RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee

RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

hertz -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 1:39:55 PM)
Question from a European... What is wrong with having a fire service paid for from property taxes which must be paid by anyone who owns a property? Why would that be so offensive, given that it would stop this sort of issue arising and ensure the fire service is as well-funded as possible?

calamitysandra -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 2:04:30 PM)
Pahunk, you truly are a nasty piece of work. Considering all you have admitted on this boards, starting with not being able to pay bills, because you prefer to invest in your silver hoarding delusion, over skimping on the quality of the food and care your pets get, and not even coming close to ending with you fucking married men, you really have the gall to call a family you do know next to nothing about trash? You feel you are in a position to malign them and accuse them of things like burning tires? If the silver price was just ever so tempting the day the bill landed in your box, you could have been the one whose house burned down due to non payment. Reading your posts on this thread, it is quite clear who the true piece of trash is. And another European going DUH! Fire-fighters are among the things/services/persons that should really be paid for with taxes. It is a matter of public safety, skipping the payment should not be possible.

pahunkboy -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 2:50:31 PM)
LOL. Well- my family does not have a history of house fires. Nice of you to tack on $5 a month when a family might not even have the money to pay for the utility. Gotta love this. Man sets his house on fire- and his son assaults the fire chief and the same family had a house fire 2 years ago. They did not pay till the next day then- and did not pay now. LOL. Every family could be this as an example.

Aylee -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 2:59:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hertz Question from a European... What is wrong with having a fire service paid for from property taxes which must be paid by anyone who owns a property? Why would that be so offensive, given that it would stop this sort of issue arising and ensure the fire service is as well-funded as possible? Much of it has to do with the size of the US versus the size of European countries as well as what is supposed to be taken care of at Federal levels, state levels, county levels, and township and city levels.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:01:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: hertz Question from a European... What is wrong with having a fire service paid for from property taxes which must be paid by anyone who owns a property? Why would that be so offensive, given that it would stop this sort of issue arising and ensure the fire service is as well-funded as possible? Much of it has to do with the size of the US versus the size of European countries as well as what is supposed to be taken care of at Federal levels, state levels, county levels, and township and city levels. key words: supposed to be. "what a beautiful world this will be what a glorious time to be free" if they only got back to whats supposed to be

hertz -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:04:02 PM)
quote: Nice of you to tack on $5 a month when a family might not even have the money to pay for the utility. But isn't the whole point of this thread that the person the story is about didn't pay, and as a result he lost his home? If someone can't pay $5 a month towards their own protection, what other means of paying it do they have? Essentially, you are now lumping the poverty-stricken in with this guy, and suggesting that if they can't afford to pay the bill, and their home catches fire, then tough luck. Personally, I'd sooner someone made me prioritise my own interests by forcing me to pay than abandon me in my hour of need. Hell, if push came to shove, one might even be able to do some sort of means test to release people from the obligation to pay in situations of extreme hardship, whilst ensuring they get still help when they need it. This is kind of what we do in the UK (last bastion of socialism, I know!).

hertz -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:07:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee Much of it has to do with the size of the US versus the size of European countries... I hadn't thought of that. Of course, if you are 100 miles or more from the nearest sizeable settlement, then a fire service is not really an option.

FirmhandKY -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:18:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you Well it seems the Fire Chief in the area does not agree with the fee based fire protection, seems the Fire Chief should be someone they listen to. Union City Fire Department Chief Kelly Edmison objects to the new expansion, saying that “the best option is a true fire tax. It eliminates this having 911 or whoever check to say, ‘Are they covered or not covered?’ The last thing a firefighter wants to do is to not be able to help when they’d like to.” According to documents prepared by the county in 2008, a paltry 0.13 cent increase in property taxes on each household would be all it would take to fund fire services for the towns within the county. The expansion he is talking about concerns last night vote to expand the area where they have to pay a fee. If you click on the link for the tax increase you will read this in the first paragraph "no other life saving service is fee based on ability to pay or threat of non service if you do not pay, counties will be called upon to provide a higher levels of fire protection ..... so it seems they are collecting the money and they dumping the responsibility on the county to protect those who can't or did not pay It was the South Fulton Fire Department which responded, not the Union City Fire Department. Tazzy linked to the pdf file which contained the complete plan to provide county wide fire services, and I quoted it at length directly above, from which your quote about the fee originated. You are incorrect about "they" (the City of South Fulton?) collecting a fee, and then not providing service. It appears to me that the County is free loading off the Cities within the county. The county passed an ordance decades ago to establish a County Fire Department, but then did not fund or man it. The cities seem to have taken up the slack, by allowing the extension of their city fire departments outside of the actual cities, if a county resident was willing to pay the subscription fee. The County is aware of all the issues, had a detailed analysis of all the issues (costs, training, coverage, etc) two years ago. And choose to do nothing. Firm

pahunkboy -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:24:02 PM)
Firm-- surely there are other out of the area fire companies. They could offer service in any capacity- free- less then $75 or x $. Was this the ONLY fire company who was allowed by law to respond? As far as that goes- a neighbor could not come to the aid? Using the garden hose on the burn barrel? This issue has alot to do with open burning of rubbish. Such should not be allowed in a residential area. The site is improper- how old is the grandson who manned the fire? Where is children and youth for neglect?

