I can't believe we are debating a house being allowed to burn like this

[SargeUNN]

I find it hard to accept without feeling we are a much more cruel nation than I thought. Where is our sense of decency and since when is a wrong ok because the majority of an area choose to have it? Is it ok to abandon the constitution in certain regions because the people in that region vote to ignore it? Should we bring back slavery for the south because they want it (I assure you there are those in the south who would and powerful enough they could get it passed), should at least Jim Crow laws be reinstated because the government of the nation struck down against the will of the people of that area? Should you be subjected to having your hands cut off because you were convicted of shoplifting, never mind if you were wrongly convicted?

I also have to wonder if maybe Katrina sufferers who lost their homes because of not being able to afford insurance should have not been allowed to get funds to rebuild? I went through Katrina and helped raise funds on my radio show to rebuild 100 homes in Pascagoula Ms., and most didn't have insurance because it was too hard for them to meet the payment, but to hell with that, they should have found a way to afford it so let them live homeless. I can't help but wonder if this was how we were talked about here, so I asked someone and they told me nobody was so morally bankrupt to do that here. So what happened? Have we as a nation regressed that far in such a short time?

[seabeyond]

1. i am not debating that. i am debating libertarian policy gutting our democratic social net work

that provides safety nets for all

[Little Star]

111. Bingo

[Blecht]

2. Welcome to America

This is nothing new. People can be shits everywhere, but there seems to be an awful lot of empathy-free assholes in the US.

[Fumesucker]

3. I can't believe that everyone on DU doesn't agree completely with me..

It's really shocking..

[SargeUNN]

5. I have to wonder your thoughts about

the questions I asked. Would you honor us with your answers to those instead?

[Fumesucker]

12. I lost a paid for home to fire in 1973..

I inherited it from my parents, it was not burned to the ground but so damaged it had to be destroyed..

I fully understand the anguish of losing a home to fire, thankfully no one was injured and I had no pets at the time, quite possibly more than you if you have not suffered that tragedy.

Your questions are the equivalent of asking "when did you stop beating your wife" and I'm not getting drawn into your game.

Again though, I'm utterly shocked that not everyone on DU agrees with me completely.

[SargeUNN]

22. humm interesting no answer

I fell to see your point. As for getting drawn into some game, that is a strange statement. I have to wonder if really what you are saying is you know you can't give a legit answer so let's just take the victim stance and not have to admit you have no response other than to agree or show any reasoning of value otherwise. So I will it take it you agree with the point and just don't want to say so.

[Fumesucker]

36. OK, when did you quit beating your wife?

If you do not respond then you clearly cannot give a legit answer.

You talk around the subject so much I can't really tell what your point is exactly, try to boil it down to a short paragraph or even better, a single sentence..

[SargeUNN]

39. is this your way of avoiding the question?

I believe my question was posted first so you are going to avoid it by trying to use this defense. I think that you would be better served to just answer the question or not reply.

[Fumesucker]

42. I got tired before I counted all the question marks in your OP..

I think I reached eight and wasn't finished..

Did you just throw the question marks in for graphic effect?

[SargeUNN]

61. ok I think we know where you are.

I think you have shown enough that no need to bother responding to you again. Thanks

[JuniperLea]

88. Thanks for taking one for the team...

Some people learn by reading, some by observing others, and some have to piss on the electric fence for themselves. Thank you for allowing me to observe.

[LTX]

184. I'll take a stab at your "questions" --

1. "Where is our sense of decency and since when is a wrong ok because the majority of an area choose to have it?"

What you perceive as a "wrong" in this instance is a vote by County residents to adopt a procedure under which individuals could acquire fire protection services by paying a fee. Like it or not, U.S. citizens are free to regionally vote for and collectively adopt just such a procedure. It is part and parcel of their general freedom to contract for goods and services. While there are obvious exceptions to the freedom to contract, this is not among them.

U.S. citizens are also free to gamble with their property by not paying the fire protection service fee they voted to adopt, and by starting an outdoor fire next to their house.


2. "Is it ok to abandon the constitution in certain regions because the people in that region vote to ignore it?"

No.

