I'm using a $300 Samsung HDTV as my primary monitor. 1920*1200. It replaced my 1600*1200. I have no complaints, I just added 320 pixels on the side.
So I haven't lost any lines of code, and actually have gained some... You see, now some lines of code that WERE line wrapping now fit on line, that's a line gained.
I'm spoiled though because to the right I have my 'old' 1600*1200 LCD and to the left I have 2 22" 1920*1080 monitors. it's a lot of pixels.
pets fireman's life. Just ask the child of a dead firefighter.
Incidently, firefighters don't put out fires from the outside. If they fight it, they go in. There's no halfassing it.
If people can just pay the cost of the visit then everyone would choose to do so. At that point we're back to private fire departments. Look where that got us (private firefighters were becoming arsonists)
It's quite fucked up when you, AS AN ADULT choose not to pay something that's about.0001% the value of your house to keep it from burning down. If you don't think your shit is worth $75/year then WHY THE FUCK would a firefighter think it's worth their life?
My point is, when people came across on the mayflower, some little county in the middle of TN did not have coverage then. Coverages spread as people became dense enough to pool their money and pay for a fire department. SO here we are today and this community has decided it's not worth it for them to pay.
Should these communities continue to vote to not give THEMSELVES a fire department, should the national government be required to cover them? I should hope not.
And I don't think you're disagreeing with the spirit of my post, just adding more history, right?
I'd also like to add that in our free society people still have the ability to live wherever they want. There are 50 states to choose from, hot and cold, liberal or conservative, fire protection or no fire protection.
Some none free countries don't give you the ability to pack up and move somewhere you like better.
If you don't like the services that the people around you voted to provide, pack up and move to where there are more people like you. You're free to do that here. Enjoy.
Seems to me this guy isn't really one of the rednecks (disclaimer. I'm in alabama, roll tide)
We rednecks don't want the government programs. We don't want to pay more taxes. We want to fend for ourselves. If our house burns down and WE didn't take the necessary steps to prevent/mitigate it, then WE take responsibility for it.
This guy, is not representative of our views.
On the other hand, his fucking house burned down. He's pissed at himself for not paying the money. He's not going to be rational, he's just pissed and going to blame it at anyone and everyone.
Society is not $75,000 poorer. If this guy had a mortgage, he had homeowner's insurance. The insurance company is poorer but that's the point of insurance. If it didn't work that way, no one would get it.
You've posted a lot on this topic and so far I've agreed with everything you said, but I'm not sure service should be mandatory.
What's your opinion on fire coverage in ULTRA rural locations? Death Valley, Badlands, Yukon territory? Deep in the Smokey mountains of TN? If you say they are 'too rural' to bother covering, then where do you draw the line?
The way I see it, places like that can only be covered by a federal agency because they are SO sparsely populated the inhabitants couldn't afford to cover the cost of a FD.
And I don't think we should have a national fire department, who's job is to put out house fires. Sure, we have national agencies working on forest fires, but I don't see that as equal to a single house fire.
As an aside, there's a 99% chance the FD would have acted had lives been in danger.
If the people were inside, then it's an emergency. But no one's life was in danger, so now we're talking about a Fireman risking HIS life to save someone's crap that's probably already insured anyway.
Actually, it was the chief's call. So when two fireman die on this call what's the chief going to tell the firemen's little girls?
We sent your daddies in to save the shit of someone who didn't think their home was worth paying the fire fee?
And BTW, if you just try putting the fire out from the outside where it's safe, the house is still going to burn from the outside in. You have to go INTO the house to put it out.
If everyone only payed AFTER the fire (and everyone would) then there would be no budget for the fire department to run on. Sorry, but they have to get a way for people to pay ahead of time, or it's not 'insurance.'
The only way this scheme should work is if you added a line near that bottom that said $3000 Profit.
Only then could a system work where people paid for the service after the fact. That makes it a business model, and only then would a bank loan them money for a truck.
In a PERFECT WORLD your plan would work. But in this world that PROFIT line would have to cover the cost of idle fire fighters (between fires) their workers comp insurance and the lawyers to sue the people who didn't pay their bill.
When I bought my house the agent researched if there was a fire department serving my house. When he found out it was for pay, then he said that I need to either pay the fee or I can opt to pay more for insurance. I opted to pay the fee because it was about the same as the surcharge on the insurance.
Insurance companies already know about this and they charge more for those who don't pay or it's not available. They will LOOSE this battle if they sue because they're already charging the customer more because he has no coverage from a fire department.
Bank won't sue because they get their $ from the insurance company. If the house somehow ISN'T insured, which is rare because you pay your insurance costs with your mortgage bill, the bank will sue the homeowner. (PS. I work in this industry)
And I can assure you that had anyone been in the home they would have gotten them out. But this was a house, a physical asset of value, which Jesus has no love for. Jesus would NOT ask a fireman to risk his life to save the property of others. It now lies on the community to invite them in, cloth them and feed them.
