Refusing to put out the fire was a form of protest/strike and it accomplished its goal.

[howard112211]

We are now talking about how fire departments get funded, nationwide.

Was it a harsh measure to get a point across? Certainly. Could there have been other, perhaps less harsh, means to get that point across? Perhaps. But the reality is that strikes are often harsh. Remember garbage piling up and rats running around? That's what happens if the garbage service doesn't get funded. Burning houses is what happens when fire departments don't get funded. Dead people is what happens if hospitals don't get funded. The reality is that people often don't listen if strikes are not harsh.

The one's who provide the most crucial services are often the ones who have the least power to protest for better working conditions, simply because everyone expects them to have a moral obligation to perform their service. Imagine a doctor refusing to treat patients because his paycheck was cut. What a horrible person he must be.

I am always amazed at people who expect people to perform crucial services out of pure idealism with disregard of funds for their practice and bread for their families. It is always easy for an outsider to point fingers. In reality, it just doesn't work, but some people refuse to understand that.

I feel sorry for any animals that were harmed during this incident. But if the facts that were posted here are correct, the family in question was upper middle class and could have easily afforded the service, chose not to pay for it, and likely voted for the politicians who defunded the system, and subscribed to the ideology that defunded the system. So, of course it is unfortunate for them to be singled out as the target for this particular act of protest. But they are part of the group that was the legitimately the target of this strike. It's not like they let some poor familiy who could barely afford to eat, let alone pay for anything extra, watch what little they did own be destroyed.

Chances are that now people will listen when fire departments say they need funding.

[TicketyBoo]

1. I don't know if it's true or not,

but the guy told Olbermann that he FORGOT to pay the fee.

In my opinion, it shouldn't be optional. They should add it to everyone's taxes.

If he intentionally didn't pay the fee, it wouldn't surprise me if his insurance company compounds his misery by refusing to pay his claim based on non-payment of the fire-fighting fee.

[Hannah Bell]

4. County residents don't pay taxes for fire service. The county has no residential fire service.

By the voters' own choice.

The guy had earlier said he thought they'd come out even if he didn;t pay the fee because they had done so for a previous fire he had.

Which didn't make him any more willing to pay the fee thereafter, apparently, because he thought he could get the service for free.

The $75 fee is the only money the city gets from the county to fund its fire department.

[mediaman007]

5. Someone posted the city and county data from Wikipedia.

The county had a significantly higher per capita income compared to the city. The cities annual income per household was about $28,000, while the counties was in the neighborhood of $35,000. When you consider that the city's income is factored into the county income, its apparent that the county is more affluent than the city. Yet the county voted to not affiliate with the city's fire department. The difference? An extra $100 on their property tax per year.

[hayu_lol]

6. What happens when you 'forget' to pay your light bill?

This guy forgot? He was reminded by letters, by calls from the fire department, and even the Chief of the fire department made some of the calls. This family had another place a few miles away from this site. 3 years ago, they had a fire. They either forgot to pay that service fee or refused to. Fire department put out that fire...sent a bill for expenses...and the bill was ignored--to date, that bill has not been paid.

Fire department answered this call because this guy's neighbor paid the fee and when the fire spread, the fire department put out the fire.

Take a different approach here...what if when this call for help arrived, the truck was busy over in Kentucky putting out a fire from someone who paid taxes to support this fire department. Would the firemen drop their hoses and rush over to Tennessee while one of their tax supporters houses burned down? Hmmm...don't think so.

[itsrobert]

10. Thanks for some facts for a change. The guy was gambling

And he lost.

Also note, the fire started by them trying to burn their trash. Looks like they didn't want to pay for trash pickup or dumping fees either. Also, another fact, the family has a nice RV that they are using now. This family wasn't rich, but they weren't poor either. They didn't want to pay. The son didn't pay his fee three years ago, and the FD put out that fire.

Now, there are some that may not be able to really afford to pay the $75 in the county. And the best way to do this so every home is covered is through the property tax system.

[seabeyond]

13. not buying "he forgot" over 50% dont subscribe, precedent set. he said prior to i forgot

that he thought they would come out and put out fire even though he did not pay.

doesnt sound like.... i forgot

son, three years prior had fire and did not pay. FD put out fire and he then paid.... once. FD said, not again.

they send bill, then when not pay follow up with call.

not buying the.... i forgot

[mstinamotorcity]

51. Good Point!!!!

I almost forgot about those shady insurance companies. They just might try and deny his claim because of failure to pay the firefighting fee.

