Tennessee Firemen ignore burning house over unpaid subscription fee- Freepers outraged.

[Fuzz]

Their outrage is fucking hilarious if you ask me, coming from the government can't do anything so privatize it all and we don't want to pay any taxes crowd.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2600951/posts

Gene and Paulette Cranick, of South Fulton, Tennessee, US, lost their home after officers were ordered by bosses not to extinguish it.

Fire fighters only arrived when the flames spread to the property of a neighbour, who had paid the fee. However, they continued to refuse to help the Cranicks.

Later the same day, the couple's 44-year-old son was arrested and charged with aggravated assault, after allegedly punching the local fire chief.

Jeff Vowell, the city manager of South Fulton, said: "It's a regrettable situation any time something like this happens." Mr Vowell explained that there was no county-wide fire service and it was too expensive for the city's officers to serve surrounding rural areas like the Cranicks' as well.

Rural residents can gain access to the service by paying the annual fee. But "if they choose not to," Mr Vowell said, "we can't make them".

------------



WTF are taxes for?

4 posted on Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:31:20 PM by dfwgator (Texas Rangers - AL West Champions)



COMING SOON.

Not only will you have to pay a ‘subscription fee’, but you will also have to ‘bribe’ the firemen once they get there.

This is the way it is done in THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES, and that is what these COMMUNISTS and SOCIALISTS want for YOU and ME.

5 posted on Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:32:22 PM by UCANSEE2 (lame and ill-informed post)



Increasingly, we seen to living in a fantasy appropriate to a
college freshman with Mon’s charge card, a full bong, and a
copy of Atlas Shrugged.

7 posted on Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:33:58 PM by M. Dodge Thomas



As a Firefighter myself I say these guys aren’t Firefighters/, they are not even morally good people.

To stand by while someone’s home burns is act of low life’s.

The people who didnt pay the subscription were wrong in not paying it , but two wrongs do not make a right.

I don’t blame the kid for punching the Fire Chief, too bad his men didnt do it when he ordered them not to go.

\If this is what a subscription Fire Dept. does , Thank God we don’t have it where I ive.

10 posted on Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:34:26 PM by Venturer



Its the new tactic to raise taxes. People will no longer stand by and see taxes raised so local governments simply start charging “fees” for what taxes used to cover. Soon “fees” will be charged to fix roads, use the police, send your kids to school, etc etc. When people ask what then are their taxes used for, a rep from the SEIU will simply be smiling.

15 posted on Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:35:24 PM by icwhatudo ("laws requiring compulsory abortion could be sustained under the existing Constitution"Obama Adviser)



>> were ordered by bosses not to extinguish it.

Unionized fire dept?

16 posted on Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:36:11 PM by Gene Eric (Your Hope has been redistributed. Here's your Change.)

Money grubbing slugs, maybe. But in their defense, they were following orders. It’s a pretty lame defense.

We’re raised to believe that things like firefighting and policing and doctoring are higher callings of sorts. In order for them to deserve that status, they have to act like they deserve it.

And standing by watching a families home burn to the ground while you have the power to stop it don’t cut it, in any way, shape, or form.

25 posted on Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:43:07 PM by djf (It is ISLAM or "We, the People..." Take your pick. THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND!!!)

WTF are taxes for?

Welfare.
29 posted on Sunday, October 03, 2010 8:47:38 PM by meyer (Tax the productive to carry the freeloaders - What is it with democrats and slavery?)

[Canuckistanian]

1. You'd think they'd be ecstatic

This is the free market at work here, since governments have all but abandoned that place.

[depakid]

2. How anyone can conflate "socialism" with this is beyond me

the only conclusion is that this is a symptom of mental illness or a personality disorder.

[bobbolink]

10. Its called IGNORANCE, and we are also complicit.

We also haven't done our part in educating people like this.

Ignorance is deadly.

[depakid]

13. Actually, it's well beyond ignorance though I agree to an extent

some basic civics education covering these matters is invaluable to the relatively sane.

[bobbolink]

15. Let's be honest... what are we as "progressives" doing to help people truly understand the issues?

[depakid]

20. Listen to progressive programs and you'll see

Obviously they're more often preaching to the choir, though from time to time someone like Randy or Rachel effectively illustrates the point to some right winger or another.