Do more research before commenting. This was the nearest city's fire department. That city was extending their service to people out of their jurisdiction, but only for those who paid. They could have opted not to extend it to anyone, and not even respond to the call. And as for the $, no economy can survive by giving benefits to everyone in existence that doesn't pay. See the U.S. economy right now? It's not very healthy. Way too many entitlements (and a war or 2 doesn't help either)
The person was not in life or death peril. And as for the pets, tell the fireman's little girl that daddy died trying to save a socialists little kitty. I'm sure the kitty part will make it all ok.
signing a contract on the spot sounds good, but it would be waayyyy too easy to go bankrupt or have discharged. There are laws about signing a contract in duress, and it doesn't necessarily have to be the fireman putting you in duress. Your house burning down puts you in duress, ANYONE is going to sign it without thinking, and it's not going to hold up in court.
I like the lein idea better than trying to just charge them the $$ ahead of time.
But it still doesn't solve the problem of how to get a NEW fire department started with no $$ up front. No bank is going to lend you money to buy, even a heavily used, tanker/ladder/pumper if your business model is pay-per-fire. Chicken-egg problem. You can't buy a truck till you have some $$. Yuu can't put out a fire until you have a truck.
How rural does a place have to be to be not worth covering? Badlands of south dakota? Yukon Territory? Death Valley? All of these places are IN a county somewhere and I bet they don't have fire coverage. The population is sparse here that people that live in these places (and there are some) couldn't afford the tax associated with paying for a fire department.
Look at it this way, at some point, no where in the US had fire coverages. As municipalities sprung up they decided it was in their best interest to give their citizens a fire department, but they can only afford to cover a certain range. The areas not supported just haven't been reached yet because their population is not dense enough to support a fire department. The only way the badlands and death valley are ever going to get covered by a FD is if we have a federal FD. Well I for one think we have TOO MANY government programs we're paying for and do NOT want to be taxed so someone can be a hermit and have fire coverage.
I still don't think it's enough though. This $75 fee is effectively an insurance and it depends on everyone paying before they need coverage.
If he was allowed to pay 5 years in arrears + interest it's still going to be worth it for people to not pay up front. If ONE person gets away with this, EVERYONE (ok, 75%) is going to stop paying.
What people aren't considering is that the FD's insurance coverage more than likely prevents them from doing this. Insurance coverage for a fireman is a VERY critical part of being a fireman. If they respond to a call that doesn't meet what's spelled out in the policy and DIE, they could be denied coverage. I doubt that homeowner is willing to pay out $500k to a widow.
People choose to live in the county. Imagine if someone lived out in BFE North Dakoda. Do you know how much it would cost to cover every single dwelling out there? The population is so sparse NO ONE could afford to live there. A fire department is an entitlement people expect now. Live in the city, sure, you get a fire department, but in no way is a fire department when you live out in the middle of fucking nowhere a God given right.
Ok, good luck getting a binding sales contract signed when someone's house is burning down. Sure, ANYBODY is going to say Sure, I can pay it! But you can bet that anyone who doesn't have the money to pay the $75/year isn't going to have $7500 even if you do it over 10 years.
And guess what, fire departments pay a lot of money for disability/dismemberment insurance. In their policy they are bound to NOT service unnecessary calls, and these contracts have spelled out that people who don't pay first are considered unnecessary.
Agreed, this is why people move into the county to avoid paying those taxes. I live in the county myself, sales tax there is 1%+4% state. Cross into the city, you pay 5% city +county +state... over time that adds up. Don't forget property tax is higher in the city as well. So what happens when you don't pay as much taxes? You don't get trash pickup, you only get county police, you don't get some utilities, you don't get a lot of things, and in a lot of cases you don't get a fire dept. I'm lucky, there's a volunteer FD that supports my area. I pay $25. It's a lot cheaper than living in the city, but on the other hand, their pumper is 25 years old. Their latter truck is 40 years old. They're run by bubba and jimbo that are thankfully on call and live less than a mile from the station (aka shed) and they take turns being the on-call person.
As you can imagine, you get what you pay for. And those that don't pay don't bother to call bubba and jimbo.
This person lived outside of the city fire jurisdiction. The had been petitioned by the people in the county to extend their coverage, but since those people didn't want to incorporate as part OF the city, the city offered to agree to put out fires for people who wanted to pay the $75 fee. So, this is a service the city is doing for those that pay for it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm using a $300 Samsung HDTV as my primary monitor. 1920*1200. It replaced my 1600*1200. I have no complaints, I just added 320 pixels on the side.
So I haven't lost any lines of code, and actually have gained some... You see, now some lines of code that WERE line wrapping now fit on line, that's a line gained.