[Orrex]

2. If you were on fire but had failed to cough up your $75 in advance, would you expect them to help?

[Bonobo]

3. Recommended for pure unintentional comedic content!

This is Fox News-worthy!

You deserve praise.

Only a strong and clever man can twist and wrench the truth so far that it is just at its breaking point but know when to stop just short of a complete lie.

[seabeyond]

15. the point out the twist or incorrect facts. because only fox would make a statement like yours

without any clarification. such an accusation with nothing to support it.

[Bonobo]

23. You didn't read closely.

I said the OP twisted the truth. The facts may be correct.

Think for a moment. You still might get it, but I doubt it.

[seabeyond]

24. instead of me trying to figure out what you imply, wouldnt it be simpler for all if

you just told me what you meant?

[Bonobo]

39. OK, I'll try.

In my opinion, equating the lack of action by the firefighters to a "protest" is just ridiculous.

For one thing, what we traditionally refer to when we refer to a protest is an action by a group of unempowered people rallying in numbers (the only way they can retake power of any sort) against an oppressive ORGANIZATION.

In this case, the FD had all the power and they were refusing through IN-action to help someone who was, in this case and at this time, POWERLESS.

Simply put, to equate such pettiness with some sort of a 'righteous protest' to make a statement (truth to power? LOL) is the height of rhetoric and truthiness.


Does that make my opinion clearer?

[seabeyond]

41. Does that make my opinion clearer?,,, of course it does, you to the time to explain what

who where referencing.

you are looking at it from one view and one only so though you are right, you are also wrong through out.

if you look at unions and govt, they have opt out of service that have hurt whom they protest by inaction. not produce goods or services. as a means to protest various things. so protest is by no means, always active.

you say FD is the one with all the power. i beg to differ. (and this is not to condone choice of protest or validate that it is a protest... i have a mix opinion on this) but, the FD is powerless to make residence in another state to fund their services. putting the burden of cost on FD. gutting their department thru lack of funding. for the county to not pay then hold the moral card on receiving service and then when they dont receive service vilify FD is pretty damn powerful. look at du.

so in essence, i agree and disagree with your post.

[Oilwellian]

7. There are better places...

to take a dump.

[KharmaTrain]

8. Enjoy Your Libertarian Nirvana

Need a cop? Enter your Credit Card number at the beep. Enjoy driving down roads where there's a tollbooth at ever border...make sure you have plenty of change. Yep, this is surely how things should be :sarcasm:

If I had the call in this matter I would have ordered the firefighters to put the fire out then take the dude to court and sue for the $75 plus other charges. But then I'm a "sochulist"...relying on the nanny state :sarcasm:

This should be a strong reminder to those who want to pay no taxes what their "paradise" looks like.

As far as strikes...I wish we had a stronger labor movement in this country but we don't. Solidarity is difficult at best and without a full cross union efforts many strikes either go unnoticed or are allowed to drag out with the workers getting the worst of it. Unfortunately this country has become very selfish and self absored.

[howard112211]

14. Actually, I absolutely think it should be funded by taxes.

I don't think I stated otherwise. Public service should be tax funded.

[KharmaTrain]

22. The Question Is What If There's No Money...

That's the underlying story here...the problems many states, counties and municipalities are having in paying for services. The real estate crash tied with the bust of the consumer economy hit coffers that already took a hit in decreased revenues thanks to the booooosh tax cuts for the rich. No matter where you look local governments are cash-starved and they're either eliminating services or cutting corners while facing those who think they should get even less.

If the economy continues to suck...if there are no new revenues, how do you deal with this matter? That's a big question that is kinda the elephant in the room.

[seabeyond]

25. significantly increase tax on city to fund the county? or tell county to fuck off

and figure out how to provide FD service to their people.

those are the two options i see.

cant really allow city fire to collapse.

[KharmaTrain]

31. And How Do You Increase Taxes?

Sure...you have the county board vote for them, but far easier said than done...especially in a rushpublican area. Do a referendum? I don't see that doing much better...selfish is selfish and that's the hallmark of today's GOTB and Libertarians. These people are hellbent on not paying for anything led by their corporate puppetmasters who can't get enough of their welfare. So, again, what happens if there's no money. Sadly we see there are portions of our society that will let houses and whole neighborhoods burn down.

