Firefighters let home burn

[pauldun170]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot...logical-debate

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Particle Man

I wasn't talking about doing a credit check on the spot and then deciding to fight the fire

They charge him whatever hourly rate and then if he can't pay it, they take whatever other steps they'd need (collections, etc). People would probably still bitch about how "it's not fair that they charged him to save his house" but he'd at least have his pets and stuff.

Then they reposess his house and have a cool firefighter hang-out pad

Charging an "hourly rate" doesn't take into account the costs for the firefighters' down time when they have to be ready to respond, but aren't actually active.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by TYEster

Sure would if my job involved me saving lives of innocent animals and broken homes that have the potential to make decent contributing members to society. I mean I guess being a sales rep is the same as a civil servant and all....

You have yet to actually come up with an excuse as to why they failed to do their job that's not related to "money".

I don't need an excuse because they didn't fail to do their job. Their job is to fight fires for residents who have chosen to take advantage of their services, which is exactly what they did. You are putting some kind of moral imperative on the firefighters that, in this case, I'm just not seeing.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by goof2

I don't need an excuse because they didn't fail to do their job. Their job is to fight fires for residents who have chosen to take advantage of their services, which is exactly what they did. You are putting some kind of moral imperative on the firefighters that, in this case, I'm just not seeing.

There's an even easier way to look at it. The nearby town has a fire department. The county where he lives doesn't. The town's fire department contracted with SPECIFIC RESIDENTS of that county, to provide service. He didn't 'sign' the contract, so he doesn't get service.

It's not like he's within their normal service area and didn't get service.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Charging an "hourly rate" doesn't take into account the costs for the firefighters' down time when they have to be ready to respond, but aren't actually active.

It can when done right. Part of the reason why medical transport by helicopter is so expensive is the person being transported pays for a portion of downtime, maintenance, and all the other expenses that go along with having the helicopter. They don't just pay for the expenses related to their trip.

I already posted how I would guarantee payment. Put a lien on the property and deny building permits for repairs from the fire. If the lien isn't satisfied in a reasonable amount of time foreclose on the property.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

There's an even easier way to look at it. The nearby town has a fire department. The county where he lives doesn't. The town's fire department contracted with SPECIFIC RESIDENTS of that county, to provide service. He didn't 'sign' the contract, so he doesn't get service.

It's not like he's within their normal service area and didn't get service.

Sure, and this is bolstered by the article Paul posted that stated residents in this area couldn't get fire service at any price until 1990 when this system was implemented.

[azoomm]

Originally Posted by pauldun170

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot...logical-debate

Favorite post within that...

Here's an idea...let's have a universal fire fighting protection bill passed and force everyone in America to pay an additional $75 in taxes so this guy and every free loader can have fire protection. After all, I'm sure somewhere in the Contstitution we are gauranteed the right to federal fire protection.....No?

[KSGregman]

I was confused on the "pay to play " aspect of this story....I've not heard of that arrangement before. Every "community" I've ever lived in has taxed the residents living there, usually based on property, and used the proceeds to provide for "common services" like a public education, police and fire departments.

I guess that wasn't the case in this community....if a fee was required to be eligible for fire service and he didn't pay I guess he's fucked..but it still just seems like an odd way to go about providing "services" to that community.

[the chi]

In FL where I lived in town it was considered part of property taxes. I just learned from a co worker here in GA that they dont put it in property taxes but they bill you for the cost of fighting your fire, and put a lien on your property if you fail to pay it.

Living in town is waaaaaay different than living in a rural area tho. Like in this guys case, he wasnt part of a community, he lived in the boonies outside serviced areas.

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Charging an "hourly rate" doesn't take into account the costs for the firefighters' down time when they have to be ready to respond, but aren't actually active.

Originally Posted by goof2

It can when done right. Part of the reason why medical transport by helicopter is so expensive is the person being transported pays for a portion of downtime, maintenance, and all the other expenses that go along with having the helicopter. They don't just pay for the expenses related to their trip.

I already posted how I would guarantee payment. Put a lien on the property and deny building permits for repairs from the fire. If the lien isn't satisfied in a reasonable amount of time foreclose on the property.

What he said.