I'm spoiled though because to the right I have my 'old' 1600*1200 LCD and to the left I have 2 22" 1920*1080 monitors. it's a lot of pixels.
pets fireman's life. Just ask the child of a dead firefighter.
Incidently, firefighters don't put out fires from the outside. If they fight it, they go in. There's no halfassing it.
If people can just pay the cost of the visit then everyone would choose to do so. At that point we're back to private fire departments. Look where that got us (private firefighters were becoming arsonists)
It's quite fucked up when you, AS AN ADULT choose not to pay something that's about .0001% the value of your house to keep it from burning down. If you don't think your shit is worth $75/year then WHY THE FUCK would a firefighter think it's worth their life?
My point is, when people came across on the mayflower, some little county in the middle of TN did not have coverage then. Coverages spread as people became dense enough to pool their money and pay for a fire department. SO here we are today and this community has decided it's not worth it for them to pay.
Should these communities continue to vote to not give THEMSELVES a fire department, should the national government be required to cover them? I should hope not.
And I don't think you're disagreeing with the spirit of my post, just adding more history, right?
I'd also like to add that in our free society people still have the ability to live wherever they want. There are 50 states to choose from, hot and cold, liberal or conservative, fire protection or no fire protection.
Some none free countries don't give you the ability to pack up and move somewhere you like better.
If you don't like the services that the people around you voted to provide, pack up and move to where there are more people like you. You're free to do that here. Enjoy.
Seems to me this guy isn't really one of the rednecks (disclaimer. I'm in alabama, roll tide)
We rednecks don't want the government programs. We don't want to pay more taxes. We want to fend for ourselves. If our house burns down and WE didn't take the necessary steps to prevent/mitigate it, then WE take responsibility for it.
This guy, is not representative of our views.
On the other hand, his fucking house burned down. He's pissed at himself for not paying the money. He's not going to be rational, he's just pissed and going to blame it at anyone and everyone.
Society is not $75,000 poorer. If this guy had a mortgage, he had homeowner's insurance. The insurance company is poorer but that's the point of insurance. If it didn't work that way, no one would get it.
You've posted a lot on this topic and so far I've agreed with everything you said, but I'm not sure service should be mandatory.
What's your opinion on fire coverage in ULTRA rural locations? Death Valley, Badlands, Yukon territory? Deep in the Smokey mountains of TN? If you say they are 'too rural' to bother covering, then where do you draw the line?
The way I see it, places like that can only be covered by a federal agency because they are SO sparsely populated the inhabitants couldn't afford to cover the cost of a FD.
And I don't think we should have a national fire department, who's job is to put out house fires. Sure, we have national agencies working on forest fires, but I don't see that as equal to a single house fire.
As an aside, there's a 99% chance the FD would have acted had lives been in danger.
If the people were inside, then it's an emergency. But no one's life was in danger, so now we're talking about a Fireman risking HIS life to save someone's crap that's probably already insured anyway.
Actually, it was the chief's call. So when two fireman die on this call what's the chief going to tell the firemen's little girls?
We sent your daddies in to save the shit of someone who didn't think their home was worth paying the fire fee?
And BTW, if you just try putting the fire out from the outside where it's safe, the house is still going to burn from the outside in. You have to go INTO the house to put it out.
Protection money = insurance.
Insurance only works if people pay into the pool when they don't need to.
The moment they accept that $5000 everyone else stops paying into the pull and it all falls apart. No more budget for the FD.
Life is rough. $75 helps it not be so rough, IF YOU CHOOSE.
If everyone only payed AFTER the fire (and everyone would) then there would be no budget for the fire department to run on. Sorry, but they have to get a way for people to pay ahead of time, or it's not 'insurance.'
The only way this scheme should work is if you added a line near that bottom that said $3000 Profit.
Only then could a system work where people paid for the service after the fact. That makes it a business model, and only then would a bank loan them money for a truck.
In a PERFECT WORLD your plan would work. But in this world that PROFIT line would have to cover the cost of idle fire fighters (between fires) their workers comp insurance and the lawyers to sue the people who didn't pay their bill.
They won't sue.
When I bought my house the agent researched if there was a fire department serving my house. When he found out it was for pay, then he said that I need to either pay the fee or I can opt to pay more for insurance. I opted to pay the fee because it was about the same as the surcharge on the insurance.
Insurance companies already know about this and they charge more for those who don't pay or it's not available. They will LOOSE this battle if they sue because they're already charging the customer more because he has no coverage from a fire department.
Bank won't sue because they get their $ from the insurance company. If the house somehow ISN'T insured, which is rare because you pay your insurance costs with your mortgage bill, the bank will sue the homeowner. (PS. I work in this industry)
And it costs a LOT less to fix a flat than it does to put out a fire. Crawl back in your hole.