Sadly, given the selfishness is this country and those who see "privitizing" as the answer, we may see more of these stories. Shameful.

[seabeyond]

35. the increase would have to be to the residents in city that are already paying taxes fund their FD

in the first place. you are right.... not going to get county to pass anything to ensure money goes to cities FD. they have learly shown they are not going to implement any plan that people pay for that service

so what is the option.

the already tax paying city residence will have to increase their tax burden in order to meet the FD need, so they freely give to county services not paid for

or

tell county fuck you.

no more service. city FD opt out. and let county figure out how to provide FD for their citizens that are not willing to pay for it.

[seabeyond]

16. the libertarian are those you defend and those people are riled against in the county.

the twist of it is, you accuse poster of libertarian when she is arguing for the democratic policy of safety net, and you are on the side of libertarian not adding to the collective pot.

isn't that a funny

[KharmaTrain]

20. I Think You Missed Those Sarcasm Thingees

I'm far from defending anything Libertarian. But this is the world some wish for all of us to live. I see this as much a public safety matter than safety net...and how without one the other erodes and mayhem ensues.

[seabeyond]

21. ya. thanks for clarification. nt

[littlewolf]

38. a friend of mine told me in MO (I think)

if you lived in the county but not the city ... and did not subscribe .... they would come and put out the fire ... no prob ..
but you paid 1k dollars for the first hour .... 600. for each hour their after including mop up and the fire marshall coming
out and signing off on everything ....

I also believe they should have put out the fire .... and then sued for expenses ...
I am a vol EMT and I can not even believe our FD or EMT's
not performing the job ....

I also believe things like Fire should be paid for by tax dollars .... it is part of my county taxes ....

[seabeyond]

43. the difference, what i see, from this area and MO. is two different states.

the city is in one state and county in another. they have not had the means to get people to pay for the charges after they put out the fire. they would send the bill, people would not pay it and they did not have the recourse to go after those in the county of another state.

[KharmaTrain]

46. Living In UnIncorporated Areas...

At one time I worked at a place that was in an unicorporated area. We got our water from a ground well where the surrounding towns got it from Lake Michigan. Police and fire protection were offered by the county...which meant calling in a local municipality after making sure there was an emergency. If this happened then the employer would get a bill afterwards for the charges. The company avoided most property taxes and the owner was more than willing to pay the $500 for a call than the $5,000 in yearly taxes.

I don't think many are arguing that fire protection shouldn't be paid for in some manner by tax dollars, but who pays and whose responsible. With virtually every government facing cash troubles and people demanding more service, when the money runs out what do you do? And thanks to the rushpublicans and their ongoing "tax cut" scam this shows what the future could look like.

[sarge43]

9. "We have to destroy the village in order to save it."

Yeah, that always works well.

[seabeyond]

18. i LOVE the twisted logic in this subject. k. destroying the village would be continuing outsourcin

FD 75% of calls to 32K residents when only 50% pay making the city, who is poorer pick up the cost, burdening the city FD to demise.

get it.

the burning down the village, is the city FD that they have been paying for when the outsourced county uses up their funds.

[tyne]

11. Really very

very good points.

[seabeyond]

12. the only thing i argue. the fire was well outside of house. took time to get to house. animals

should easily have been saved by owner. until i hear otherwise, grossly unjust giving that to the FD

[itsrobert]

17. I know exactly where my dog would be in time of a fire

Every time the smoke detector goes off, she climbs into the bathtub. That is her safe place. I rather she run outside, but at least I know where she will be if I need to get her, or tell the rescuers where she would be.

[seabeyond]

19. i would look at the pet as a child. as a mama, i could not imagine i would not be able to rescue my

kids if a fire became uncontrollable OUTSIDE the house and took time to reach the house.

it is simply bogus.

[JVS]

26. Yup. +1

[mainer]

27. I want a pony, but I shouldn't have to pay for it. So give me yours.

And you feed it for me, too. And board it. And pay its vet bills. But I demand the right to ride it whenever I want to. And if you don't, it's because you're mean and selfish.

That seems to be the general attitude of the county residents who refuse to pay their annual subscription fee.