Beyond that- since progressive advertisements and PSA's aren't all that big in America's deregulated media anymore, it's tough to get accurate information out about many of these things.

[RamboLiberal]

34. They should listen to Thom Hartmann

He's talked about how in the past there were fire dept tags and if you didn't pay the fee and have the tag the fire dept would let your house burn down and how taxes made sure everyone's house was covered.

[bobbolink]

71. Very good... keep passing the buck.

Then blaming people for being "stupid".

That's been working out very well for us, hasn't it?

[bobbolink]

70. The point is, WE haven't come together and done what we very well could have done.

From time to time I put out ideas, but it is met with silence.

Interestingly, the conservative grass roots are now doing those things, so we lose... when we could have made some advances.

Oh well... its only a country.

[raccoon]

67. +1000. nt

[pnorman]

18. I just made a posting of this on my union's listserv to that effect.

The header was: "Freek Republic is OUTRAGED"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Stinky The Clown]

3. ". . . . that is what these COMMUNISTS and SOCIALISTS want for YOU and ME."

Erm ...... uh ...... Mr. Fucking genius ..... Commies and Socialists would do the exact opposite of that. You fucking moron.

[Lyric]

14. Freepers don't understand big words like "communism" and "socialism"

To them, those are just vague synonyms for "Stuff That Sucks".

It's almost painful to witness the stupidity over there. They really have no idea that THIS is a perfect example of the EXACT sort of society that they are so determined to bring about--a society where everything is privately owned, and there are no longer any publicly-owned services and goods. What the hell did they THINK was going to happen with a privately-owned service?!

[City Lights]

30. Their stupidity knows no bounds.

:crazy:

[zbdent]

53. actually, bribes and "subscription fees" (hm, bag fees on airlines?)

sound quite a lot like unfettered capitalism ...

"Not only will you have to pay a ‘subscription fee’, but you will also have to ‘bribe’ the firemen once they get there.

This is the way it is done in THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES"

[Ruby the Liberal]

84. I literally laughed out loud when I read that.

[tularetom]

4. They have met the enemy and it is themselves

Only problem is they're too friggin dumb to realize it.

[tomm2thumbs]

35. +1 - they have a pay-per-view appetite with salad bar brains

it's never a crime until it happens to them

[Fuzz]

73. lol

[napi21]

5. I won't go to FR but I HOPE everyone point out to them that

this is exactly what happens when you have a private business running things. Think about it. If your house burns down& you didn't pay to insure it, you get NOTHING! If you privatized plice depts, emergency workers etc, then you better be willing to face NO SERVICE!

[uncommon]

51. Have you ever been to FR? They won't let you get past 1 or 2 posts that point out their own

ignorance before you are banned. Their mods are quite efficient.

[Contrary1]

6. Mr Cranick said:

"I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong."

That's what happens when taxes aren't enough to cover services. Bend over Freeps...there's more of the same coming. One of these days you Repub/Teabaggers might figure it out.

Nah.

[WolverineDG]

9. This has nothing to do with taxes not being enough to cover fire service

the homeowner lives outside the city limits & so doesn't pay any taxes to the city. The city provides service to county residents for a fee.

dg

[Contrary1]

12. Yeah, you are right...

Years ago, when our house was not considered to be within the city limits, we paid extra property taxes in our township for services.

[Renew Deal]

22. The people covered by that fire department should pay through taxes

if they rely on the service. The county line argument is short sighted. Then there are the moral issues. Why not answer the calls and bill (fine) the people later? At least they are doing the right thing morally.

[tammywammy]

23. Because they used to do that, bill people $500.

Half of people billed didn't pay, that's why they went to this system.

[Renew Deal]

26. I know, but this system isn't moral.

This problem can be solved by government through taxes or fines.

[tammywammy]

28. I agree the county should collect taxes and disperse to the neighboring cities

But the county decided to go this route with the fees.

Here's a pdf of where the county was discussing this issue.
http://troy.troytn.com/Obion%20County%20Fire%20Department%20Presentation%20Presented%20to%20the%20County%20Commission.pdf

(hat tip to LiberalAndProud for providing the link in the other thread on this)

edited to add: The city fire dept also sent out letters and called people about the $75 fee. The homeowners in this situation knew about it and assumed the fire dept would still help them if they needed them.