This question is both ridiculous and a non-sequitur. The Constitution:

-- does not give citizens the right to a fire department;

-- does not give citizens the right to require other citizens to risk injury or death to save their property from fire;

-- does not give citizens the right to be free from the consequences of their own negligence; and

-- does not prevent citizens from deliberately gambling with their property by starting fires next to their house and by not acquiring safeguards like fire protection services, smoke detectors, and insurance.

3. "Should we bring back slavery for the south because they want it (I assure you there are those in the south who would and powerful enough they could get it passed), should at least Jim Crow laws be reinstated because the government of the nation struck down against the will of the people of that area?"

No.

And again, this question is both ridiculous and a non-sequitur. There are specific Constitutional provisions that prevent national and regional adoption of slavery, and there are specific laws that criminalize human trafficking. These Constitutional provisions and laws are based on a universal recognition that slavery and human trafficking are morally indefensible and a clear exception to the freedom to contract.

Furthermore, it is both juvenile and repugnant to analogize property protection to human bondage.

4. "Should you be subjected to having your hands cut off because you were convicted of shoplifting, never mind if you were wrongly convicted?"

No.

Cruel and unusual punishment is prevented by the 8th Amendment, and there are elaborate and specific judicial procedures to challenge the legitimacy of conviction. Losing property because you refused to pay a service fee that you voted to adopt is not remotely within the definition of cruel and unusual punishment, and the homeowner here was not "convicted" of anything. In short, this question is again ridiculous and a non-sequitur.

[Chulanowa]

162. Well, I'm certain you deserved that loss.

I'm now going to get my jollies by laughing at your misfortune.

[doc03]

4. I think if someone doesn't pay their fire service fee the

fire department should put big red X on the house so they would not put the fire out by mistake. Screw these people that sit around and collect welfare, SS and unemployment, if they can't pay their fucking fee let it burn. If they burn up in the fire that will be a few less bums on welfare.

:sarcasm:

[ejpoeta]

6. as someone who has lost everything i own in a fire, i cannot understand it myself.

Here we have a volunteer fire department. I was not home when it happened thank god, but our house was gone. It was a singlewide trailer from the 70s. my computer looked like modern art. my entertainment center looked like a table. my daughter's room was a black hole that you couldn't even tell what was in it. I have nightmares to this day about if we had been in that house when it happened. In the end the only things that mattered were ok.... us, our daughter and the animals, who had been hiding UNDER THE HOUSE. I would have to say I wouldn't want a fire department stand by and watch my house go up in flames. Would I pay the $75? probably. but we must also consider something else..... we hear about people having to make difficult choices all the time. For some $75 is a lot. and the fire department could go in and put out the fire and then charge the guy the whole bill. just like in healthcare.... if you want to call it that. if i have no insurance they will give me treatment and then charge me for it. charge me more than the insurance company is probably paying them.

yeah sure, I can understand the idea of this is what people want so they will get it. or people want services and don't want to have to pay for it. I get that. but we are people. and when you are looking at your whole life gone into ashes I couldn't imagine the feeling that no one even tried to help. Maybe this guy learned a valuable lesson.... but if I tell my daughter to stay out of the road and she goes anyway and gets hit by a car do I then say, oh well.... guess you learned your lesson?

[seabeyond]

14. 75 a year is not a lot for anyone... $6.27 a month. .21 a day. nt

[Gormy Cuss]

19. $75 due once per year is a lot for people living hand to mouth

and saving up money just isn't in the picture because there's always some unexpected expense that eats through whatever small reserve has been built up.

No one has suggested that the homeowner in question didn't pay because of lack of funds, but to people who are very poor $75 might as well be $1000 --unaffordable is unaffordable.

[seabeyond]

20. i have been that poor and though 75 here and there hurts, 75 is still not that much

i have family that is that poor now and again i say the same thing.

i know, from experience.

and

none of the homeowners are even close to that poor.

[Gormy Cuss]

34. Your experience aside, there are many people who would find that $75 once/year to be a major burden.

I know from personal and professional experience.

I already acknowledged that the homeowner in question doesn't seem to be that poor. The county may in fact have households that are, since 10% of families (and 15% of the seniors) live below the poverty line.

[seabeyond]

37. i disagree. when i had no money, none, not a cent... i found ways to get

that money at any given time.

