn, will avoid capture.
The point here ultimately remains the same: Capitalism is an inherently untrustworthy system.
I understand the capitalist libertarian impulse that insists that government is inherently incompetent and a burden, both in regulation and in taxation.
This impulse is what capitalist libertarianism bequeathed to neoliberalism, which is what happened when capitalist libertarianism came to power in the post-Watergate era and all but shed its already ludicrous claim to anarchist ideals, in which only political, but never economic, power is problematic in an allegedly “free” (for whom? to do what? to whom?) market.