The world is full of jerks, freeloaders, and ingrates — and the problems they create for themselves

[depakid]

These free-riders have no more right to South Fulton's firefighting services than people in Muleshoe, Texas, have to those of NYPD detectives."

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/248658/pay-spray-fire-department-doing-right-thing-kevin-d-williamson

More of their internal spat about the "wisdom" and "propriety" of their conservative policies here:

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/04/national-review-firefighters/

Certainly makes for an interesting compare and contrast with some of the views we see expressed here.

[Fumesucker]

1. Oh jeebus...

:popcorn:

Lots and lots of :popcorn:

And a Kosher Coke please..

[TK421]

2. I have extra butter if you need some...give a shout n/t

[JI7]

3. wtf ? i thought you wanted more liberal policies ?

[petronius]

4. Hmmm, NYPD detectives in Muleshoe, TX

You better copyright that idea before NBC sees this thread...

[Fumesucker]

6. ...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YGmysIzCkn0/SVZcZPksKrI/AAAAAAAADHE/w-nNbEczhjI/s400/red+heat+cover.jpg

[petronius]

10. Dammit! How did I ever miss that one?

Looking at the trivia page on IMDB, the makers of that movie had a lot of chutzpah:

"The film crew applied for a permit to film in the Red Square but the application was denied, so the crew had to "sneak-film" the Red Square scenes. They dressed Arnold up in the uniform and filmed him as though making an amateur/home movie with just a couple of crew people present."

"During filming the producers tried to have the city move the sculpture by Alexander Calder on Dearborn Ave. over a few feet in order to accommodate a bus chase."

Seems like you'd have to be pretty sure of yourself to try either of those things...

[Fumesucker]

17. It's a pretty fun action movie..

Arnold is his usual fairly wooden self but it's quite in character anyway..

Belushi is entertaining..

[JI7]

5. so you don't think Firefighters from the US should have gone to Haiti after the Earthquake ?

[Fumesucker]

8. Haitians are richer and more numerous than Americans?

And still refuse to fund their own fire protection service?

It's really amazing the things you can learn on DU.. :eyes:

[JI7]

9. NY is more numerous and richer than Muleshoe Texas

[Fumesucker]

11. Umm... there are NYPD detectives working in Muleshoe TX?

Another thing I learned on DU today..

[JI7]

13. the OP mentioned muleshoe texas having right to nypd

[Fumesucker]

15. A link in the OP also has the facts exactly 180 degrees wrong..

The FD is from South Fulton, KY, the county is Obion county, TN.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Yes it does

why I said, what we are facing are different world views, that are 180 from each other.

[depakid]

16. The ThinkProgress summary of the conservative NR spat contains arguments posted here

in many iterations.

Jonah Goldberg actually had one of the more interesting (and twisted) rationalizations that I've seen:

Here’s the more important part of the story, letting the house burn — while, I admit sad — will probably save more houses over the long haul. I know that if I opted out of the program before, I would be more likely to opt-in now. No solace to the homeowner, but an important lesson for compassionate conservatives like our own Dan Foster (Zing!). As Edmund Burke said, example is the school of mankind and he will learn from no other.

[Fumesucker]

18. You're not a wingnut..

And you don't live surrounded by wingnuts..

Trust me, they are all but impervious to "facts" and "logic", such things are for dirty liebruls..

Oh, and the Thinkprogress link has the facts exactly wrong..

[depakid]

20. Ah, but isn't it interesting to see some share the same attitudes, beliefs and values as wingnuts?

btw: I didn't post the article for "factual accuracy re: the event" but in order to showcase the arguments and let people have a go with them. That was the purpose of the ThinkProgress piece, too. It's not a news story.

[Fumesucker]

24. I'm not making the same argument..

I'm arguing that a small, less wealthy population should not subsidize services for a much larger and wealthier population who refuse to provide those services for themselves.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Why I have told you, that you are correct

wingnuts are 180 from lib'ruls, who also don't have facts, and are impervious to logic.

That said the think progress link gave you excepts of what CONSERVATIVES posted. Hence it is CONSERVATIVES who have the facts wrong.

