Cold Front

[AyumiAmakusa]

EDIT: Removed because my opinions make me sound like an uncaring jerk.

[Kiranselie]

Only in emergencies must they treat you.

Google 'can hospitals refuse treatment if you have no money' and see for yourself.

I dont know how it is where you live, but in the state I live in, A hospital can not refuse any service to any person if the hospital receives 1 dollar of state funding.

95% of the hospitals in this state receives state funding.

[Gunga]

A hospital cannot refuse to treat a person because they cannot pay.


The message the fire department sent was not a "necessary" messgae. It was the wrong message. The person in question offered to cover the entire cost of the operation if they put out the fire. That alone sends the message that it is better to pay the annual fee versus a service call charge whicj could cpst thousands of dollars.

What they did was completely unacceptable. That you cannot see that is mind boggling.

and No, i dont believe you really do feel sorry for those people. If you did you wouldnt have written the drivel that you did.




_

It's nice for you to think that the world works this way, some people might even call it innocent or optimistic, but I don't share this view of the world. The ONLY way society works is if MOST of the people work together. That means that if there is a price to pay for your fire dept, make sure you pay or burn.

[Gunga]

I dont know how it is where you live, but in the state I live in, A hospital can not refuse any service to any person if the hospital receives 1 dollar of state funding.

95% of the hospitals in this state receives state funding.

You do understand that the number one reason for bankruptcy in America is healthcare, right? No matter what state you're in, it ain't free.

[cpito]

You do understand that the number one reason for bankruptcy in America is healthcare, right? No matter what state you're in, it ain't free.

Of course it's not free, silly! Those who can pay shell out $8.50 for two 10 cent asprin so those who can't (or would rather buy a 50" tv) can get it for free.

[Wizzly_Bear]

If you don't want to contribute to a society/organization/fire department, don't be surprised when they don't want to contribute to you. That is all.

[Kiranselie]

You do understand that the number one reason for bankruptcy in America is Overpriced healthcare, right? No matter what state you're in, it ain't free.

Fixed!

[RodneyT]

This whole situation sucks. If they didn't want to put out the fire...., then why drive out there and then say no. Uncompaasionate jackasses if u ask me. And that's coming from a staunch right winger

[Irinis]

All of these responses are humorous, especially the contradictory ones. Please remember that the world is maya, and we have nothing to worry about. Then such trifling concerns (either for the sad state of bad firefighters or the sad state of bad country folk abusing the system) can all be set aside as immaterial, and we can all move on as one towards what is really important.

Yes, playing DDO and getting loot that is even more immaterial than the illusionary "real" world we pretend to live in!

[cpito]

then why drive out there and then say no. Uncompaasionate jackasses if u ask me. And that's coming from a staunch right winger

because the guy who burned trash in his yard and set his own house of fire also endangered the property of the people next door who HAD paid thier $75 dollar opt-in fee. They didn't respond to the fire itself, they responded to the poor neighbor.

[suitepotato]

This is an example of putting a petty principle ahead of a moral duty. People can argue all they like, but the duty of a community is to the maintenance of itself, and that means the peace and stability of itself most centrally. Allowing a fire to destroy a man's home sunders that peace and stability as willfully as lighting it themselves. In the name of their petty commitment to being in the right, they put themselves in the worst wrong possible.

The proper course of action would have been to fight the fire and charge the $75 through proper civil court channels afterward. Anything else is venality at its worst because they make clear that their human dignity, which is in many ways defined by how they listen to and act on their conscience, is open only to the highest bidder.

[krtkoo]

This is interesting topic indeed and so are the opinions in this thread - but why is this in Ghallanda? I think it belongs to Off-Topic chat.

[ThatLukeGuy]

This is an example of putting a petty principle ahead of a moral duty. People can argue all they like, but the duty of a community is to the maintenance of itself, and that means the peace and stability of itself most centrally. Allowing a fire to destroy a man's home sunders that peace and stability as willfully as lighting it themselves. In the name of their petty commitment to being in the right, they put themselves in the worst wrong possible.

