Is that your house on fire? So sorry.

Stigmata said:
I think insurance companies are largely scams, and any that aren't will eventually become so due to inevitable management shifts and the nature of corporate-ladder progression.
Click to expand...

So we should all not buy insurance and then just expect everyone to take care of us out of the goodness of their hearts?

Maybe someday everything will be socialized, but for now the world works a certain way, and we all need to either play along or suffer the consequences.

EDIT: Okay, impasse reached; I'm done if you guys are :p
 
hakojo said:
So we should all not buy insurance and then just expect everyone to take care of us out of the goodness of their hearts?

Maybe someday everything will be socialized, but for now the world works a certain way, and we all need to either play along or suffer the consequences.

EDIT: Okay, impasse reached; I'm done if you guys are :p
Click to expand...

Fire Service and Police Service have long been socialized. These other ones that aren't are a blight. Not everything should be socialized, not by a long shot... but people pay taxes and those taxes should go to fire and police stations so they don't have to worry about directly paying "subscriptions" for their homes to be protected and their crime fought.
 
Raziaar said:
but people pay taxes and those taxes should go to fire and police stations so they don't have to worry about directly paying "subscriptions" for their homes to be protected and their crime fought.
Click to expand...

Well then the people in this particular county can take it up with their legislature to appoint a local government that can actually tax them for things like this. That's why they had the subscription service in the first place, and one can assume they were reasonably happy with it.
 
Vegeta897 said:
Well it wasn't technically 75. It was 75 per year, all those years they didn't pay. It's not like you can just pay 75 for the year that the fire happened.

It's like insurance. You have to always be paying because you never know when something will happen.

That said, I think they should have accepted a large sum of money to make up for the missed fees. That seems kind of pointlessly harsh that they would just reject any amount.
Click to expand...

But for this to work they HAVE to apply a principle here. No money, no fire put out.

If they dont even have the common sense to pay the $75 to protect their worldly belongings, then the dont deserve to have their stuff saved.

I agree that they should save them if they are in danger of being killed / injured.

The fact is, if everyone didn't pay the $75, then the little old ladies that need the protection of the fire dept, wouldn't get it.

As has already been stated, Police, Fire, Medical services should all be provided by the gov't, and taxes should be higher if neccessary.
 
Stigmata said:
Okay, yeah, that's true. I just... okay, I'm going to be honest here. Anyone who, in these firefighters' shoes, would rather keep their job than save almost all the material possessions that someone has accumulated through their life, all over a $75 dispute, absolutely disgusts me. I believe that something has to be deeply wrong inside of you to think that way.

*extenuating circumstances excluded, like if the firefighter's pay grade is what's keeping someone else from succumbing to health problems, or keeping his/her family off the street due to bills.
Click to expand...

No you're being unreasonable here.

You think, a highly trained fireman should risk his job, every time there is a fire at a house without protection? Why should he give up his livelyhood?

Why don't you train as a firefighter for a year, spend a lot of money, and then get fired on your first week?
 
I still don't understand why anyone would privatize the fire service.

What's next, privatized Civil Defense?
"Oh I'm sorry, you forgot to pay this month's bill. You'll have to wait outside the shelter until the commies have finished their bombing run."

Seriously, America, do you even use your taxes?
 
KiplingsCat said:
I think an important point is still being left out here. I said it before but I'm going to repeat it: fires are dangerous. Fires are unpredictable. Fires aren't inclined to happily stay in one place and burn away to nothing. Fires don't care if you've paid your 75 dollars or not. They're hot and destructive and are liable to do things that people don't want or expect. It's all very well to say "oh sure, if someone was in danger of being injured they would have done something"...but what if somebody was injured as a result of them not having done something with the original fire in the first place? If something is on fire that shouldn't be, no matter who is or isn't inside it, or who's paid what, it should be brought under control immediately. Otherwise shit will inevitably happen.
Click to expand...