[WolverineDG]

56. The city can't levy taxes on residents who don't reside in the city limits

This is really simple, basic governmental jurisdiction stuff & for the life of me, I can't figure out why people here either don't or can't understand that.

dg

[Renew Deal]

59. Because "city limits" can change

They can put them in the same "fire district" and bill them. The city they live in can contract the services of their neighboring service. Anything more than simple mindedness can figure that out.

[Hannah Bell]

77. they can't do it by fiat; the county residents have to agree to it. apparently they don't want to.

[Renew Deal]

78. The residents don't have to agree

The governing body does. The affected people live in that county, so they are "residents." Also, the fire department is willing to service that area.

[Hannah Bell]

79. the county residents don't have to agree to have themselves incorporated into a fire district & pay

taxes? really? the county government can just impose it by fiat?

not in my area. county/city residents originally voted to create a fire district & vote on all tax levies to fund same.

where is it that the "governing body" can just decide such things by fiat?

[Renew Deal]

80. Who's talking about "fiat?"

The county government doesn't have to put them in a fire district. All they have to do is contract the fire service like they contract any other service. Even better, tax the residents and build your own fire department. There are ways to make this work.

[Hannah Bell]

97. you didn't read all the history. proposals to build a county fire department have failed twice.

and the county gov't voted 19-1 to leave the choice to individual property owners rather than assess taxes & contract with the city county-wide.

something "could" be done, but not unless the county residents want to do it. which they haven't, historically.

[Renew Deal]

98. Right

I'm talking about what can be done. Hopefully people now realize that the current policy is wrong.

[Hannah Bell]

99. gotcha. i misunderstood your drift.

[DeschutesRiver]

29. Exactly. Without the fee offer that was extended, these people have no fire coverage. nt

[smirkymonkey]

103. Couldn't they have billed him the $75 fee after they put out the

rapidly burning fire? I mean, I just don't understand how you can stand there with the ability to divert a tragedy and not do anything.

[EC]

7. They seem to disconnect that this is "privatization"

that they have been preaching...they think it's a tactic to raise taxes...

[blogslut]

8. The disconnect, it burns!

As for the fire, what if the Cranicks' neighbors sue the city of South Fulton for allowing a nearby fire to get so out of hand it spread to their property? When it comes to the safety of people and property, cost-cutting is a reckless measure.

[Renew Deal]

24. There's also an insurance issue.

Will their homeowners policy consider the lack of fire coverage some form of negligence? And who creates the fire marshalls report? Will they have to pay someone just for that? There's lots of issues.

[Skittles]

11. ??? I don't understand this

what if someone had been IN the house?

[petronius]

16. I would imagine that they have a procedure that differentiates between protecting property and

protecting life. But once the people were out they'd probably back off.

If Cranick had thought quickly enough, he should have started yelling about a baby in there...

[uncommon]

52. I agree - the firefighters would have gone in to save a life, but protecting the property was

the owner's responsibility in this case since they opted out of paying the fees.

[verges]

93. And that too easily would have gotten a firemen killed. nt

[LiberalAndProud]

17. Nonsubscribers are at the mercy of the city services.

I would be willing to wager that had lives been at risk there would have been a response by the fire department.

Some background information here.

March 18, 2008
http://troy.troytn.com/Obion%20County%20Fire%20Department%20Presentation%20Presented%20to%20the%20County%20Commission.pdf

April 21, 2009
http://www.nwtntoday.com/news.php?viewStory=25587

July 21, 2009
http://www.ucmessenger.com/news.php?viewStory=29228&FORM=ZZNR2


The study in the first paragraph mentions that nonsubscribers are left to the mercy of the municipalities. If a property owner decides to take the gamble, it seems to me that he stands to forfeit his property.

[Renew Deal]

19. Their complete lack of self awareness is both pathetic and amusing.

They are basically arguing against everything they're for. This entire episode is a great example of how their quasi libertarian bullshit does not hold up practically and morally.

I bet fire service subsriptions are about to rise significantly after this.

[and-justice-for-all]

21. That is fucking evil...

the privatization of that Fire Fighter service (Fees), but that is what privatized FF looks like and that is what the freepnuts want; and yet there they are, bitching about what they so strongly support, what a confused mess of people they are.

