Do you think people will pay their firefighting fees now?

[Beloit Fencer of Old]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/

[OROD]

I think this is sad and pathetic. If I was a firefighter I'd be ashamed. This is a retarded system they have in that county, and also makes me thankful that I dont live in Tennessee.

Also, the fact that Glenn Beck was approving of this system and letting the house burn down should show everyone what a douche that guy is. Hopefully there's a special place in Mormon Hell for assholes like him.

[telkanuru]

We can argue forever as to if such a fee is legitimate (I think it is, since it applies in cases where you don't pay the local taxes that would usually support the fire service), but regardless, if you're offered a service and turn it down, you don't then get to complain about not getting the service.

As for Mr. Beck, well, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[I_luv_saber]

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a great peek into why privatizing fire and safety is a horrible idea.

We can argue forever as to if such a fee is legitimate (I think it is, since it applies in cases where you don't pay the local taxes that would usually support the fire service), but regardless, if you're offered a service and turn it down, you don't then get to complain about not getting the service.

As for Mr. Beck, well, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

You would certainly think that at the very least, though, a person should be able to have the fire dept. come out and be billed for their service later (not $75, but full service. A few grand is cheaper, and less traumatic than losing your home). Similar to how many states treat rescue - you may be billed for it under certain circumstances.

[Philistine]

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a great peek into why privatizing fire and safety is a horrible idea.

Absolutely.

You would certainly think that at the very least, though, a person should be able to have the fire dept. come out and be billed for their service later (not $75, but full service. A few grand is cheaper, and less traumatic than losing your home). Similar to how many states treat rescue - you may be billed for it under certain circumstances.

AIUI, that was the way the used to do it--they didn't charge a subscription, but instead charged (IIRC) $500 to each fire they responded to. The problem was, there was no particular statute giving them this ability, and they collected it in less than half the cases--so they went to the subscription model.

The things that make this less of an issue than I might otherwise feel are that the fire department is a city department--the owner lived outside the city limits. The fire department of the city (and surrounding cities) was responding to 80% of fires outside of city limits. All attempts over years to get the county to come up with a county fire department were voted down.

I'm not completely sure what happened--if the department just showed up and sat there watching it burn, I still have some visceral problems. I've seen it said that they showed up after it was fully involved and thereafter acted to put out the grass fire on the neighbor's property (who was a subscriber).

Regardless, I bet they get a whole lot more people paying the subscription.

--Philistine

[OROD]

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a great peek into why privatizing fire and safety is a horrible idea.

Exactly, this is why we have these things called "civilization" and "government". We have taxes that are used for the common good because it's understood that not everyone is able to provide for their own individual defense, education, health care, etc, and we have realized (back to caveman times) that we ALL benefit from having a system where we all pay to help others. And even if everyone COULD pay individually for these things, it's clear that we are stronger and more capable if we pool our resources. This is why we have armed forces to protect us, paid for by taxes. Even the most retarded Tea-Bagger Party member can understand this principle. (Actually, I take it back... probably not)

People are arguing that if the fire fighters made an exception for this guy, then nobody would pay their $75 fee. Really? And who's fault would that be? Oh yeah, the stupid county officials that came up with that system, that's who. This would have been very easily solved by a rule saying that if you dont pay the fee (or tax, or whatever) then you get billed later plus costs plus some fee. I'll bet a $1,000 or $10,000 fee would still have been less than the value of the house. Result: plenty of money for the fire department, everyone is incentivized to pay their fee and dude still has his house and pets alive.

What happens if they watch the house burn and later realize the owners DID pay and it was just a clerical error? What if they decided there was no one inside, but there actually was and that person died? I wont even go into the moral problems with what they did, but even just legally they've opened themselves up for tons of liability with this policy.

[Beloit Fencer of Old]

The individual whose house burned mentioned that insurance would pay for some of the damages (up to the limit), but i bet that his insurance company was not aware that he was not covered by a fire department. Otherwise, his rates would have gone throught the roof...kind of like the flames did...

Reagarding private firefighting, that model was used in many communities 100+ years ago. The "Fire Companies" would race to a fire to be the first on the scene, as the first one there would earn the commission to fight the fire.

This event is another one which makes me happy to live in the Northeast. I grew up in a family of firefighters. My childhood memories are filled with events when I would wake at 1am to the sound of the Plektron waking up the family to tell my father that he was to respond to a fire...often in a neighboring town...where our firefighters would provide "mutual aid," ensuring that our neighbors' resources would not be overwhelmed by an extraordinary fire. No one checked to see if anyone paid a fee before responding. You help me, I'll help you.