I personally think they should call it fire insurance, and if you don't have any, you get a $10,000 bill once they have put it out.

There is a principle here though, if they put out everyone's fire that hasn't paid the $75, then no one would pay the $75 and the fire department would not exist, then where would everyone be?

It's a harsh reality unfortunately.
 
It's been said already, but I don't think it's possible to overstate this. A privatised fire department is an idea only a retard could think was a good plan. I don't mean that in any sort of derogatory way. I think that the inhabitants of South Fulton are actually mentally handicapped. I wouldn't be surprised if this was their mayor:

Basil Marceaux Dot Com
 
This argument can be boiled down to one very simple fact: the system in this district is flawed and needs to be replaced. Any wrongdoing in this incident is a direct result of this. The fire chief was acting within the constraints of the system - whether or not he was morally obligated to do something, he was obligated by his job to act as he did. If this is corrupt, then it's only because the system is corrupt. In any case he will have known this going into the job and therefore was probably prepared to act in this way. In all likelihood, he didn't do (or rather not do) this because he was vindictive or lacked compassion, he did it because he was required to, regardless of any impulse to be a samaritan. It sucks, but I don't believe the blame should be rested squarely on his (or the departments) shoulders... unless they actually advocate the system, of course.

Actually, the only abnormal element here is the fire itself. Had this been a sick old woman losing her house and because the bank foreclosed on it, nobody would be crying for the manager to stick his neck out at the risk of losing his job because that's just how it works. This seems odd and cruel because it's so out of the ordinary - firefighters aren't meant to be insurance agents. However, I do agree with Kipling that the fire was dangerous and (though this was probably calculated by the firemen) the risk of it spreading or harming someone should have been a bigger concern than saving the house. Again, though, this would seem to be a limitation of the system rather than them being unwilling to act.

Note, I'm making a few assumptions about how :eek: the system :eek: works here due to the limited information at hand, but I dare say I'm probably not too far from the truth because AMURKA LOL
 
Solaris said:
No you're being unreasonable here.

You think, a highly trained fireman should risk his job, every time there is a fire at a house without protection? Why should he give up his livelyhood?

Why don't you train as a firefighter for a year, spend a lot of money, and then get fired on your first week?
Click to expand...

It's not every day(or pretty much ever) that a fireman is going to be outside a burning home fighting a fire... and choosing to ignore one of the homes burning while focusing on the other. They were there, they were there with the equipment, and they didn't fight the source of the fire.
 
Raziaar said:
It's not every day(or pretty much ever) that a fireman is going to be outside a burning home fighting a fire... and choosing to ignore one of the homes burning while focusing on the other. They were there, they were there with the equipment, and they didn't fight the source of the fire.
Click to expand...

It wasn't there job to put out random fires. It was his job to put out fires for customers, that man wasn't a customer and so wasn't entitled to services.

Do you really believe that the firemen should be obligated to loose their jobs and livelyhood for the sake of someone elses home? What about their homes, how will the pay the mortgage with no jobs?

They had no more responsibility to ensue that house wasn't burnt down than you do did. And they way to excercise that responcability is a socialist program of public ownership.
 
Bad^Hat pretty much summed up my feelings on this matter. Regardless of whether we think the fireman did the right thing or not, I think we can agree that this system is a terrible way of running things exactly because of situations like this.
 
Solaris said:
It wasn't there job to put out random fires. It was his job to put out fires for customers, that man wasn't a customer and so wasn't entitled to services.

Do you really believe that the firemen should be obligated to loose their jobs and livelyhood for the sake of someone elses home? What about their homes, how will the pay the mortgage with no jobs?