[struggle4progress]

25. ... Vowell said people always think they will never be in a situation where they will need

rural fire protection, but he said City of South Fulton personnel actually go above and beyond in trying to offer the service. He said the city mails out notices to customers in the specified rural coverage area, with coverage running from July 1 of one year to July 1 the next year. At the end of the enrollment month of July, the city goes a step further and makes phone calls to rural residents who have not responded to the mail-out ... from the article

[BlueCheese]

27. I only skimmed the FR replies...

... as they don't really interest me.

But there are really places in this country with no fire protection? Firefighters actually stood by passively while someone's house burned down? That's insane. That's one step away from privatized firefighting--if you can't afford it, well, too bad for you.

I wonder what would have happened had someone been trapped inside. Would they have left him or her there, or extinguish enough of the flames to rescue that person, and then let the house burn down, or what?

[deutsey]

63. I'm appalled by this as well.

Silly, naive me thought there were just some basic things that can't be privatized.

Silly, naive me.

[ZombieHorde]

106. Good points, and on a side note, blue cheese is delicious. nt

[ScreamingMeemie]

31. Anyone else stuck on the thought that, if they had put out the original

fire, the guy who had paid $75 wouldn't have had his house catch fire?

[pa28]

32. "What? This is just life in Libertopia."

At least one over there seemed to get the Libertarian extremism angle. I guess he's one of the sharper blades in that particular toolbox.

[billlll]

33. pay COPS on crime scene for any help - NYC 1800's

Forget exact year.

We will go back to that if GOP rules for long.

[billlll]

41. PRIVATIZE=shabby (item) for a hi price....and lo wage

Lo wage 2 ways... 1. Directly belo that boss
2. ALL wages get downward pressure as the newly minted boss starts donating to elect GOP officials.

P. also leads to wars for cheap raw materials.

[LiberalFighter]

36. It's a way to keep from raising property taxes. Cut some services out and

have the property owners pay it themselves. People are stupid enough to believe their taxes didn't go up even though some of the previously provided services were paid with their taxes.

[Rex]

37. GOPukes are so sad and pathetic; if they want somethng then it is okay

(even if it is obvious it goes against their so called values), BUT if YOU want something (and even if they are mostly apathetic about it) YOU ARE A LEEECH ON SOCIETY...SOCIALISMM!!! Booogaahhbogha! Be skerrrdd!!

[raccoon]

68. You got that right. nt

[gratuitous]

38. At least Mr. and Mrs. Cranick kept their taxes low

Free market capitalism going strong. If you can't afford it, tough beans. We're not going to raise taxes on Paris Hilton, so you'd better start making some decisions: $75 this year for medical deductibles or are you going to pay your fire department subscription? Because it would be just soooo unfair to ask Dick Cheney to pay an extra three cents on every dollar he "earns" over $250,000 a year.

[grantcart]

39. This happened a lot in my home town of Spokane when I was a kid

Developers would build houses just across the street from the city line and arch conservatives loved the idea of saving a few dollars on their taxes.

When their house was on fire the city fire department would make sure no people or pets were in the structure and watch while the 'volunteer' force would take 40 minutes to arrive and they would leave.

The insurance for the fire fighters did not cover them if they went outside the city limits to fight fires unless it was part of a preapproved request to fight a forest fire.

Eventually a few houses would burn and then they wanted to have their area added to the city but the city refused because that meant that they would have to add sewer and other services.

The property values in these areas would then plummet. Typical conservative thinking - try and save a few pennies by scamming their fellow citizens and end up losing tens of thousands in the end.

[GoCubsGo]

100. My piano teacher died that way.

Not in a fire, but during childbirth. Her family moved out into the unincorporated area just outside of town, which didn't have fire and ambulance service. But, hey, they paid less in taxes. Well, my piano teacher was pregnant with her sixth or seventh child. She went into premature labor with some sort of bad complications. Her husband called the ambulance. They eventually showed up as a courtesy. (They had to deal with another call within city limits first.) Both mother and baby died. Husband sued the city, and lost. The sad thing is that they didn't live all that far from the hospital, and he could have gotten her there quicker had he just driven her himself.

I see similar stuff here. Folks who live out in the county are always mocking those of us who pay city taxes. Yet, they're the first to whine when nobody comes to collect the mountains of debris from the ice storm. Or, fix the areas that flood every time there's a big rain. Or, respond quickly every time the need the police, firemen or paramedics. Nobody has died yet, but it's a matter of time...

