ambulance driver's main job is to keep you alive
firefighter's main job is to put out the fire
whats wrong with the analogy?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Firefighters let home burn because homeowner didn't pay fee
- Thread starter Bulbo Urethral Baggins
- Start date
- Status
ambulance driver's main job is to keep you alive
firefighter's main job is to put out the fire
whats wrong with the analogy?
That's not the world I want to live in. I want to help pay for the guy living in a trailer down the road, not in the Arizona desert.
...well that was the plan put forward in tpxicadams post. No fees just a tax.
If they don't have much income they wouldn't be taxed either but they would have protection. Plus I'm sure they pay sales tax at least on stuff.
They'd have to make sure to steal someone's mobile home who also did not pay the police fee. Property and all that.
Because the firefighters were willing to save a life payment or no payment, just not property.
GitarooMan
Member
This is stupid all the way around. The main stupidity is the fee structure. For the good of the county, there should be county-wide agreement on fire protection (either from the city or a county fire department). This individual fee arrangement is a ridiculous way to provide essential services.
Sorry to inform you you are paying for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I know, it's gross to think about. There are rural parts in my area (Ohio) that can use new bridges or better water management, but we are paying contractors to do it halfway across the world in a place I will never be. :/
Dark Octave
Banned
Since when is the fire department a private company?
Woman getting mugged in an alley didn't pay her cop insurance. Oh well...
Woman getting mugged in an alley didn't pay her cop insurance. Oh well...
its still an essential service.
This is a home we're talking about.
When there were wildfires in places like California, Firefighters from every state and country come to help. Canada, japan, Australia. Noone sent them a bill or refused service when property rather than lives were at stake.
It is a public good.
Cause taxes are communist you commie!
Then why should anyone pay for it?
they do. They'll be forced to pay more if they're not with the program......... like with Ambulances.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
That would involve giving more power to the government, which they would then abuse while cackling on their obsidian throne.
That's funny because America was at it's economic best when the max income tax was at 90% under Eisenhower.
Still has to be paid for. I'm certan that wildfires have a general fund to pull from if not a general fund overall. Rural counties don't have that kind of money and the bulk of it would go to more urban areas anyway. In KY, much of the fire dept in rural areas are volunteer which means that there is no fire dept to put out the fire anyway- fee or not.
Attaching liens to the property until the fee is paid would be a possible solution.
Unfortunate but understandable given the circumstances.
You're right but only for places that have taxes.
I feel just as bad for those people as the next guy but FD played their part perfectly. They arrived at the scene, there were 0 casualities and the fire was contained.
Instead, all the outrage and disappointed should be directed to the fact that FD tax was optional.
You're right but only for places that have taxes.
I feel just as bad for those people as the next guy but FD played their part perfectly. They arrived at the scene, there were 0 casualities and the fire was contained.
Instead, all the outrage and disappointed should be directed to the fact that FD tax was optional.
Do you really believe in this correlation?
BattleMonkey
Member
Was there anything to actually save by the time they got there? It's a small trailer home.
Sadly no. The meth lab was probably the first thing to go.
Absolutely. Eisenhower kept inflation practically at 0 and debts low.
I know you don't mean this, but I just got an image in my head of the fire chief holding a credit card swiper at the scene of the fire prompting the homeowner to pay. LOL.
ReBurn
Gold Member
Fire service should be covered by property taxes. Instead of a separate fee, just raise the taxes and compel every property owner to pay. That would have solved the problem. If you don't pay your property taxes then you lose your property anyway. I don't know why the need to separate the cost, unless some politician wanted to increase revenue without the appearance of raising taxes.
In this case I think that the fire department should have acted to save the home. But instead of this "they could have just paid the $75 later" line of thinking, I think that they should have been billed for the entire cost of the operation. Just paying the $75 later gives people no reason to ever pay it to begin with. It turns into a "no reason to pay until services are required" situation. That hurts everyone in need of protection if the fee is meant to cover costs for everyone, so proactively contributing to the pool is beneficial for everyone. By not paying the fee they essentially opted out of the protection pool, so the entire cost should fall to them.
Also, the first directive should be to save lives. There's no way these people should have been allowed back inside that house if fire officials were on scene.
In this case I think that the fire department should have acted to save the home. But instead of this "they could have just paid the $75 later" line of thinking, I think that they should have been billed for the entire cost of the operation. Just paying the $75 later gives people no reason to ever pay it to begin with. It turns into a "no reason to pay until services are required" situation. That hurts everyone in need of protection if the fee is meant to cover costs for everyone, so proactively contributing to the pool is beneficial for everyone. By not paying the fee they essentially opted out of the protection pool, so the entire cost should fall to them.
Also, the first directive should be to save lives. There's no way these people should have been allowed back inside that house if fire officials were on scene.
This must be a joke right?
I see what you're saying but don't you think that this is a bit of a grey area?
Evil Benius
Member
What a lot of people are missing here is that this fire took place in an unincorporated area outside of the local town. That town has no power to enact taxes on people outside of their jurisdiction so they must resort to offering the fire protection as an optional service with a fee attached. Only an idiot would avoid paying this fee since it is just not worth the gamble. The only other option would be for these people to incorporate into a township (or something similar), enact taxes, and then form their own fire department or work out a deal with the town and transfer that tax money in exchange for fire service.
This is not the town or fire department being cruel at all. They do not even have an obligation to provide this service to begin with.
This is not the town or fire department being cruel at all. They do not even have an obligation to provide this service to begin with.
