Posted on 02/16/2006 3:52:53 PM PST by LouAvul
Edited on 02/16/2006 6:43:01 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
I misunderstood, I thought you meant you spent $450,000 on your house city boy..... :^)
New ladder trucks can run as high as $750,000 dollars.
I have no doubt they can, but you are talking an old retired red truck in my area (no fancy lime green ones!). We have 4 firetrucks, always have fund raisers when the $20 a year is due and everyone there carries a cell at their own expense and leaves their jobs (unpaid) when the call is made.
I have no involvement other than to pay the $20 and have never been to the fundraisers. All I can say is, I trust them and know they are doing everything they can on the $40,000 budget a year they have. As I posted before, everyone gets a letter stating you either pay the $20 or your house will burn down providing there is no danger to life. I must admit, I have yet to see them do that in my town but I would never, ever blame them if they did.
And again, I must say if you've never lived in the country, you probably shouldn't. Your $450,000 trucks don't happen here. There are many poor people who would not be able to pay the taxes required. We are happy to pay our $20 and if we don't, we know what could happen. You may think our life sucks but I think it's 100 times better than yours.
The fire department is not a government provided service in this area. They voted down a government tax based system in 2001. Maybe the Hispanics helped vote it down, I don't know.
When the Constitution of our nation says the government has the duty to protect us, the government does not have the right to reject service to a citizen.
It is their RESPONSIBILITY to American citizens.
Not just to the upper crust of society.
I find it rather odd you are saying the government should treat us with capitalism. Capitalism is a good economic system. It does not mean the government has the right to pick and choose who is protected.
Federal Civil Rights lawsuits are a lottery.
I would be tempted to vote for very large damages here.
If it is a private service, obviously they do not have to play by the same rules.
I guess I did not understand that it was private.
I would be tempted to vote for very large damages here.
Then your kinda on the wrong web site...
You said, in part: There are such things as moral right and wrong. Morally what they did was wrong.
***
I hate the result here, but some of the thinking on this thread is hopelessly liberal, and short-sighted. The thinking of those who would save this guy's property is exemplary of liberals who are willing to let guilty criminals go free because of a bad upbringing, or give money to single mothers with 5 or 6 kids "because they need it" when to do so does nothing but encourage more of the same irresponsible behavior. People are watching. People learn, quickly, how to game the system.
Why not make it clear in the policy: Listen folks, we'd like you to pay, but we are telling you up front, if you don't pay, you still get the service-- or, you can pay when we arrive to put out the fire-- or not, because we don't want to be thought of as mean-spirited, even if you don't pay when we show up, we STILL will provide the service. Many will still pay because it is the right thing to do, but many, probably most, will not, because they don't "have to."
Look at church giving. We don't demand donations at church, much less tithing. You still get to hear the sermon and the music. You still get communion, and heat in the winter, a/c in the summer. That's the deal churches make on the front end. And anyone who has reviewed church finances knows that 20% of the members give more than 80% of the offering.
"Not just to the upper crust of society."
So, in your opinion, anybody who can pay more than $20/YEAR is "upper crust of society"? LOL....some definition you have there.
"I find it rather odd you are saying the government should treat us with capitalism. Capitalism is a good economic system. It does not mean the government has the right to pick and choose who is protected."
I think enough people have pointed out that the community is question refused a tax-based fire service. This was an all-volunteer fire dept. and not some government agency. What part of this distinction DON'T you get?
Do you not think the US Constitution was in place during the 1800s? Where is it in the Constitution that the separate and sovereign states were required to provide fire or police services? How is it that fire companies and police companies were fully implemented by some cities? Surely those men had a clear understanding of the role of the government.
I find it rather odd you are saying the government should treat us with capitalism. Capitalism is a good economic system. It does not mean the government has the right to pick and choose who is protected.
The government is not 'picking and choosing'. The government is returning a role that was originally understood by many to be a private company's business back to those businesses.
Even more fundamental to American political philosophy than the Constitution is the notion of self-rule. This community CHOSE to have subscription-based fire services.
Probably:
Notifications by mail
Notification at the close for the house
If it is like our VFD, several widely publicized and heavily atttended fundraisers for the VFD.
Stories in the local newspaper.
Notification in the newspaper, etc.
Many of the people in retail in town are the firefighters and he probably knows 3 or 4.
I am not buying the story about not knowing how the system works.
"But, one of the functions of government....one of the very few legitimate functions of government in the Constitution...is TO PROTECT us, not just those who can afford a membership fee. "
It was NOT a function in the early days - private fire insurance brigades were the norm, and you would afix a plaque to your building signifying which company you were covered by.
http://www.northeasttimes.com/2003/1030/antiques.html
Government Mission Creep
I hardly think $20 a year is available only to the "upper crust".
I find it rather odd you are saying the government should treat us with capitalism. Capitalism is a good economic system. It does not mean the government has the right to pick and choose who is protected.
I think this is exactly the point, it's only $20 a year because the government is not involved. If the governement was, my town would have paid firefighters for our 5 fires a year (tops) and we would pay thousands in taxes. Truly, I think you must be a democrat, why must I pay thousands when I can only pay $20, why must I pay federal wages to someone who would sit on his butt 99% of the year when I have men who are happy to volunteer, not only unpaid but take off their jobs where they would be paid to perform this honorable service for the community? You make no sense to me especially for someone from Arkansas.
rw got it. See post 205.
It's not private, it's volunteer.
Isn't there a risk here that this would give a FD a financial incentive to start fires on non-member's properties? Crassus, rival to Pompey and Caesar in the Roman Republic, made a great fortune with a similar tactic.
Yep my dues are $35.00 a year.
A few years back, my old fire company sold an ambulance due for replacement to another company just starting up for two dollars.
The building they were using for an EMS substation had been donated by the survivor of the family who had owned it. The rest had been killed in an auto accident near there.
That, and the interest of volunters who trained to become fully qualified EMTs and others to do the administrative work, filled a gap in EMS in the area, cutting the response time in half for their first due area.
The fire companies, the community, everyone pulls together, with a few exceptions, but you are there for the exceptions, too.
Let me know when you pass your English boards ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.