[Dappleganger]

40. Yet they have no problem to let a family STARVE to death...

no problem letting a family have no medical care, no place to live, no job to earn a living.

I guess it's just alright to not let the house burn down.

Fuck 'em. Fuck 'em all to hell.

[pnwmom]

42. From the same link, here's a Freeper who got it right:

There’s the correct application of required economics, and then there’s barbarism.

This is barbarism. Legal, economically sound, barbarism.

When you get these kinds of results from logic, it’s time to examine the original question.

Because things escalate. And the same kind of economic logic that justified letting the house burn down, is being used to justify letting people die by being deprived healthcare.

Pure libertarian economics does not exist except in theory - in reality, you always have to deal with the inequalities. That’s why pure libertarianism always fails.

The trick, of course, is not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Because while the God of economics was served, what now happens to the community? You know, the one filled with human beings? The one that goes to church on Sunday? That one.

If its still confusing, here’s a hint: When firefighters stand around watching a house burn to the ground for purely financial reasons... THAT’S THE BABY.


44 posted on October 3, 2010 5:53:24 PM PDT by Talisker

[hayu_lol]

43. If you read and understand the OP,

then you know that the fire dept. was standing by in case the neighbor's house caught fire or was threatened...the neighbor had paid the fee of $75.

Maybe a year ago, there was a series of threads telling of the problem of water in Tennessee. Seems that people lived in a very rural area and got their water from a stream. Stream dried up. People were really complaining that they had to get water tankers to bring fresh water from the distant town. They of course, enjoyed the negligible taxes they paid in their rural heaven. They finally appealed to the Feds to build them a water system which so far as I know, has not been built. The water needers, like the people who had their house burn down, paid not one penny toward getting a water system in. Had the people in the burned house paid their $75 yearly fee, they would have been covered.

The fault is theirs alone. Wonder if they had fire insurance...or did they save a buck or two on that as well?

[Renew Deal]

60. I disagree that the fault is theirs only

The fault is also with the governments that allow people to be charged a fee for fire service. This should have been worked out by government.

[lumberjack_jeff]

65. What is it about DU?

Do we decide what's right and wrong by reading FR?

Public safety shouldn't be an option for those who choose/can afford it.

[Ruby the Liberal]

89. I think the point was (as I saw it) that this is their Libertarian dream come true

yet they call it "Socialism".

[pnwmom]

81. The neighbor's house actually caught fire BEFORE they intervened.

I think that neighbor has a cause of action against them.

[Hannah Bell]

46. lol. he got it precisely *wrong*. the city has no obligation to provide any fire protection

whatsoever outside its jurisdiction to those who refuse to pay.

the county chose to let the people under its jurisdiction contract for services as individuals, for a flat fee, rather than assess taxes on the value of the properties and contract for everyone.

even though median income in the county is higher than in the city.

and this individual, who owns property in kentucky as well, was too cheap to pay $6.25 a month for fire service.

too bad, this is the consequence of the "freedom" he chose.

it's funny to see the wingers at free republic crying in their beer about the "barbarism" of the society they're bringing into being.

[lumberjack_jeff]

64. The county which set up that situation is the main problem.

Public safety shouldn't be an optional check box on a tax bill.

The city should have refused to provide services *anywhere* in the county until the county found a way to pay to provide fire protection for everyone.

[pnwmom]

82. Oh yeah? And did he get this part wrong too:

"And the same kind of economic logic that justified letting the house burn down, is being used to justify letting people die by being deprived healthcare."

[Hannah Bell]

85. yes, he got that wrong too. the jurisdiction for the healthcare issue is the entire US.

the jurisdiction for the fire issue is the city. the county doesn't pay taxes to fund the city. some of its residents don't want to pay, they just want to freeride on the poorer city.

[pnwmom]

87. And why is health care a federal issue and fire protection local?

[Hannah Bell]

91. um -- because about half of health care spending is federally funded and the feds

regulate nearly every aspect? could that be it?

while fire protection, except for forest fires, is a function of local governments & paid for by local tax dollars -- could that be it?

the county in this case has a higher median household income than the city, yet they want to leave fire protection in the county to "individual choice". that speaks volumes to me.

the man chose; he takes the consequences of his choice.

you're all about choice when it comes to the poor -- seems you don't like it when it's applied to the gentry who get farm subsidies in two states.