That said, many of the posts here are very similar...

Shocking, alien country and all that.

[Hannah Bell]

47. The debate at NR has nothing to do with the debate here. You brought it in to paint

those supporting the publicly-funded fire department as aligned with the neo-cons at NR.

Sorry, the neo-cons at NR are aligned with the neo-cons in the county who voted in a fee for service policy, & the county libertarians who think they can free-ride off another jurisdiction's public services until they bankrupt them.

[Hannah Bell]

48. your world view is that large, rich counties should get free fire service from smaller, poorer towns

apparently.

[jobycom]

12. Should someone point out to ThinkProgress that their facts are completely wrong?

Nah, let's just go with what they said. Look, they have the word progressive in their name, so they must be progressive.

[Fumesucker]

14. Yeah, I noticed that earlier..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9261426&mesg_id=9262537

[depakid]

19. And that detail is relevant to their discussion of conservative arguments how?

[jobycom]

22. Are you seriously asking why an argument based on flawed facts is problematic?

[Fumesucker]

23. The fact is that the county has over ten times the population of the city..

And a higher average income..

Why should city residents pay for fire protection for people that don't even live in the same damn state and are too cheap to provide their own fire protection?

If the city FD is out on a call in the county what happens to a city resident (that has actually paid for the FD via his taxes) if his house catches on fire?

It shows sloppiness on the part of Thinkprogress that they couldn't get the basic facts straight.

[depakid]

26. Are you two reading the same article that I am?

I don't think so- as it's not think progress making any of those statements- all they're doing is setting out and making a pithy comment or two on the conservative arguments in the National review.

Now, if some of those arguments contain factual errors or (as may be more likely) hit too close to home- well, that's food for thought.

[Fumesucker]

28. From the TP article you linked to...

As ThinkProgress reported earlier this morning, South Fulton firefighters from Obion, Tennessee, last week stood by and watched as a family’s home burned down because their services were available by subscription only, and the family had not paid the $75 fee. As ThinkProgress noted, the case perfectly demonstrated conservative ideology, which is based around the idea of the on-your-own society and informs a policy agenda that primarily serves the well-off and privileged.

Now, leading conservative authors from modern conservatism’s bulkhead magazine, The National Review, have come out in defense of Obion County firefighters’ policy of servicing rural citizens by paid subscription only. The magazine’s commentary on the issue started with a blog post by Daniel Foster, one of the magazine’s staff writers. Writing on the National Review blog The Corner, Foster condemned the behavior of the county, saying that while he has “no problem with this kind of opt-in government in principle,” he sees no “moral theory” under which the firefighters would be justified in watching the house burn down:

Those are TP's words, not those of NR..

It's just garbled..

[depakid]

30. That detail is utterly irrelevant to the purposes of the discussion

Surely you can see that.

[Fumesucker]

32. The real split here seems to be..

Between those who think a smaller and poorer community should subsidize a service for a larger and wealthier one and those who think the wealthier community should pay for the services they really want but are too damn cheap to actually fund.

That's what the argument here is when you get right down to the meat of things, some of us don't like seeing the wealthy sponging off the taxes of the poor.

And the fact that the article is not even self consistent when describing the facts of the case in question is indeed relevant to any discussion.

[depakid]

33. I don't see it that way at all

Correct me if this isn't a fair summary of the view in the abstract.

Person down the street in separate jurisdiction didn't pay for and doesn't deserve the services and so too bad for them.

Or to anyone else in a similar situation who for whatever reason neglected to or didn't pony up the money.

btw: I understand the equity argument that you're making and agree at a certain level.

[Fumesucker]

34. The problem is that the person who didn't pay and then gets the services anyway..

Is taking the services away from a person who did indeed pay, in this case someone who can on the average less afford those services.

If the city continues to provide services to the county that are not paid for the eventual result will be the loss of those services for everyone, even those who were actually paying.

[depakid]

36. I don't have a big problem with that

Just as I don't have a big problem with the dole for "lazy people" or with universal healthcare for people who don't pay much if any income taxes.