75 is not hard to come up with, if one does not have it and needs it. a 1000, yes.

[Gormy Cuss]

46. Again, what you were able to do is not generalizable to the poorest of the poor.

I'm glad for you that you've always been able to scratch up a small amount of money but please understand that there are people who can't scratch together enough money for toilet paper in between checks.

[seabeyond]

54. again, i dont agree. tough, yes. a consistent means, no. nt

[G_j]

64. 'till you run out of things to pawn?

I've been there too and there are times when 75 dollars might as well be 75,000 dollars.

[seabeyond]

72. yes there is the pawning. but there is the odd jobs too, that one would not do long term

like clean someones house, mow lawn, borrow short term. about anyone can scrape up 75 amongst family and friends. and extra shift...

many ways.

[closeupready]

118. Odd jobs, unless you are in a wheelchair, or otherwise disabled.

n/t

[closeupready]

119. lol, do you offer inspirational or motivational seminars or something?

You oughta. :woohoo:

[seabeyond]

126. never mind, i see you are being sarcastic.... nt

[LiberalAndProud]

166. So you're against property taxes in general?

Because this subscription fee is in lieu of property taxes. It is a voluntary tax in that the county will not impose its authority to collect the fee.

Let me repeat that. The subscription fee is a voluntary tax to protect your property.

[closeupready]

116. Did you have children at the time?

Didn't think so.

[reggie the dog]

173. were you selling drugs???

pretty much the only way i can pay for unexpected stuff is to sell some hash...

[seabeyond]

180. no. nt

[Better Today]

31. I get that because the guy on Countdown looked lower income, a lot on here

just assume he couldn't pay. You should read the stats posted in the OP here, http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9263353 , and also many of the comments. I think that the thread puts a lot into perspective. Like this guy had already had the FD out without paying once before, so had his son, and a neighbor, all of whom never paid a dime after the fact either. And the unincorporated areas in question are where the wealthier people live.

FD isn't a free service, if they refuse to be taxed, which seems evident since they insist on remaining unincorporated from the cities with the FDs so they won't have to pay the city taxes, then they need to pay the damn $75 bucks and be done with it.

I bet during the first fire the FD put out for this guy, he was probably saying he'd pay them whatever they needed, then didn't, then continued to conveniently "forget" to pay year upon year. But he thought he knew he could continue since they had put out three fires he knew about, one of which was his, when no payments had been made.

The homeowner seems to be a complete sleazebag expecting services to be gifted to him on the backs of the poor (financially poor) city dwellers.

Now I will agree that a system like that sucks, the counties should simply assess a property tax to cover the city services, but apparently the wealthy outliers have put the quash on that through elections.

[Gormy Cuss]

44. My comment was about the universal affordability of paying a $75 fee

not a comment on whether the homeowner in question could afford it.

[Better Today]

50. I understand that you are looking at a wee slice of a larger pie. Thanks for admitting it.

[Gormy Cuss]

114. Sorry, I thought that I made that clear in the prior post.

I didn't suggest that the homeowner in the Obion county story was that poor.

[Lars39]

156. Here's a point to consider.... a low income senior citizen or

disabled vet in TN usually qualify for property tax relief. The fee is not considered a property tax(though it should be included in the property taxes), so the low income senior citizen or disabled vet has to pay it. The fee system hurts those most who are least able to pay.

[ejpoeta]

48. if he had another fire already, maybe there is something else he needs

like education on preventing fires? maybe they ought to let people know that if they choose to not pay the $75 then in the event of a fire which requires the fire department, they will be charged the cost of putting out the fire. They can put a lien on the property if they need to. That way if people want to

i know that we were pretty damned poor back then. We were paying $400/mo for propane and just barely not freezing to death. We had an electric heater in my daughter's room. As poor as we were we made sure we had insurance on the house and paid it. not sure how much it was, but I am pretty sure we would have found a way to come up with $75 for the fire department if we had to. I know that we try to donate to the FD whenever they are out collecting money.