[TBF]

28. More libertarianism on DU -

crazy how it's gotten on this site.

Taxes should be paying for these services. And taxes need to be raised on the wealthy if this is not happening.

[mainer]

29. No, it's people fed up with freeloaders sucking from taxpayers

It's the opposite of libertarianism.

[Pithlet]

34. Really. How is it that one gets slapped with the Libertarian label

Because they aren't siding with the Libertarians? It's getting whacky around here.

[seabeyond]

36. fighting libertarian policy makes you a libertarian. truly amazing, lol. nt

[JVS]

30. That is not in the cards for Obion county. Their political culture will not support a tax hike.

[Baalath]

33. The city can't tax people who don't live in that city.

Ohio can't tax Illinois residents, and so on and so on.

So are you saying the county should have created a fire department and taxed itself? Maybe, I wouldn't want to live somewhere without fire services. These county residents have lived like this for 20 years. Maybe they should stop blaming the city that paid the taxes and supported a fire department.

I think that the whole county government and residents of the county have some moral responsiblity here. What if a child was trapped? There is no one who is going to come next time to help them. Fire departments help each other out when they have reciprocity agreements. They don't send their fighters and equipment out to any fire they can outside their district because no one there bothered to buy a fire truck. I read their worker's comp insurance doesn't even cover them if they work at non-contracted fires.

I think that whole county is full of twits to live like that. I think they have a lot of nerve to whine at the city workers when they weren't willing to tax themselves to take care of themselves.

[littlewolf]

40. basically they should either

1. pay the 75.00 for the city protection

2. have the county fund a FD thru county taxes ...

[Baalath]

44. Agreed.

I think we can all clearly see somethings that should have been done before hand. The question remains what to do when those things aren't done.

[WeekendWarrior]

32. I don't think there's any excuse for using human lives

to make a point. A family lost their house. The fact that it spurred a debate doesn't help them much.

[Fire1]

37. Passive aggressive, imo. n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

42. Funny that the FD did not call it protest, nor had they announced

in advance that they would allow a house to burn if changes were not made. So what they did was just let a house burn over $75. They let animals die inside. That is not protest, that is inhumanity.

[seabeyond]

45. yes they have. this is a long time policy. further, this man's son had a fire three years prior

he started a fire. the fd went out and put fire out. he had not paid. he paid after fire out. they told him, not again.

and still they did not pay.

[Xipe Totec]

47. Always look on the bright side of the blaze nt

[McCamy Taylor]

48. Why are you posting anti-union propaganda at DU? "Strike" does not equal dead dogs.

That is what your title tries to suggest. Shame on you!

[Rex]

49. It was a really stupid statement, but hey we live in the times of GWB

so why not! I have to admit I love reading everyones detailed argument on how western civilization depends on each and everyone paying their taxes...AS IF. Wouldn't that be a dream if everyone paid all their taxes on time and over their lifetime.

Wake up Dorthy and get in the fastlane! It is only a dream that will never happen.

So how bout let a house burn down over $75 dollars, so we can watch how many thousands it will cost in damages to the folks that wouldn't pay up. Wow, what a statement! :dunce:

It is sad no one saved the animals, since there was so much time. Guess personal agendas are far more important than life.

[TexasObserver]

50. No, it wasn't. And striking by fire fighters is illegal in many jurisdictions.

This is yet another strain to find some good in this heinous action.

Wake up and smell the burning carcinogens.

This was a mean spirited "get even" move by the city government that was intended to get back at someone who wasn't liked. Whether the guy was a jerk or not is immaterial. Whether he was a free loader is immaterial.

[frustrated_lefty]

52. Ascribing motive to the firefighters is a distraction.

The decisions which resulted in this situation were made by politicians and voters. Portraying the firefighters as decision makers ignores that simple fact, and distracts from the policies which are the problem.

As an aside, I boggle at anyone who insists the firefighters should have behaved differently. Acting without authorization could easily have resulted in their loss of job, and any injuries suffered under those circumstances wouldn't have been covered by workers benefits. What's moral about risking your life and livelihood, thereby endangering the security and well-being of your family?

[mmonk]

53. I do not find letting the home burn noble in any regard.

That does not mean I am against counties funding fire departments. Some things you do, you do it because they are right and moral.