[pnwmom]

92. Except for the elderly and the poor, health care has never been

a federal responsibility. Each state has been responsible for its own laws regarding health care and even Medicaid.

[Hannah Bell]

96. baloney. federal regulations apply to all providers who accept federal funds.

federal regs apply to drugs & medical devices, hospitals & clinics, medical research, & numerous other aspects of medical care in this country.

Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) was established via federal law, for example.

On the other side, we have a city that taxes its residents to pay for fire service, a county that decided its residents should contract individually with the city for the fire services it deigned not to fund, and an individual who decided not to contract & take his chances.

[lumberjack_jeff]

62. +1

Bet we won't see mr talisker on FR any more.

[Hannah Bell]

44. those people can't read. the situation is 180 degrees from how they paint it.

this is their libertarian fantasy come true -- & they're calling it socialism.

[SpiralHawk]

45. RepubliKarma

This is what the ReBagliCons are bringing...

[xchrom]

47. the stupidity of freepers never ceases to amuse. nt

[pipi_k]

48. So, reading between the lines...or maybe right through them...

what they seem to be saying is, they don't want to pay the taxes that would support certain services, and they don't really want to pay "subcription fees"...they just want these services to be provided at no cost to them by volunteers who have full time jobs somewhere else (remember...they don't want to support "entitlement" programs!).

Or maybe they'd just prefer the good old days of slavery...


:eyes:

[uncommon]

49. "Personal responsibility" freepers. Do they really not understand that this is what they are fight

ing for?

Privatization will mean this kind of scenario will play out over and over and over again. By the time conservatives are done with this country, there will be NO public services.

[pipi_k]

58. I honestly don't think they even know what the words mean.

They hear the words repeated over and over again, but like little kids who hear swear words and repeat them without even knowing what they mean.

[lumberjack_jeff]

66. Exactly.

News flash, freepers; "socialism" isn't individual private contracts for fire protection services.

[Dappleganger]

50. So letting a house burn, then get out of control and spreading

to the entire county is somehow a good thing?

One amazing gust of wind and that entire burn is eating up everything in its path.

[Hannah Bell]

109. so then, a town of 2500 should bankrupt itself because a county of 32,000 people

won't tax itself for fire protection & doesn't give a damn about the wind spreading fires or anything else you mention?

[malaise]

54. You want small government Freepers

"Hug it up" - this is your small government at work and you poor ass Freepers will be the victims of the crap you're promoting. Now fuck off and tell them to start over and if they can't, they'd better not apply for welfare because you don't want that either. Go Cheney your ignorant selves in mama's basement until that too burns down because poor mama bought into your bullshit...WTF - you're homeless. That's the logic of your asinine 'small government ideology.

[Brewman_Jax]

55. Oliver Wendell Holmes said about taxes...

taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society. Freepers should be fine with the above example since they so preach the values of personal responsibility and that privatization and the free market will take care of everything and life will be good! :thumbsup:

Hey, freepers, how's that working for ya?

Can you taste the irony? :eyes:

[piratefish08]

57. what a bunch of socialist fucks.

:sarcasm:

[lumberjack_jeff]

61. Even blind squirrels stumble over nuts occasionally. n/t

[distantearlywarning]

69. This is hysterical.

Don't they realize that this is *exactly* the sort of thing they are advocating when they bitch and bitch about their taxes and big government? This is precisely what a completely "free" society looks like, a society where individuals are free to pick and choose whether they would like to opt into social services with their own tax dollars. It's also what "personal responsibility" looks like - the guy made the choice not to pay for fire services of his own free will, and he unfortunately is now reaping the consequences.

Personally, I would love to see the freeper types live in this sort of society - you don't want to be taxed for X thing? Fine, don't pay. But you don't get to bitch later if you then need X thing, and nobody will feel sorry for you, because you had a free choice about what to do with your own money. Citizen, you are free to decide exactly what consequences you think you can live with in this society. Have fun.

[Lilith Velkor]

72. Meanwhile, we have DUers going, "Fuck that guy, he should have paid up."

Which party is which, now? :crazy:

[booley]

74. It's weird how...

It's weir dhow these guys push for stuff and then when they get it, they suddenly find they don't like it.