It's a tough one because if this guy just was a jerk about it and felt he should not have to pay for it but still get the service.... part of me wants to say that he deserved it. but then on the other hand, and here is where this idea of pay as you go doesn't work... this doesn't just affect him, it affects his neighbor. we live next to a wildlife preserve.... what if our house went up and started a fire in the preserve which is not far from my house?

we used to be community minded. We used to care about others. I hate to see all the selfish people who only care about themselves... like those who don't want to have to pay taxes to keep their town running, that keep the roads fixed.... they want to have those services and not have to pay towards them. They want for themselves, but don't want to have to pay for anyone else. and this isn't meant for anyone who is remarking about this fire, but in general about how people like members of my own family are so selfish and others I see who seem to only care about themselves.

[Bluenorthwest]

91. The interviews with the farmer- he said they had called previously

and the FD came, but they fire was out by the time they arrived. That fee was paid. This is what I heard reported on Olbermann. Your versioin of events seems to have been improvised.
Painting this guy as rich is a joke. Destitute? No. But trying to frame him as wealthy is nuts, and it is despicable to judge him by presumption. He 'seems to be' you say, a complete sleazebag. Based on nothing.
In what way did he strick you as a complete scumbag? Was this a psychic moment or what? Do you often judge others by how they 'strike' you, and then repeat that as if it were fact? What 'struck' you about this farmer?

[Better Today]

115. As for the wealth issue please take a moment to read Hannah Bell's excellent post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9263353

As for not paying, I listened to the MF and he mentioned numerous times that he, his son, and a neighbor had all been helped by the FD in the past without paying, ever. Hence, he seemed to say, he felt like he could be a deadbeat on the backs of the lower class city dwellers who would be to foot his FD charges that, imo, he never intended to pay.

As for how I judge folks, yeah, I pretty much take them at their own words and the manner of presentation, etc. The facts here don't seem to jive with much of what he said, like that the pets were the FDs fault, yet he had plenty of time with a slow moving fire from the backyard to get them out and chose not to. That alone removes any sympathy I might otherwise have. Add all the other crap, like he's part of the constituency who voted to not be fairly taxed to pay for services, he had a call out before but didn't pay, his son and others he knew did the same, his idea that he should get something he never intended to pay for.... yeah, that takes me from a lack of sympathy to downright schadenfreude.

[Mimosa]

123. ^ Exactly. And everybody has known somebody like him, I bet ^

The FD charge should be a tax but since it's not, the guy should have paid. He gambled -more than once- he lost. Note that he did pay homeowners insurance.

[Better Today]

125. Worth noting, for sure, and he says they are planning on paying out, though

I wonder if his 15 minutes of fame might be putting that in jeopardy since now the insurance company knows he didn't do his due diligence.

[SargeUNN]

23. so let the freakin house burn is what you are saying?

wow what does that say about you?

[seabeyond]

27. oh wow, back at you cause that isnt what i fuckin said huh. geez dude, get a grip

you have to at the least, read the words posted. you dont get to make up a fabricated story to argue and then self righteously scorn.

[Better Today]

52. Yep, let the freakin' house burn. It's just property. As for the pets in the house,

with a fire that started in the backyard and moved slowly to the house (by the owner's own description), then the pets' deaths are clearly on his plate, not the FDs.

[SargeUNN]

51. that is not the point and what is so disturbing

the point is the failure to act humane and then try to justfy with exactly this type excuse.

[Better Today]

53. "Humane" to a house? Wow, that's a bizarre concept.

[SargeUNN]

60. maybe you need to think more into what you read

I would think it obvious that letting 4 animals burn up, let a person's family keepsakes, displace them for longer than should be, costing the insurance company's policyholders to have their company pay out many times more than that and not caring that for $75 you will allow a family and a community to suffer, as well as will the next time there be a baby or any person there that might perish. Yeah you really didn't get it did you?

[seabeyond]

62. the owners either let their animals burn up or lied about the animals burning up

not that you will even acnowledge simple fact and common sense. the fire happened way out in back yard. took a bet of time to get to the house. if those animals died, the owners are responsible.

[SargeUNN]

67. You are assuming stuff here to some degree but

you seem to be unable or unwilling to look at the bigger picture of what doors such a response opens up in the future. I am disturbed that you seem to be unwilling or unable to realize that.