Easy enough in cases like this to bill people $75 bucks plus some modest fine to encourage those with the means to pay what's essentially a levy. (Obviously there are more efficient ways to finance, but that's what they've got).

[Fumesucker]

37. You don't have a problem with those who are paying losing services?

Because a lot of wealthier people don't want to pay and demand services anyway?

I'm hoping I'm misunderstanding you..

[depakid]

39. I don't have a problem with a few people who may be seen as rorting the system

Similarly, Howard Dean dismisses the few who might rort the system with respect to pre-existing conditions sans a mandate.

It's small number- and the costs to society as a whole of focusing attention on -or blowing things out of proportion (think Cadillac driving welfare mothers) creating and satiating outrage over someone possibly "getting something they don't deserve" -far outweigh the costs failing to uphold the social contract and reinforce systems and values that work for society at large.

See, e.g. Resilience of the welfare state flummoxes the free marketeers (best performing economies)
Nations with generous social welfare programs are the world's best economic performers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9250132

On another note- in this instance, my guess is that the fire dept. would have been perfectly within their rights to file a mechanics lien on the property if they weren't paid- but of course, that's not the point.

The fire chief here- like many conservatives and libertarians and DUers was out to "teach 'em a lesson." To rid the dole of Cadillac driving welfare moms.

[Fumesucker]

42. I've done some more reading on this situation..

Tennessee law is kind of screwy on this, the FD is limited to $500 maximum charge and basically there is no legal mechanism to force people to pay, not even mechanics lien..

Personally I think the very best thing the city could do is just not offer subscriptions or respond at all outside their city limits once current subscriptions are expired

Eventually the city will have to shut down the FD if they continue to use significant resources that are not recompensed.

Keep in mind that 75% of structure fires that the city responds to are in the county.

[Agony]

45. Fine, I agree, fix the broken politics. In the meantime just put the fire out. nt

[Fumesucker]

46. This guy or his family already got one freebie...

He even said he thought they'd put the fire out even though he hadn't paid..

That's because they did it for his family before and they never paid up.

[depakid]

52. The whole idea of "getting a freebie" is at the heart of the dysfunction

And before it's said, I know- we live among different sets of peoples, who hold dramatically different sets of attitudes, beliefs and values.

-and yet more often than not, you and I agree on issues- and take some heat from others on the board for our positions.

N'est pas?

[Hannah Bell]

54. no, the question is not just about getting a freebie. it's about who has the ability to pay

as well.

the county is richer than the city, bigger than the city, more able to subsidize its poorer residents, but the county won't tax its residents to pay for universal fire service & wants the city to serve those who won't, or can't opt into the "pay to play" situation the COUNTY SET UP.

The county as a body is well-able to fund a universal fire service for its residents.

It, and they, refuse to do so & want another smaller & poorer body that does tax its own residents to foot the bill for their libertarian "choice".

[Pithlet]

25. It's relevant because if this were the county's own fire department

I know I'd feel differently. But this city had no real obligation to do anything for them at all, really, because they are in a different location. The fact they were even going into an entirely different municipality, in a different state, and fighting their fires for them, even after they repeatedly voted against paying them with tax money, and then on top of that the residents themselves repeatedly stiffed them, is relevant. I think a lot of people are getting so upset because they don't realize they're different locations. They just see the thing about the fee, and the fire company not putting out the fire because of it, and go OMG! But it is relevant. The two places aren't even in the same state. I think if more people knew that this fire department has been bleeding money and is on the verge of bankruptcy because of what this county has been doing, maybe more would feel differently, too. But maybe not. I don't know. I'm so drained from all this at this point.

[depakid]

27. Sounds like you may be close to Mr. Fosters' view then:

I have no problem with this kind of opt-in government in principle — especially in rural areas where individual need for government services and available infrastructure vary so widely. But forget the politics: what moral theory allows these firefighters (admittedly acting under orders) to watch this house burn to the ground when 1) they have already responded to the scene; 2) they have the means to stop it ready at hand; 3) they have a reasonable expectation to be compensated for their trouble?

