• 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

#61
I don't agree that it's entirely like insurance. To some extent, sure.
But paying for insurance is being covered if something happens to whatever you have the insurance on.
Paying this fee for the fire fighters is paying to have them SAVE your house (and anything in it, such as living creatures).

What if one of the family members didn't get out? Would the fire fighters let them die? for $75?

The policy is flawed, but I think the man should have been able to pay "whatever is necessary" to have his house and animals saved.
 
#63
ericw said:
.... I think you're missing the grander point I was trying to make. That sometimes, when people have the ability to help those who can't help themselves, they should. Even if the person can't afford (or was too stupid to pay) their 75 freakin dollars.



So if there's a policy that unless I tattoo "Resident of Hagerstown, MD" across my forehead I get my hand cut off and I refuse to get the tattoo and my hand gets cut off... Oh well. I knew the policy.

Hello, local policies can be wrong. County commissioners can vote stupidly and create bad situations.

Forget it... :rollno:
Click to expand...

This. All of it.

capnsandwich said:
As I'm sure it did to the firefighters watching that house burn to the ground even when they had the means to do something about it.
Click to expand...

I hope this was the case. I can't imagine that the firefighters didn't disagree with what was going on, at least some of them.
 
#64
Yeah, I don't see this as an insurance policy but, rather, a community service. You should never have to "pay a fee" for a community service. You don't pay for police protection. You pay taxes that cover it. Why is firefighting any different than police protection? If you were growing pot on your property they'd be all over you. But, because you had a fire, they wash their hands because of $75 they hadn't received.

OK, I'm done beating this dead horse.
 
#65
capnsandwich said:
Yeah, I don't see this as an insurance policy but, rather, a community service. You should never have to "pay a fee" for a community service. You don't pay for police protection. You pay taxes that cover it. Why is firefighting any different than police protection? If you were growing pot on your property they'd be all over you. But, because you had a fire, they wash their hands because of $75 they hadn't received.

OK, I'm done beating this dead horse.
Click to expand...

Isn't it a different county that has the fire department? Unless I am reading the story wrong...
 
#67
Okay, my cousin is a volunteer Fire Chief. He installs a lot of 'free' smoke detectors/batteries for the elderly during his personal time.
However, I am uncomfortable with the idea of his-sticking his neck out for someone that doesn't agree with required fees
to support the service.

It is a service, and one that most of us like to take for granted...
 
#75
PSPookie said:
Which was probably the point.

I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find out that there was a closed-door, off-the-record committee meeting where someone suggested: "Let a house burn down and watch the fee checks come rolling in."
Click to expand...

Well, now that the community has seen that they plan to hold to their side of the agreement, who's to say they won't use this same fire to raise the rates to $125 or more? It's so crooked. I can just see this spinning in a worse direction.
 
#76
If he refused or forgot to pay, it's a cut and dry "he got what he deserved" from my point of view. I don't waiver on that thought and if someone had died, well, that's just tragically sad but I don't give a flying crap. Tough lesson, sorry. Things like that I WOULDN'T forget.

A little darwinism goes a long way in my book.

The world isn't free and everyone isn't entitled to what I CAN pay for and other's CAN'T. I work hard, I pay for things and some of what my taxes pay for tick me off but that's where I have the power in my vote. There are things I can't afford but I'm not entitled to them. We all sit somewhere on the spectrum.

In San Diego the taxes are probably going up to help pay for services like the Fire/Police Dept. If I can be sure that it will indeed go towards that funding, I'm 100% all for it. If they want to increase my parcel tax on my land to help pay for it, I'm ok. If they send me a bill to cover my house, I'll pay. I didn't say I was happy about it, but if that's what it takes.

If I COULDN'T afford it, oh well, sounds like it's up to me to work harder to make that happen if I want it.
 
#77
6jase5 said:
If he refused or forgot to pay, it's a cut and dry "he got what he deserved" from my point of view. I don't waiver on that thought and if someone had died, well, that's just tragically sad but I don't give a flying crap. Tough lesson, sorry. Things like that I WOULDN'T forget.

A little darwinism goes a long way in my book.

The world isn't free and everyone isn't entitled to what I CAN pay for and other's CAN'T. I work hard, I pay for things and some of what my taxes pay for tick me off but that's where I have the power in my vote. There are things I can't afford but I'm not entitled to them. We all sit somewhere on the spectrum.

In San Diego the taxes are probably going up to help pay for services like the Fire/Police Dept. If I can be sure that it will indeed go towards that funding, I'm 100% all for it. If they want to increase my parcel tax on my land to help pay for it, I'm ok. If they send me a bill to cover my house, I'll pay. I didn't say I was happy about it, but if that's what it takes.

If I COULDN'T afford it, oh well, sounds like it's up to me to work harder to make that happen if I want it.
Click to expand...
Working hard for money to pay for taxes? Sounds unfair. :ninja:
 
#79
6jase5 said:
If he refused or forgot to pay, it's a cut and dry "he got what he deserved" from my point of view. I don't waiver on that thought and if someone had died, well, that's just tragically sad but I don't give a flying crap. Tough lesson, sorry. Things like that I WOULDN'T forget.

A little darwinism goes a long way in my book.

The world isn't free and everyone isn't entitled to what I CAN pay for and other's CAN'T. I work hard, I pay for things and some of what my taxes pay for tick me off but that's where I have the power in my vote. There are things I can't afford but I'm not entitled to them. We all sit somewhere on the spectrum.

In San Diego the taxes are probably going up to help pay for services like the Fire/Police Dept. If I can be sure that it will indeed go towards that funding, I'm 100% all for it. If they want to increase my parcel tax on my land to help pay for it, I'm ok. If they send me a bill to cover my house, I'll pay. I didn't say I was happy about it, but if that's what it takes.

If I COULDN'T afford it, oh well, sounds like it's up to me to work harder to make that happen if I want it.
Click to expand...
since essential services are likely subsidized by state and federal taxes,and fire trucks i consider essential services,i find the conduct of the fire crew despicable.....surely any decent human being would at least try to help someone in a situation like that,fee paid or not.....an insurance claim after the fact and watching someone's home and animals go up in flames is an apples bowling balls comparison.....
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back