[seabeyond]

69. when you accuse FD of allowing animals to burn, then yes, it is important to address that.

assuming or not there is a reality that it took time for fire to get to house, so no logical reason for animals to die.

so

if you blame the FD that is nigh disgusting.

i think i see the big picture (macro) and you see the narrow picture (micro). the difference is, i am willing to understand you position and where you come from without calling you names or challenging your political position and you are not. even though i see my position absolutely firmly standing under democratic policy.

[Better Today]

66. So I'm guessing you'd consider inhumane if all the same things occurred

except the FD showed up and tried to put out the fire? What if the owners weren't home and a neighbor didn't see the smoke in time to have the FD save the house, even if the FD was willing? Would losses in those cases be inhumane? I mean seriously, I've yet to hear about a major house fire where nearly everything isn't lost due to either fire, smoke, or water damage. Clearly you have some naive notions about house fires in general. As for the pets, the owners made the choice apparently to set upon their asses while the fire went toward the house, they have no one to blame but themselves.

[seabeyond]

56. of course it is not a point, but a point in the poster i was responding to, that i wanted to make

you keep trying to direct my conversation. why is that?

and you were ok fabricating a ridiculous story on that particular point that i made. again, why is that?

i will say again, i already, was the first, to answer your.... point.

to point out reality, a crisis in the making, tht continues to exist in order to resolve is hardly justifying shit. what it is doing, is being responsible for recognizing an issue and addressing it so we dont continue to have these inhumane acts... instead of allowing a problem to continue that will worsen an already crisis.

[grahamhgreen]

97. The selfishness is legend.

Your viewpoint is sociopathic, IMHO.

[Recursion]

178. The only "selfishness" in this story is the county residents

who refuse to pay for the services and try to steal them from the city.

[grahamhgreen]

191. It is sociopathic to have the means to easily put out the fire and not do it.

so·ci·o·path

–noun Psychiatry .

a person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

[seabeyond]

192. the dude that leaves his animals in house to die? not buy subscribe to protect loved ones, neighbors

or put firemen in a horrible situation?

meh... i am not into calling the man names.

[grahamhgreen]

193. Sociopathic

To support allowing the house to burn.

Whoever one might be.....

Never to late to change!

;-)

[reggie the dog]

172. if you stuck me with a 75 dollar bill today

i would be fucked, i am going through divorce in a foriegn country on minimum wage, i had to take HER money out of HER bank account that i still have a card for just to buy hash this month (enough to try to get back in the game because i have no legal way to make enough money to get by, so i guess if sales were good i could pay that 75 dollars, or maybe eat... and i need shoes mine have a hole in them now, and my daughter needs a bed because she is 3 now and still in a crib.... i am going away for the weekend but only because my new girlfriend is paying for everything....that feels great too.... live on 800 to 900 euros a month and then tell me about paying 75 dollars in a once a year bill; i live in a reconverted garage so i doubt that i would be paying 75 dollars a year if the system was paid for by property taxes

[seabeyond]

181. oh... reggie. we dont need to know some things

there is so much wrong in your posts....

anyway

viva la fance

[reggie the dog]

186. once the divorce goes through

i will be supplemented with housing vouchers and money for my kid far better than i would be in the usa but i am "sperated" not divorced for now....so still have the ex s income which is more than twice mine counted as my family income even though i live alone

[seabeyond]

187. truly

the best to you. i hope things work out.

[reggie the dog]

189. thanks

[rrneck]

7. The robber baron Jay Gould once said,

"You can always hire one half of the poor to kill the other half". It is a damn bloody shame that those firefighters stood there and let that house burn down. It's a damn bloody shame that there isn't enough tax revenue in Obion County to have a proper fire department.

It's also a damn bloody shame that there are so many volunteer firemen in this country who are exposed to risks of their own in the very dangerous business of firefighting. They risk injury or death every time they go out, and their insurance policies may not pay off if they respond to a fire they are not supposed to.

It's also a damn bloody shame that small communities risk crippling increases in liability insurance or even cancellation if their firefighters are injured or injure somebody else when they respond to a fire they are not supposed to. In the event of the loss of a half million dollar fire truck small municipalities are no doubt painfully aware that if they report a loss all of their t's need to be crossed and their i's dotted or they may not collect a dime.