ReBurn
Gold Member
The first responsibility of a first responder is to protect and preserve life. At least it was when I was a volunteer fire fighter 20 year ago. Property can be replaced, but life can't. I'd think that watching people run into a burning building would violate that responsibility. I don't see a grey area.
If there are people inside, they should have acted to save them regardless of the fee. But as far as I can see there weren't
Evil Benius
Member
I believe that it has been stated before that they would fight the fire if lives were at risk.
I think everyone is thinking that the service should be county wide which makes sense for areas that have a merged government.
It is unrealistic from a normal county set-up.
My view is that the fire dept should assume that the home needs saving and then charge after the fact for the service. if they can't pay, attach the lien so they can never sell until they pay back. In this case, the fire dept still has to come out to protect the homes that are paying the fee anyway.
It is unrealistic from a normal county set-up.
My view is that the fire dept should assume that the home needs saving and then charge after the fact for the service. if they can't pay, attach the lien so they can never sell until they pay back. In this case, the fire dept still has to come out to protect the homes that are paying the fee anyway.
ReBurn
Gold Member
I missed that on the first read-through. I wouldn't have expected any less. I don't understand letting the people back into the burning structure, though.
No doubt there's some hyperbole in this statement, as I doubt anyone actually forced them into the home to retrieve their belongings. I wonder if anyone tried to stop them. I hope someone tried to stop them.
Evil Benius
Member
I think this is possible, but the penalty would have to probably be in the tens of thousands of dollars.
I may be thinking back to when this happened before. It was brought up when I had this same discussion last night somewhere else.
ClosingADoor
Member
So basically, fuck everyone I don't know?
If everyone pays in the country, everyone is helping eachother. You lose your job and can't pay that year for this fire service, that guy in the Arizona desert helps you also.
I can't see anything against that for these kind of services. Schools, health care, police, fire departments, should all be shared and payed through taxes since we all use it.
The Frankman
Banned
You charge for air YOU KEEP YOUR BILLS PAID!
But then the system wouldn't work.
Isn't your political ideology all about enabling citizens to make the choices that make sense for them?
Obviously not paying into the fire department coverage was a rational choice that made sense for them at the time. Sucks that they drew the short straw, but that's the invisible hand, right?
Presidents do not control inflation nor debts. They don't hold the purse strings of the economy. Tax rates do not dictate economic growth.
In the 50's, the world was decimated by war, with American manufacturing at a peak of efficiency (at that time) that allowed us to export way more than we imported, with a large segment of our population coming back from war and getting educated on the GI Bill, which helped fuel an incredible influx of white collar jobs. Etc etc. You are talking about huge, world-changing, societal events that drastically influenced how the economy worked. It's much more encompassing than saying 'because tax rates were X, economy was Y'. That is a terrible way to evaluate an outcome.
Another thing your 'ideal America' vision fails to recognize is that women and minorities were seen as third-rate citizens and paid accordingly, helping to keep wages down (and thus inflation). Is that the America we need to aspire to?
I have no problems sharing, but I want to share with people around me. By raising their quality of life, it will raise my quality of life. Also, I have more control and say over how my money gets spent locally (and at a state level) than I do elsewhere.
It's not that I don't care for that person who lives in Arizona, but the people around him need to help.
VelvetMouth
Member
And then the fire department has to spend a bunch of money to get a lien enforced on a shitty property that's not even worth much to begin with. There will be zero incentive for people to pay the fees. I live in a well off HOA and we have people come in here signing contracts that state they have to pay HOA dues and abide by the rules. There are people who just don't give a shit and have $8000 liens on their house because they won't take in their trashcans or pay fines.
Another thing to take into consideration, these firefighters aren't contracted to fight fires on homes that don't pay. What happens if one of them gets injured, will their insurance still cover them?
Dude Abides
Banned
Do these people pay property taxes to the county? If so there should be some kind of arrangement between the county and the city to prevent this kind of thing.
It's almost like... I mean not quite, but it's ALMOST like... it would all just average out in the long run.
I see what you're saying but I think that it would be at least somewhat ineffective to put it into practice. FD not helping while at the same time preventing people from trying to do something themselves, somehow seems a bit counter productive. Another concern is that such a stance by FD could act as a deterrent to people calling in for help in the future.
I do not want to derail this thread further, but I do understand that it is not the president that controls the economy (I probably should have said "Under Eisenhower"). I also agree on your points describing the global situation at the time, although it does not hold true for the entire period of high taxes in the US. Just one last very simple thing: More (tax) money means you have more to spend and you don't have to fall back on loans so fast. If the US top earners would share their wealth (even in the federal system) a lot of holes can be plugged and they would still be able to live good lives.
Electricity is an essential service but if I don't pay my bill the power goes out.
Evil Benius
Member
Except not really since you would get added waste, bureaucracy, and having strings attached to the funds. There is no need for such a thing to go beyond even the county level.
Check this:
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/05/122535/after-firefighters-obion-expands/
So again. People in this thread have wrong-headedly blamed the fire department. Blame the politicians.
Electricity is (often) provided through private companies, not the government...
And even then, the government provides support if a person is unable to pay their utility bills. As well as non-profits that help support the governments work.
This is utterly maddening. On elected officials and voters alike.
And your house isn't reduced to a pile of ashes when the electricity goes out, is it?
Examples like this are pretty damning towards the idea that anyone should be able to "opt out" of paying into the protections we have against major threats to person or property.
So basically one centralized office is far less efficient than who-the-fuck-knows-how-many-thousand local offices all with their individual boondoggles and blank forms with different watermarks.
Gotcha.
- Status