• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Firefighters let a home burn down because $75 fee wasn't paid!

Page 28 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Zorkorist said:
As should we all... but in the case that we are unprepared, or stupid, then Government helps us out, with Fire and Police Protection.

Should he have had mortars, bazookas, and tanks, so he is prepared for when the Police Department abandons him?

-John
Click to expand...

It is your right to have your own weapons to defend yourself if you choose, within reason.
 
Zorkorist said:
Have you ever faced a loss?

A loss hurts, and it may hurt to degrees, but losing a home is one of the worst losses I can think of.

-John
Click to expand...

Heh - many. Very few things rank up there with a raping of my wife and the loss of material possessions doesn't rank anywhere near those
 
alkemyst said:
Not all fire departments are public/government. Many are privatized...especially here. Almost all our EMT/Paramedic/Ambulance services are private.

They still may show up as a millage on property taxes whether or not privately-owned or government-owned.
Click to expand...
Yet, you are taxed.

So good for you, you went to extraordinary measures to protect yourself.

This man did not, and he deserves the protection that most of us pay taxes for.

Not ridicule. Not predjudice. But protection.

-John
 
Exterous said:
Heh - many. Very few things rank up there with a raping of my wife and the loss of material possessions doesn't rank anywhere near those
Click to expand...
Well fine. I'm not going to argue this, other than what I have already done which is to state it.

-John
 
Zorkorist said:
Yet, you are taxed.

So good for you, you went to extraordinary measures to protect yourself.

This man did not, and he deserves the protection that most of us pay taxes for.

Not ridicule. Not predjudice. But protection.

-John
Click to expand...

What happened is one of the purest form of democracy I can think of. First, the county put it to a vote to see if people wanted to have their taxes rise to pay for increased services. The people of that area voted no. Then the residents were given the option to obtain fire protection themselves for a reasonable fee. This man chose not to.

True democracy gives people a choice on what services they want and how they will be funded, which is exactly what happens here.

I personally think that this is fine, the government should not choose what services it provides, the people that are affected should decide. I believe it is a person's right to decide to forgo some protection if they so choose. I also believe that anyone given a reasonable chance that rejected that protection should have to deal with the consequences.
 
Pay as you go?

One reason we choose a representative Government, is so that we don't have to vote on every little issue.

Or actually run out and protect any individual that has failed to pay his tax.

-John
 
Lol Zork is the biggest troll of the year. I have never seen a single user argue against an entire crowd of anandtech posters for 28 pages before.

I find it hard to believe that Zork actually believes what he says as most of his posts doesn't make sense. You could cut off his arm and he'd argue with you that it's a flesh wound. He's that stubborn.
 
That's not the way it works.

I can't opt out of taxes, and neither can you.

We both pay for this man's fire protection, like it or not.

-John
 
Zorkorist said:
That's not the way it works.

I can't opt out of taxes, and neither can you.

We both pay for this man's fire protection, like it or not.

-John
Click to expand...

The county that this dumbass lived, voted to not have fire protection. Obviously, your brain is too small to understand.

No, we don't pay for this man's fire protection b/c it's not a government right at the national or local level. STFU and get a clue. Stop trolling. You sound like a perfect fit over in P&N. Go there and don't come back.
 
Last edited:
BoberFett said:
And if you had any reading comprehension at all, you'd know that federal law prohibits a fire department from billing more than $500. And for this particular fire department, they tried billing people the $500 and only half of the people they put fires out for actually paid. That's why they put the $75 prepay into place. Because deadbeats expect something for nothing. Don't want your house to burn? Don't be a deadbeat. It's that simple.
Click to expand...

Doesn't explain why it should be different here.
 
KaOTiK said:
wtf, i swear like a quarter of this dudes total post count must be in this thread alone.
Click to expand...

Probably why this thread is still alive.

Fire protection isn't a constitutional right. I'm sure they FD would have loved to put that fire out, but if they did that then nobody would pay for fire protection and they would lose money. Then guess what? Nobody gets fire protection.

It's a cruel world. Shit happens. Live and learn and move on.
 
Just on a human level the firefighters should have put the fucking house out. FFS, who can argue against that?
Do unto others and all that bullshit the bible belt likes to regurgitate. Walk the walk you stupid hick fucks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top