It's a damn bloody shame that multi billion dollar corporations view essential services for citizens as just another revenue stream to be exploited and the people they are supposed to help as a potential liability for their CEOs, exectuive boards and preferred shareholder's profits.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sailor65]

9. I can't believe you've got it so wrong.....

This guy wasn't UNABLE to pay, he considered and then refused to pay.

The comparison to the the actual injustice of Katrina is disgusting.

[SargeUNN]

13. you are the one who got it wrong

and that is probably what I find more troubling. The fact is his house was allowed to burn over $75 and even when he offered to pay the $75 and more it wasn't an option but instead his house was allowed to burn down with the equipment and firefighters there. People have tried to defend it with such hideous statements as the people voted it that way so it makes it ok, and believe me there were those we had to overcome who said that sorta of thing about the people whose houses we rebuilt. If the defense of well the people voted for it is considered let's look at the examples I mentioned and ask if those hideous laws should be reinstated.

[EFerrari]

16. Remember that during Katrina, there were people here blaming

those that didn't evacuate for their own drowning?

[SargeUNN]

26. wow sorry to hear that

of course I was in the middle of the event so for awhile I had no internet and when I did I was too busy working to help restore the area to bother checking boards like this. I am glad I wasn't because I had enough to deal with without having to deal with that foolish talk. It was hard enough to come close to losing my life because I stopped the eviction of 2 section 8 housing complex and only because of Mike Malloy and Jeff Farias along with their listeners was my life saved. I guess that is why I asked have we regressed as a nation and a people to this low level.

[EFerrari]

28. There are always people who blame the victim.

Maybe it's a defense. If you can think that the other guy deserved his misfortune, maybe it won't happen to you because you don't deserve it.

[lukasahero]

40. And the hikers who should have been left to die

because they took the risk of climbing?

There's an awful lot of hate here these days.

[muffin1]

96. My ex-boss (a repug)

used to say that all the time around the office. WTF? Yeah, it's actually true that some people can't scrape together $75.00. Or hop into a car they don't have to escape a hurricane. If this is how a lot of Democrats think, we are definitely screwed.

FUCK.:grr:

[JuniperLea]

30. So uninsured Katrina victims are somehow different?

Yet help for them is expected?

People over money is the liberal, progressive idea I was raised on.

[PVnRT]

77. Most of them were poor and did not choose to not have a car, or not have home insurance

They couldn't afford either. This guy could. It's one of those key differences the people screaming "KATRINA! KATRINA!" here fail to understand.

[JuniperLea]

82. I get that "he could afford it and Katrina victims could not"

I get it... I think it still stinks, and is vile beyond comprehension, that someone would be all for letting another human being's house burn down. Despicable. Subhuman.

[Better Today]

161. Then you should be blaming the subhuman who didn't pay for his FD service, not the FD.

He is the despicable one. He is the one who let the fire get to the house and burn it down without removing his pets. You're right, not planning for the possibility of your house burning down, thereby forcing others to not respond, is despicable and subhuman.

[PVnRT]

175. How about people who refuse to contribute to the well-being of society?

I guess they're OK. Especially wealthier people trying to dodge taxes. We can just ask the poor to pony up more money to help them out.

[Warpy]

10. Civilized people don't.

Libertarians do.

That's where the debate is.

Do we want a civilized country with amenities like fire departments paid for by taxes or the libertarian "paradise" where it's everyone for himself?

Do we want to concentrate on "we" or "me?"

[joeybee12]

11. KNR

[Ineeda]

15. IMO, they should have put the fire out BUT...

Interesting that you bring up Katrina. This is a subject that I've wrestled with for years. I live on the Gulf coast and have struggled and sacrificed most other things to pay for my flood and wind insurance, which ain't cheap. (I survive on SSDI.) My home is my only asset other than a small 401k, so I feel I need to protect it above all else. My area has never been hit, thank heavens, but it's been close a few times. I have many neighbors who have never paid for hurricane insurance and these folks are very wealthy. Frankly, I don't know how I would feel if these neighbors and I got wiped out, ala Katrina, and they benefited from the assistance such as you provided. I'm as compassionate as you can get, but when people make reckless choices, for whatever reasons, perhaps there should be a price paid for that choice. Katrina victims had no choice, but my neighbors do and so did the man under discussion. I don't want anyone to suffer, but sorry, bad choices should have consequences.