They had no more responsibility to ensue that house wasn't burnt down than you do did. And they way to excercise that responcability is a socialist program of public ownership.
Click to expand...
I think I put too much of the onus on the fireman in question yesterday, yeah. I just think the whole situation is disgusting. It's all about ****ing money, whether it's someone's life, life savings, or life possessions going up in smoke. We move these numbers around, spending so much of our lives tied to a cubicle or rote manual labour or whatever, just so we can get a big enough number to get someone to do work for us, or to get a bureaucrat to fill in a form, so that you get the services you want. But in the end, someone still has to do the goddamn work. The firemen were there. The equipment was there. They were fifty goddamn feet from the blaze and they actively did nothing, all over a monetary structure that continually depletes itself because people are too lazy or obstinate or selfish to do the work themselves.

Ideally they'd just have a socialised fire department because it makes sense, but they don't, so I'm just angry about the whole thing. :(
 
Well, if they make an exception for one house, then it's going to set a precedent and they'll be losing subscriptions left and right.
 
Stigmata said:
I think I put too much of the onus on the fireman in question yesterday, yeah. I just think the whole situation is disgusting. It's all about ****ing money, whether it's someone's life, life savings, or life possessions going up in smoke. We move these numbers around, spending so much of our lives tied to a cubicle or rote manual labour or whatever, just so we can get a big enough number to get someone to do work for us, or to get a bureaucrat to fill in a form, so that you get the services you want. But in the end, someone still has to do the goddamn work. The firemen were there. The equipment was there. They were fifty goddamn feet from the blaze and they actively did nothing, all over a monetary structure that continually depletes itself because people are too lazy or obstinate or selfish to do the work themselves.

Ideally they'd just have a socialised fire department because it makes sense, but they don't, so I'm just angry about the whole thing. :(
Click to expand...

Yes you're right. It's an awful thing. Capitalism isn't always great.
 
Stigmata said:
It's only great for the top 10%, and even then only most of the time.
Click to expand...

Indeed, why not take the example of a Nationalised Fire service and apply it to other things like, food production, drinking water, university education, hospitals to name some good examples.

Why should such essential things to humanity be left in the domain of the rich?
 
I still hold that the biggest problems with Communism are and were the various ways in which information is controlled. If we could have a communism that still involved elected officials and and open dialogue between the governing body and the populace, I don't see how anything could go more wrong than with capitalism. I guess what I want is just a better and more capable socialist democracy.
 
Capitalism is economic feudalism. Co-operatives are a nice compromise with full socialism imo and can be pretty successful even alongside traditional capitalism so transition wouldn't be too bad.
 
Yes Eejit I'm also quite a fan of co-operatives, I never found Rands criticisms of them all that convincing.
 
*Noob question coming, infront of some intelligent Americans*

Why can't the US become one big state? One tax system, one big fire dept, one big police force, one big NHS.

All the rich folk in New York, and all the Hookers in Vegas can pay for the fire service in this town then.

*Gets coat*
 
kazsymonds said:
*Noob question coming, infront of some intelligent Americans*

Why can't the US become one big state? One tax system, one big fire dept, one big police force, one big NHS.

All the rich folk in New York, and all the Hookers in Vegas can pay for the fire service in this town then.

*Gets coat*
Click to expand...

Because that's not how we roll XD

No, it's because we used to have this thing called the 10th Amendment that nobody pays any attention to anymore, and which could actually solve a lot of our problems if applied correctly - basically, powers not controlled by the federal government are ceded to state governments. So essentially, if some people wanted, say, socialized medicine, and other people didn't, both groups could move to states that had laws the way they wanted.

That's how it's supposed to be used, anyway.
 
ya I'm sure states like Texas will give up their state hood to become part of the this big country called america



you know there's a reason why it's called the UNITED STATES of america ....right?
 
CptStern said:
ya I'm sure states like Texas will give up their state hood to become part of the this big country called america



you know there's a reason why it's called the UNITED STATES of america ....right?
Click to expand...

Eh? I don't understand your post. I'm saying why don't the states unite properly, and have one big government.

EDIT: Looks like that got answered above.
 
The essence of of libertarianism has rarely before been so clearly demonstrated.
 