On January 24, 2001, my older daughter (who now fences!) was three years, one month and nineteen days old, and it was almost her last day on earth. While a local Baptist minister and part-time EMT responded in his pickup truck, both the town's ambulances were on calls. Our neighbor to the west, a city not even located in the State of Maine, responded with a spectacularly professional ambulance crew. As I type this, Lauren is to my left, studying Bilology. I never paid a fee to them. But if they ask for support in the future, they will get it.

[I_luv_saber]

Reagarding private firefighting, that model was used in many communities 100+ years ago. The "Fire Companies" would race to a fire to be the first on the scene, as the first one there would earn the commission to fight the fire.

I guess I can see there being private companies available if people want to pay a premium for what they see as better service. Similar to private vs. public education. But I do think everyone should have basic fire and police coverage. I can also see some hangups with having private companies, but perhaps they can be addressed; I can't imagine a system used over 100 years ago didn't have it's problems.

This event is another one which makes me happy to live in the Northeast. I grew up in a family of firefighters. My childhood memories are filled with events when I would wake at 1am to the sound of the Plektron waking up the family to tell my father that he was to respond to a fire...often in a neighboring town...where our firefighters would provide "mutual aid," ensuring that our neighbors' resources would not be overwhelmed by an extraordinary fire. No one checked to see if anyone paid a fee before responding. You help me, I'll help you.

On January 24, 2001, my older daughter (who now fences!) was three years, one month and nineteen days old, and it was almost her last day on earth. While a local Baptist minister and part-time EMT responded in his pickup truck, both the town's ambulances were on calls. Our neighbor to the west, a city not even located in the State of Maine, responded with a spectacularly professional ambulance crew. As I type this, Lauren is to my left, studying Bilology. I never paid a fee to them. But if they ask for support in the future, they will get it.

Couldn't agree more. I think a lot of our problems today stem from the fact that people just seem to have lost their sense of compassion and humanity - along with responsibility.

[Inquartata]

No, I don't think that people who were not inclined to pay the fees will be much more inclined to do so now. I think they'll continue to make the same short-term cost-benefit decision. "If I pay that fee, I can't afford cigarettes and beer this month. Shoot, that won't happen to my house, anyway. I'm different".

Yes, this sort of service functions best as a public good. There are ways to make them work privately, but an optional fee isn't one of them. You still need some form of coercion to overcome the free rider problem. Government isn't the only way of providing such coercion, but it's probably the best we have available at the moment.

[ladyofshalott99]

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a great peek into why privatizing fire and safety is a horrible idea.



You would certainly think that at the very least, though, a person should be able to have the fire dept. come out and be billed for their service later (not $75, but full service. A few grand is cheaper, and less traumatic than losing your home). Similar to how many states treat rescue - you may be billed for it under certain circumstances.

I'd be interested to hear how the homeowner's insurance company is addressing this issue. Does the owner have his claim denied because he didn't pay the fee? Or does the insurance company sue the city for not preventing what is assuredly thousands of dollars of damage?

Technically speaking the city is in the right, and the owner was foolish for not paying the fee (but probably didn't out of principle), but, if proper procedure was indeed followed, then the policy is incredibly flawed and moronic. Just goes to show, you can't really put a price on common sense.

[erik_blank]

Technically speaking the city is in the right, and the owner was foolish for not paying the fee (but probably didn't out of principle), but, if proper procedure was indeed followed, then the policy is incredibly flawed and moronic. Just goes to show, you can't really put a price on common sense.

I don't know the truth of the matter, but the owner/victim has gone on record as saying that he had paid in the past, but simply forgot this year.... It was (according to him) certianly NOT an issue of willfull refusal to pay.

[Inquartata]

Oooh, good question about the insurance, though. Insurers generally like to charge a lot more for properties without fire protection, and if he was paying the "with" premium while he was in fact "without"...

[I_luv_saber]

I'd be interested to hear how the homeowner's insurance company is addressing this issue. Does the owner have his claim denied because he didn't pay the fee? Or does the insurance company sue the city for not preventing what is assuredly thousands of dollars of damage?

Very good question. Probably I could see them attempting to find a way to deny it, and if that's not possible to go after the city for the money they're losing.