[handmade34]

74. choices should have

reciprocal consequences maybe...

[gratuitous]

17. My understanding of the situation is . . .

This is the situation that the good people of the area set up for themselves. Everyone either agreed to it, or at the very least knew this was the way things are, Mr. Cranick included. Mr. Cranick is now shocked, shocked! to find out that even though he didn't pay his assessment, the fire department wouldn't respond to his house being on fire.

I think the situation is deplorable, but this is the situation that the people of this area decided to adopt for themselves. I certainly hope they decide to do things differently in the future, but what happened to the Cranicks was bound to happen to someone somewhere along the line. To evince shock over it, as Mr. Cranick is doing, is disingenuous in the extreme.

[hayu_lol]

142. His neighbor subscribed...

the fire dept. went to the neighbors and when the fire crossed the property line, they protected their subscriber. They had one pumper and one water tanker...when that was used up...they would have been out of business. They had to protect someone who subscribed. The subscription fee was in lieu of the taxes that the commissioners would not levy...they defeated that measure 19/1.

$75/year comes down to $1.44/week. How many beer cans do you have to pick up to manage that. Hardship cases I would bet could get reasonable terms from the S Fulton VFD.

This guy got a letter asking him to subscribe, got a phone call to subscribe, maybe the Chief made a visit. He declined to subscribe.

[WolverineDG]

18. I can't believe people still don't understand that emergency services aren't free

and would require a small town with a lower average income than the larger, wealthier county that's not even in the same state footing the ENTIRE cost of fire service, to its own detriment.

I've asked before & never got an answer: If you're so dead set on forcing the town to pay the entire cost on its own, where is the money going to come from? Are you going to raise their taxes? What items on the budget are you willing to cut? Do city workers lose their jobs or see their pay cut?

Asking where the money is going to come from is not morally bankrupt. Expecting one small town to let a larger county freeload off its services is.

dg

[ismnotwasm]

21. I understand

One reason I always support full funding for fire departments is because the lack of them can lead to bizarre situations like these. Once you get, say, Randian type Libertarians in the mix, when everything is profit,or twisted risk-benefit analysis, there are too many who fall through the cracks. Once you create a large enough underclass, you have one trouble after another and a great strain on any economic system. So pragmatic or not, it seems being humane is not only the right thing to do, but is the most cost effective in the longer run. We profit by being good and kind to one another. It's just that there isn't instant gratification doing so on a larger, economic scale.

We have too many short term and narrow thinkers. It's very sad.

[Lucian]

24. This version of DU really sucks.

I swear it's been taken over by a bunch of Republicans.

I remember four or five years ago when it was a liberal haven.

[JuniperLea]

33. It's the "I have mine, fuck you" Republican mentality

I find it despicable.

[seabeyond]

that is exactly the mentality and law in the county that voted it in.

only it is i dont have mine, i want yours, for free so fuck you.

why do you embrace libertarianism?

[JuniperLea]

43. I embrace compassion and "we the people" and...

"provide for the common defense"

These systems are a giant failure... I guess, pathetically, it's going to take a lot of death and destruction before some alleged progressives and liberals put people above money.

I don't care what someone's ideology is, the correct behavior is to help your fellow man.

[seabeyond]

57. you should care wht someone ideology is cause it could be the ruination of yours.... that being

have safety nets that afford you to accomplish exactly what you want.

[JuniperLea]

83. Well sister, that's what makes me the bigger, better person, doesn't it?

Because I don't give a fucking flying rat's ass what some human being's ideology is, how it helps or hinders my own, or any of that other fucking bullshit. I'm not going to ask someone on fire on the fucking street what they believe in, support, rail against, or whatever, before I offer a helping hand. THAT is the right thing to do.

[seabeyond]

87. well GF, wow. did i suggest that JL? or are you fabricating an argument

to be holier than thou....

i appreciate your posts... but i will back off and be done on this issue, with you

you seem to be purposely misinterpreting my posts

[JuniperLea]

89. Perhaps you should explain that last comment then...

To me it appeared that you were suggesting it was better to let the house burn since the guy was a libertarian and his views are in conflict of mine, and could lead to the ruination of my ideology.