Solaris said:
The way this story is written it makes the fire chief a bad guy.

He isn't. The only bad guys here are the retarded population of that county who don't vote for a STALINISED fire service.

Either you have a service which is run by the state: Nationalised/Socialised/Lenninised or you have a private system where if you don't pay you don't get help.

If that fire chief had put out that fire anyway, other people would not pay him for his services as it's clear they could get them for free. When you have a private system this is what happens.

GG america.
Click to expand...

This is a result of privatization? Aside from being a pretty isolated case (hence it being news, if this were a normal thing, you wouldn't hear about it) there is nothing about this that is inherent to a privately run business. The company could ask a subscription and if a house does not have that, charge them a fee for man hours + materials afterwards. Actually, isn't that how insurance works? And would a proper business have denied the offer from the owners to pay any amount to put the fire out? This is a result of stupidity, not privatization. I bet you can find similar cases of retardation with normal fire services not pulling out to a fire because it's legally in a different district, or whatever.

That said, I don't see a benefit to a privatized fire service.
 
I thought taxes took care of that shit.

Oh, America.

wikipedia_eye_of_providence.jpg
 
I'm starting to realise about what Danimal keeps bantering on about.
America is very, very, unfair.
 
Bunch of meanie poopy-heads.

[This is where I start my wall-of-text, posting research and evidence about the planned bankruptcy of Americans, only to have it ignored. But tbh I'm busy with study atm. :(]
 
They are indeed meanie poopy-heads.

[That is the only part of your post I read, I ignored the rest assuming its a wall-of-text with a bunch of conspiracies listed out and supposed evidence to prove said conspiracies]
 
Indeed, Krynn.
Danimal said:
[This is where I start my wall-of-text, posting research and evidence about the planned bankruptcy of Americans, only to have it ignored. But tbh I'm busy with study atm. :(]
Click to expand...

TL;DR
 
[This is where I start mentioning the next president being Republican by design]

[etc. etc.]
 
I'm glad that guy punched the shit out of the fire chief. I probably would've done much more to him personally.
Like slam his head in a door, again and again and again and again, then stab him in the neck with a soldering iron.

In that thought, I'm jobless and on the edge right now and hating capitalism and greed and selfishness, and this country's administration (or lack thereof) more by the day.

I do agree though that Fulton's constituency is partly to blame for being so goddamn retarded. Probably all conservative extremists.

EDIT> I think I'll play some GTA IV later today to vent my frustrations. I haven't completed Ballad of Gay Tony yet come to think of it.
 
I'm surprised how much attention this incident has been given, especially online. And when this was talked about on the Young Turks, the host looked like he really lost his temper. But that's how it's been for many years over here where I live. The local fire department will put your fire out if you pay the yearly fee, and if you don't pay the fee they won't put it out no matter what.
 
T-6000 said:
I'm surprised how much attention this incident has been given, especially online. And when this was talked about on the Young Turks, the host looked like he really lost his temper. But that's how it's been for many years over here where I live. The local fire department will put your fire out if you pay the yearly fee, and if you don't pay the fee they won't put it out no matter what.
Click to expand...

I HATE THE YOUNG TURKS.

They misleadingly name their videos so you think you're seeing one thing and you end up watching those ****ing stupid morons. **** YOU YOUNG TURKS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

katsung47
Ron Paul Defends Russia After Malaysian Plane Crash
Replies
0
Views
3K
katsung47
katsung47
Sectorial
Half-Life 2 Canon (Theory)
Replies
6
Views
3K
1marcos6
1marcos6
15357
SK, once again, discovers that NK sent a team of spies to kill someone
Replies
13
Views
774
63
63
CptStern
The War on Dogs continues in Prince George's County
Replies
15
Views
770
Kakashi
Kakashi
morgs
TTT Fanfic - The Island
Replies
8
Views
2K
Krynn72
Krynn72
Back
Top