But they never connect the two.

[Quantess]

76. Not only that, but some of them even attribute it to SOCIALITS and COMMIES!

Wow. Incredibly dumb. That's the kind of stupid that can't be fixed.

[Desertrose]

75. Is this our future?

People bitching about paying taxes and eventually this will be the result.

How foolish ...and how sad.

[Xithras]

83. Freepers lack basic comprehension skills.

They don't want to pay taxes to cover things like fire services.

They don't want to pay fees to cover things like fire services.

Apparently, the magic fire fairy in the sky is supposed to pay the firefighters paychecks, medical coverage, and retirement costs. Or maybe they expect the firefighters to just beg for scraps in between saving homes from incineration, as most of them are in "evil unions" and are just a bunch of "overpaid government socialists" anyway.

If you want a good, reliable, well trained fire service, you must provide firemen with the resources they need to live, raise a family, and retire on. Those resources cost money. There are only two ways to fund that need...taxes or fees.

You cannot argue for an abolition of taxation on one hand, and then whine about essential government services resorting to fees on the other hand. You also can't complain about fee-based services refusing to cover those who don't pay. That would be...welfare and socialism!

[WCGreen]

86. That is how it use to be in the 1800's....

There were private firefighting outfits that charged "insurance" as their fee...

[Quantess]

88. Some of them are blaming Unions.

I wonder what else they can manage to tie into this.

[freebrew]

90. I served as a volunteer firefighter as well.

We operated on fire tags. None of us drew a salary or wage, it was enough to be able to help.
There were a few folks around that didn't pay for the tag. Debate ensues as to how to deal with these folk, and the usual Repubs spoke of letting their homes burn if need be. We were advised by smarter people though and instead put out any fire we were called.
Sent them huge bills for equipment and time, those also went unpaid.
One of the excuses heard was that taxes should cover this, however, there was no tax monies allocated for fire protection at that time. Volunteer and all.

The same dept is now 24 hour paid firehouse. These guys get good pay and bennies, good on them.

Point of this: we never, ever let a house burn for non-payment of a fire tag.

[thelordofhell]

94. This happened all the time in the 1800s

Until the cities took it all over.

In the end, they should have put out the fire then billed the guy for it. Then the guy would say, "I'm not paying this outrageous bill to you commie bastards." After which the municipality will bring a suit against the home-owner who will try to file bankruptcy and eventually just leave the house.

[begin_within]

95. So instead of the $75 fee, they are in favor of paying $1,800 a year to a private company?

I don't get the logic behind all these cries for privatization of everything. A privately-owned firefighting service wouldn't bother to put out the fire if the house wasn't a customer of the service. The freepers and privateers wouldn't bat an eye about that. Just because the service in question was publicly owned, and the house in question was not part of their subscribed customers - why does that make any difference? Do all these freepers, who generally favor privatization of everything, actually prefer a system where they would each pay $1,800 a year for coverage from a private firefighting service over a system where they would pay $75 per year from a publicly-owned service?

[1monster]

101. The county I live in toyed with a fee (on top of taxes) for fire service a few years ago.

They sent out letters to home and business owners explaining the cost per square foot fees.

The day after the letters were received the idea of fire fees were recinded by red faced commissioners who showed symptoms of stress and trauma.

The mild responses were from the business people who were hit humongous (due to the larger size of their establishments) and their response could not really be called mild.

There were more than a few threats of acute violence. The commissioners took those very seriously...

[Curmudgeoness]

102. And coming soon, only the rich will be able to afford this

Mafia style "fire protection money". The poor will be screwed, again. But that's ok, I think they like it.

[Tsiyu]

107. Sure they do

may those who mock the poor soon

walk a mile in poor, sole-worn shoes

[opihimoimoi]

104. FREELOADER ....fuck him....

[mikeSchmuckabee]

105. Next up, paying room and board in private jails.

It's probably already done, or else.

[AngryAmish]

108. Yes, it is done

Most states make prisoners pay their own way (if they have the funds). And a lot of prisons have been outsourced. There are even fancy private jails if you have enough money in California.

[Ganja Ninja]

110. This is what happens when you combine gullible morons with the hair brained ..

schemes of the loony right. And I'm not surprised the the point is completely lost on the freepers. If you want a society that is based on an "every man for himself" mentality then this is what you deserve.