And I can assure you that had anyone been in the home they would have gotten them out. But this was a house, a physical asset of value, which Jesus has no love for. Jesus would NOT ask a fireman to risk his life to save the property of others. It now lies on the community to invite them in, cloth them and feed them.
Your passage is not analogous.
Human Life > Property
Do more research before commenting. This was the nearest city's fire department. That city was extending their service to people out of their jurisdiction, but only for those who paid. They could have opted not to extend it to anyone, and not even respond to the call. And as for the $, no economy can survive by giving benefits to everyone in existence that doesn't pay. See the U.S. economy right now? It's not very healthy. Way too many entitlements (and a war or 2 doesn't help either)
The story I read (not the linked article) was they sprayed down the neighbors house sufficiently to prevent damage.
The person was not in life or death peril. And as for the pets, tell the fireman's little girl that daddy died trying to save a socialists little kitty. I'm sure the kitty part will make it all ok.
I see what you did there. Pretty good. Very subtle, I like it.
signing a contract on the spot sounds good, but it would be waayyyy too easy to go bankrupt or have discharged. There are laws about signing a contract in duress, and it doesn't necessarily have to be the fireman putting you in duress. Your house burning down puts you in duress, ANYONE is going to sign it without thinking, and it's not going to hold up in court.
I like the lein idea better than trying to just charge them the $$ ahead of time.
But it still doesn't solve the problem of how to get a NEW fire department started with no $$ up front. No bank is going to lend you money to buy, even a heavily used, tanker/ladder/pumper if your business model is pay-per-fire. Chicken-egg problem. You can't buy a truck till you have some $$. Yuu can't put out a fire until you have a truck.
How rural does a place have to be to be not worth covering? Badlands of south dakota? Yukon Territory? Death Valley? All of these places are IN a county somewhere and I bet they don't have fire coverage. The population is sparse here that people that live in these places (and there are some) couldn't afford the tax associated with paying for a fire department.
Look at it this way, at some point, no where in the US had fire coverages. As municipalities sprung up they decided it was in their best interest to give their citizens a fire department, but they can only afford to cover a certain range. The areas not supported just haven't been reached yet because their population is not dense enough to support a fire department. The only way the badlands and death valley are ever going to get covered by a FD is if we have a federal FD. Well I for one think we have TOO MANY government programs we're paying for and do NOT want to be taxed so someone can be a hermit and have fire coverage.
I still don't think it's enough though. This $75 fee is effectively an insurance and it depends on everyone paying before they need coverage.
If he was allowed to pay 5 years in arrears + interest it's still going to be worth it for people to not pay up front. If ONE person gets away with this, EVERYONE (ok, 75%) is going to stop paying.
What people aren't considering is that the FD's insurance coverage more than likely prevents them from doing this. Insurance coverage for a fireman is a VERY critical part of being a fireman. If they respond to a call that doesn't meet what's spelled out in the policy and DIE, they could be denied coverage. I doubt that homeowner is willing to pay out $500k to a widow.
People choose to live in the county. Imagine if someone lived out in BFE North Dakoda. Do you know how much it would cost to cover every single dwelling out there? The population is so sparse NO ONE could afford to live there. A fire department is an entitlement people expect now. Live in the city, sure, you get a fire department, but in no way is a fire department when you live out in the middle of fucking nowhere a God given right.
Ok, good luck getting a binding sales contract signed when someone's house is burning down. Sure, ANYBODY is going to say Sure, I can pay it! But you can bet that anyone who doesn't have the money to pay the $75/year isn't going to have $7500 even if you do it over 10 years.
And guess what, fire departments pay a lot of money for disability/dismemberment insurance. In their policy they are bound to NOT service unnecessary calls, and these contracts have spelled out that people who don't pay first are considered unnecessary.
Agreed, this is why people move into the county to avoid paying those taxes. I live in the county myself, sales tax there is 1%+4% state. Cross into the city, you pay 5% city +county +state... over time that adds up. Don't forget property tax is higher in the city as well. So what happens when you don't pay as much taxes? You don't get trash pickup, you only get county police, you don't get some utilities, you don't get a lot of things, and in a lot of cases you don't get a fire dept. I'm lucky, there's a volunteer FD that supports my area. I pay $25. It's a lot cheaper than living in the city, but on the other hand, their pumper is 25 years old. Their latter truck is 40 years old. They're run by bubba and jimbo that are thankfully on call and live less than a mile from the station (aka shed) and they take turns being the on-call person.
As you can imagine, you get what you pay for. And those that don't pay don't bother to call bubba and jimbo.
This person lived outside of the city fire jurisdiction. The had been petitioned by the people in the county to extend their coverage, but since those people didn't want to incorporate as part OF the city, the city offered to agree to put out fires for people who wanted to pay the $75 fee. So, this is a service the city is doing for those that pay for it.