FirmhandKY -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:29:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Firm-- surely there are other out of the area fire companies. They could offer service in any capacity- free- less then $75 or x $. Was this the ONLY fire company who was allowed by law to respond? As far as that goes- a neighbor could not come to the aid? Using the garden hose on the burn barrel? This issue has alot to do with open burning of rubbish. Such should not be allowed in a residential area. The site is improper- how old is the grandson who manned the fire? Where is children and youth for neglect? Lots of questions, pahunk. Whether or not another fire department could or would respond depends entirely on the agreements and relationships between them, and the local governments. I can't answer that question. I also do not know the burn laws there. That might have an impact. I don't know the age of the grandson. Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:34:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY It was a pretty effective department, which also required County citizens to pay a minimal subscription fee, to help offset the costs of the Counties funding. This is where your utopia ran off the rails. WTF are you talking about? quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH Nobody is saying that rural county residents should be paying enough taxes to establish a rural fire service of its own, but it should be paying enough taxes to contract with a municipal fire department for that department to provide services to rural country residents. Sounds good to me. quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH You dont need to pay taxes to duplicate an entire fire department, only pay enough to get the services of an existing department during time periods that would otherwise be 'idle time' for them. That's getting a good bang for the rural resident's buck. And this is what your county property taxes should be paying for, without resorting to the act of billing individuals a separate fee. I've never said that an entire duplicate fire department should be required. But whether and how fire coverage should be provided should be a local decision. I was just giving an example of how one city/county provided fire service to all of it's citizens and did so effectively, in a tri-partnership of local governments, volunteers, and paid employees. The Obion County proposed combined all the local fire departments, increased it's stations and funding to completely cover all of the county and all of the cities. I really don't think you read much of the details being discussed here. Firm

pahunkboy -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:38:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hertz quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee Much of it has to do with the size of the US versus the size of European countries... I hadn't thought of that. Of course, if you are 100 miles or more from the nearest sizeable settlement, then a fire service is not really an option. LOL. That is true of Montana, Nevada, and some western states. TN- less so. Tho there are boonies. Having lived in the boonies- the roads have no names- make no sense- Maybe the city will insist to incorporate the outlying areas. That opens a whole new can of worms. And exposes them to the taxes and regulations that those in town must adhere to. Most live out of town as to get away from regulations.

FirmhandKY -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 3:47:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH quote: Those condemning the FD in this case should simply acknowledge that they do not possess sufficient knowledge to make a judgment. Perhaps talking to some of your local fire departments would be enlightening. The International Association of Firefighters has condemned the local fire department involved in this. Im pretty sure they have the knowledge to make a judgment.. http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/International-Association-of-Fire-Fighters-condemns-local-department-104392079.html And you would be incorrect. Or at least failing to understand the politics, and the history of fire fighting organizations. As I linked to before, the IAFF is a UNION, and a for profit corporation (or at least closely tied to a for profit corporation). They have their own agenda. You are committing a basic logical fallacy of "attribution to authority", and failing to understand all the issues. IAFC is a more professional organization. Firm

pahunkboy -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 4:01:10 PM)
Alex - never said a word about this. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

tazzygirl -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/6/2010 9:00:41 PM)
~FR By: Chris Menees, Staff Reporter Posted: Tuesday, October 5, 2010 1:07 pm By CHRIS MENEES Staff Reporter An interlocal agreement for county-wide fire pro-tection that has been two years in the making is being sent to the Obion County Commission for a vote. The Obion County Bud-get Committee voted at its session Monday morning at the Obion County Court-house to send the Interlocal Agreement for County Wide Fire Protection to the full commission for a vote when it convenes Oct. 18. The lengthy and detailed agreement was presented to the budget committee by fire committee vice chairman Tim Doyle, who explained the committee met as recently as last week and “tweaked it a little.” The agreement would be among the communities of Hornbeak, Kenton, Obion, Rives, Samburg, Troy and Union City, as well as the Obion County Emergency Communications District (E-911) as the fire dispatch agency for all municipalities in the agreement and Obion County. The municipalities named would agree to provide rural fire service outside of their established town and city limits and would agree to expand their rural fire service areas as indicated on a map which defines the areas in which the present municipal fire departments provide rural fire protection. Each municipality would agree to implement a standard subscription rate, with individual properties classified by a parcel number as listed on the county tax assessor’s map/tax card and a separate subscription fee to be charged for each parcel/address for which the customer desires to have rural fire protection coverage. According to the pro-posed agreement, South Fulton intends to provide rural fire service outside its city limits as directed by its city commission in a designated fire service area and would not be a party to the interlocal agreement. Doyle said the first year of implementing the program would be the most difficult as groundwork is laid, but he said it should become much easier the second year. “I think we have set up a good thing,” he said. Commissioner Ralph Puckett made the motion to send the agreement from the budget committee to the county commission for a vote. His motion was seconded by commissioner Dwayne Hensley, who said he noticed a lot of cooperation among members when he attended a fire committee meeting. If approved, the projected date of implementing the agreement would be July 1, 2011. The issue of county-wide fire protection has made local, regional and even national news in recent days in the aftermath of a rural South Fulton fire where firefighters from a municipal fire department could not respond because the property owner had not paid an annual rural fire subscription fee. Ironically, the issue of county-wide fire protection resurfaced and discussion of an agreement began a little over two years ago following a similar rural fire situation near South Fulton. http://www.nwtntoday.com/news.php?viewStory=46976 At least some good is coming out of this.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/7/2010 12:19:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: calamitysandra Pahunk, you truly are a nasty piece of work. ... over skimping on the quality of the food and care your pets get, Is this true?