[Pithlet]

29. No. That's not my view at all.

I don't support those kinds of opt in arrangements. I think the county's residents need to grow up and pay their taxes and fund their share of city's dept or start their own. But failing that, the city shouldn't suffer. Edited to clarify. I think showing up and letting a house burn is absolutely horrifying. It is a last ditch effort. And the city's fire department didn't even do this until they were driven to it because they're financially strapped. They were actually showing up and putting them out anyway even when the residents hadn't paid their fee, until they got so strapped. That's why I'm on their side.

[thelordofhell]

31. 1-2-3

1) they have already responded to the scene

Because the neighbors, who have paid for the fire protection, called to protect their place

2) they have the means to stop it ready at hand

This is true, but see the next one

3) they have a reasonable expectation to be compensated for their trouble

A fire happened on one of this families' properties 3 years ago, the Fire Department put it out, billed the family (because they didn't pay the $75 a year then too), and they never paid.....never

[depakid]

35. This same viewpoint can be (and is) applied to hospital and medical treatment

(limited to an extent by a federal law called EMTALA).

Should a family be denied treatment if they haven't paid a previous bill- or because a neighbor didn't?

[thelordofhell]

38. It is not the same........but I'll still answer your question

The family would not be denied medical treatment. There are laws in place that demand this for medical services. Hostpitals try to charge more for other patients and try to get more compensation from insurance companies to make up the shortfall.

[depakid]

40. EMTALA is very limited and doesn't apply to all emergency medical services

For example, under EMTALA all a hospital has to do is stabilize the patient for immediate, life threatening conditions.

Moreover, patients may or may not have real property (in this case- real and personal property is "the patient" in the legal sense).

Thus, there's recourse against the property itself (as well as the individuals) for any reasonable payment for services, fine for non-payment of surcharge, etc.

So you see- the libertarian argument once again makes little sense when applied to the complex (or not so complex) conditions existing in the real world.

[Petrushka]

41. Unless there were fire-hydrants in the vicinity of that fire, firefighters did NOT "...have the

means to stop it ready at hand;..." Some of the videos online
(The Young Turks', for instance) show firemen arriving on neighboring
property with what appears to be a water-buffalo, indicating that there
was insufficient or NO water source or supply available nearby; and,
if that was the case, the city firefighters' only "moral" obligation would
have been to use what little water they brought with them to---first and
foremost---protect the rural neighbor who had paid the city's fire-service fee.


Edited to add link to TYT video:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x512070

[Fumesucker]

43. That is a great point, thanks for posting.. n/t

[depakid]

50. That's another rather impressive rationalization

Touche'

[Hannah Bell]

55. The firefighters DIDN;T RESPOND TO THE CALL. They didn't come out just to watch the guy's house

burn down.

They came later, in response to another call, carrying their own water in a pumper truck -- because there aren't fire hydrants in the country.

They have no reasonable expectation of being compensated. More than half of county residents never paid a cent under the previous system in which the city responded to all calls & billed after the fact.

Presumably those who were willing to pay are the same ones who are willing to subscribe.

Not the deadbeats like this guy, who already got one free call & *still* didn;t sign up for a subscription.

The poster is NOT CLOSE TO MR FOSTERS VIEW, OR ANY OF THE VIEWS YOU LINK.

[Hannah Bell]

49. someone has pointed out that fact, but the spinners hold fast to their spin.

the entire media on the "left" and "right" are spinning in the same direction.

i wonder why that is?

[Hannah Bell]

44. hardly, the dicks at national review want the entire country on the fee for service system

the libertarian county in question voted in. that's the stance from which their attack on free riders comes from.

that's not the stance from which I or other DUers supporting the city come from.

the city of 2500 people is able to publicly fund fire service for its residents.

it isn't able to fund 15,000 free riders who live outside the city limits, and who are quite capable of funding their own service, but refuse to.

the "compassionate" contingent at DU wants a small city of 2500 people to fund fire service for a larger, richer unincorporated area who refuses to pay.

[depakid]

51. You're about the last person one might have expecged to miss the point.

Come on now.

[Hannah Bell]

53. spell it out for me. i'm rather slow.