I agree with you mostly, especially the last part, so we'd probably best leave it at that.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
$75 or we'll let your house burn down
- Thread starter capnsandwich
- Start date
I agree with you mostly, especially the last part, so we'd probably best leave it at that.
Only if people perpetuate the cycle.
Mentioned this in another thread the other day. Bud of mine left school at 16 to work as a laborer to help his family. At 23 he went back into education. He went to college and to do an access course, he's now in his 2nd year studying for a degree in Physics.
There are nearly always ways to break that cycle . . .
What sort of crazy-ass backwards country makes you PAY to be covered by the fire brigade?! I can't imagine this happening in the UK or elsewhere in western Europe, no matter how 'remote' your house is. Crazy.
No it wasn't. Nowhere in the article does it say it was a mobile home. It says he is NOW living in a mobile home on his property.
In my opinion, whether he paid or not is not the issue here.
It's the fact that firefighting service should be provided by governing systems to everyone without the need for additional fees. It is a basic protection service, the same as police and ambulance. He already paid house insurance, fire services are not insurance, they are a basic service provided for the safety of residents. If a county I lived in ever tried to make me pay extra above taxes for either of these 3 basic services, I would be rallying the community to make a change.
Australia is covered nation wide by either staffed, volunteer or aerial fire services, non of which extra money is pulled from the pockets of civilians.
Who would have thought in the year 2010, the human race would not have had effective fire services for a citizen living in the most powerful and influential Western country on the planet? Especially one that is spending close to $10 billion a month on war efforts overseas. That there is where something is wrong, IMO.
It's the fact that firefighting service should be provided by governing systems to everyone without the need for additional fees. It is a basic protection service, the same as police and ambulance. He already paid house insurance, fire services are not insurance, they are a basic service provided for the safety of residents. If a county I lived in ever tried to make me pay extra above taxes for either of these 3 basic services, I would be rallying the community to make a change.
Australia is covered nation wide by either staffed, volunteer or aerial fire services, non of which extra money is pulled from the pockets of civilians.
Who would have thought in the year 2010, the human race would not have had effective fire services for a citizen living in the most powerful and influential Western country on the planet? Especially one that is spending close to $10 billion a month on war efforts overseas. That there is where something is wrong, IMO.
Absolutely. I just can't get my head around someone in a (purportedly) developed nation having to pay a fee before the fire brigade would come! I mean that's how it was in England in the 16th century (literally).
The more I hear about the things the USA doesn't have the more surprised I am. Ultimately it all comes down to the desire for 'small government' I guess, and fear of that big 'S' word (that no one really seems to understand anyway!)