Aylee -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/7/2010 12:52:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: hertz Question from a European... What is wrong with having a fire service paid for from property taxes which must be paid by anyone who owns a property? Why would that be so offensive, given that it would stop this sort of issue arising and ensure the fire service is as well-funded as possible? Much of it has to do with the size of the US versus the size of European countries as well as what is supposed to be taken care of at Federal levels, state levels, county levels, and township and city levels. key words: supposed to be. "what a beautiful world this will be what a glorious time to be free" if they only got back to whats supposed to be Will. . . fire safety is not in the US Constitution. Sometimes it is in States Constitutions. Other times it is in County or City Charters. I am trying to be inclusive on why a European model does not work so well in the US. Throw me a bone for peace sake, instead of degenerate me. Yes I am sure that we all wished that things worked as well as the models. Uncle Joe would be much happier, after all.

Owner59 -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/7/2010 3:13:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Firm-- surely there are other out of the area fire companies. They could offer service in any capacity- free- less then $75 or x $. Was this the ONLY fire company who was allowed by law to respond? As far as that goes- a neighbor could not come to the aid? Using the garden hose on the burn barrel? This issue has alot to do with open burning of rubbish. Such should not be allowed in a residential area. The site is improper- how old is the grandson who manned the fire? Where is children and youth for neglect? The guy stood there with an open check book screaming he would pay the damm money and still they watched it burn. What would have they done if people were in that building?Watch them burn too?!! How much to save them? Folks,this is also a textbook example of "small government" republicanism at work. Low/no taxes and no/low services. These fuck`n cons want to "privatize" every gov. service possible.From social security,the military,the post office and medicare all the way down to the local FD and EMTs. You guys want to see what a no/low tax-no/low service nation looks like,google Calcutta.

thishereboi -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/7/2010 4:37:31 AM)
I was wondering when you would be by to claim this is another example of Right=bad and left=good. You may be a bigot, but at least you are consistent.

EternalHoH -> RE: LET IT BURN?!? Firefighters Watch Home Go Up In Flames Over $75 Fee (10/7/2010 5:26:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY But whether and how fire coverage should be provided should be a local decision. The problem with this approach is it allows too many crackpots, tightwads, and idiots to enter the equation. That is the problem with our country, crackpots and idiots are abundant, and they are no longer doing 'the adult thing'. This entire clusterfuck of an episode, right down to how they design their fire protective services, had local crackpots and cheapskates written all over it. In transportation circles, there is a certain order that is followed whenever different modes of transportation intersect each other. Pedestrians yield to automobiles, not the other way around. Pedestrians and automobiles both yield to trains, trains do not stop for cars or people. Pedestrians, autos, and trains always yield to ships. Trains may be big and heavy, but they are easier to stop than a boat dropping anchor. Every time a rail or highway bridge is built over a navigable waterway, or rail-highway crossing is built, this is the premise behind the design. This is how the adults involved in civil engineering and transportation planning do things. If they dont want the highway traffic on the interstate to be stopped for drawbridge openings due to the river, then you build that road bridge high enough so it clears the ship. That bigger bridge costs more taxpayer dollars, for sure, but that's how the adults do things. Can you imagine the social chaos if this premise was allowed to be altered on the local level when the crackpots and cheapskates enter the picture? Can you imagine local municipalities insisting trains yield to cars and pedestrians at rail-highway crossings? Can you imagine a local municiplaity dictating that the drawbridge over the waterway on the interstate highway remain closed through rush hour, even if the ship might collide with the bridge? This country has more than its share of idiots demanding local empowerment, but has a definite shortage of adult behavior.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625