The proper course of action would have been to fight the fire and charge the $75 through proper civil court channels afterward. Anything else is venality at its worst because they make clear that their human dignity, which is in many ways defined by how they listen to and act on their conscience, is open only to the highest bidder.

The proglem is if they do it that way, then nobody pays unless there is an actual fire. Now the fire department is not getting any funding from these people except for a fire here or there. When is the last time you paid car insurance only when you had an accident? Truth is we all pay every month. That's how that works.

The fire department is from another city. They cannot allow themselves to service rural communities for funsies when they have a legal and moral obligation to protect the denizens of that town/city whose taxes help fund them unless the rural community pays too. If there had been people inside that house you better believe the firefighters would have tried to save them. But if you are greedy enough to not pay the fee/tax/whatever to get firefighting coverage (fire insurance if you like to call it that way), and then you set your house on fire through negligence (btw the owner of the home says in the TV interview that he "really thought if I didn't pay they'd come and put it out anyways" so don't think he wasn't trying to game the system), then you will end up paying for your adult decision one way or another.

Seriously guys it wasn't people burning to death here, it was some idiots gambling their home away and then being sad that they didn't get a freebie. Idiocy on their part.

EDIT: changed some things after rereading to not be so inflamatory and still get my point across.

[Chatuyscha]

Another dane dropping a line here.

The story in the OP reminds me of two things from the big book of human knowledge.

Utilitarism, where the value of an action is set by the value for the whole, not for the single individual.

More on utilitarism here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism

The other thing from the big book is the freerider from economical theory. Freerider is the individual not willing to contribute to to a good that can be used by all.

More on it here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freerider_dilemma

As mentioned earlier, we do things a little different here in Denmark. To avoid freerider dilemmas most of our common goods are paid over our taxes. This leads to relatively higher taxes, but ensures certain goods/services to all members of the society like police, healthcare, firefighting, schools etc.

I not interested in starting any discussions on what model/way to do things, is the best. Thats a Question about political belief, and that discussion dont belong on this forum.

[Jacket]

"In God we trust, all others pay cash."

[Gunga]

Fixed!

No doubt, the cost of healthcare is bloated. Though the guy in the OP thought that the Fire Dept. cost was unreasonable as well.

[Pape_27]

It's nice for you to think that the world works this way, some people might even call it innocent or optimistic, but I don't share this view of the world. The ONLY way society works is if MOST of the people work together. That means that if there is a price to pay for your fire dept, make sure you pay or burn.

That's a very black/white view of the world.

This situation is akin to black mail by a quasi-governmental institution. Pay up or else. I live in a community where all the fire protection is provided by volunteers. So their first response to a fire should be "have they paid their fire tax yet?" I'm sorry, it's not naive nor an overly optimistic view point to think that if you are in a position to help someone that you should. Especially when a catastrophic event is occurring.

The one question i would ask is what would that fire department have done if someone was in the building? Would they still have refused to help because the guy didn't pay his $75? Based on yours and other responses, it would have been an appropriate course of action. As some point rational thinking has to come into play.


_

[Pape_27]

EDIT: Removed because my opinions make me sound like an uncaring jerk.

Too late.

[Samadhi]

Yes, playing DDO and getting loot that is even more immaterial than the illusionary "real" world we pretend to live in!

Cheers.

[crazy7381]

I can understand being upset if someone was in the house and nothing was done but to be carelessly buring trash and the its gets out of control you then relize hey my garden hose isnt helping I'll call the fire dpt even though I dont pay they have to put it out...right?! Negative, he took the risk because of where he lives to not pay. These brave firefighters who would risk there lives for free!? come out and watch it burn even the military won't let people risk there lives for free. So rather than save his house they let it burn now he has to deal with the insurance company and lets hope he didnt skimp out on that too.

I would consider this along the same lines as having a smoke detector it all boils down to how invested are you in your and your families personal safety.

Sorry my condolences however that is the price for a capitalistic society the piper must be paid.