[seabeyond]

92. no. that is not what i was saying, even kinda

i have yet to take a position on the allowing to burn or not. as i have said in the past, many time justifying my position over and over, as people call me names and troll and everything else, .... i could not let it burn. i understand the position of city. so in essense, i cannot stand on either position.

what i am saying is... yes ideology does matter. i never said in time of crisis, because though there are people in your position throwing that at duers regularly with this issue, it is not serious and does not warrant response. i ignore hyperbole. not a single person would allow party affiliation, race, gender, sexual preference to interfer with helping. so to me, that is a bogus argument to not even take seriously.

though it has been used by many, many posters last couple days to duers discussing this issue.

it is NO ONES position.

the ideology is important in what this county believes and how it effects out democratic policy of taxing all a little to protect adn ensure our safety net. to me... the whole argument is recognizing the libertarian policy of the county is a serious destrutive force spreading across the natio effection many democratic institutions.

so yes

i think it is reall important we pay attention to ideology.

[Bluerthanblue]

59. aMeNN!

I believe the truly "progressive/liberal/democratic" stand on this issue can only be, it doesn't matter whether the person paid the fee or not, the RIGHT thing to do, was to help the people in distress- it wasn't a question of FD not being 'able' to help (they were there for the people who did pay the fee), it was a question of being willing- and we should always be willing to help if we are able and a fellow human being is in desperate need.

I'm astounded by the way some people continue to defend this terrible non-action.

"who is my neighbor"? I guess for some, it's only those who qualify.... :(

[seabeyond]

63. and some duers actually are beyond the actual event of the house being burned and looking at

resolutions instead of ignoring a major crisis in this nation and a destruction of the liberal policies to create safety nets. how a libertarian policy can destroy the very thing you want.

[Better Today]

68. To an extent you are exactly correct. Libertarians aren't going to learn the foolishness

of their no-tax, no-way voting unless and until things like this occur and property and perhaps lives are lost. It's unfortunate, it's even horrendous. But unless we somehow give counties, cities, townships, and states, the right to tax without voting on the taxes or the tax increases, it's what we have. Welcome to America. It isn't the FD that's wrong here, it's the system. And just as I thought the banks should have been allowed to fail because they made their own bed, I think this man is the maker of his own misfortune and having been bailed out once, after which he still never paid the fee, he deserves every ounce of discomfort it provides him.

[PVnRT]

76. When did fire departments become cost-free?

Just curious.

I always thought that progressives and liberals believed that essential services should be provided for by the state, with everyone footing the bill through progressive taxation. But I guess I'm really just a teabagger "disruptor" who's been under cover since 2001.

[JuniperLea]

86. What a vile, disgusting, subhuman question

I don't give a flying rat's ass what the money situation is!!! That's the fucking point!

All y'all are bankrupting your Karma banks... seriously.

[wickerwoman]

164. It's a perfectly valid question.

Do you think inadequate numbers of unpaid firefighters should have to run into danger (because they can't afford trucks or gas) and put their lives at risk with substandard, out-of-date equipment because Joe Maverick decides really $1.40/week is too much to pay to support people who are willing to die to protect his house full of tacky shit?

What's the Karmic withdrawal for indifference to "the money situation" that allows firefighters to do their jobs safely?

Put it this way: two fires at the same time. One person paid their fee and the other didn't. The fire department responds to the free-loader who called first. Meanwhile, the person who paid their fee's house burns down.

Where's your concern for all the people in their community whose lives and properties were put at risk while the FD was responding to this idiot who made a calculated, anti-social decision not to contribute to the safety net on the theory that his ignorant, tax-hating ass would be bailed out anyway?

[PVnRT]

176. You can "not give a flying rat's ass" all you want

No money, no fire department. What then? What's the "karmic retribution" for those who refuse to pay taxes, refuse to pay fees, and expect the fire department to keep coming out ot fight their fires?

I guess the bigger picture is far too complex for you to grasp. It's much easier for you to proclaim your moral superiority and spit on those who aren't as outraged as you.

[Lucian]

80. That should be the core belief of the Democratic party...

your whole response.

+ infinity.

[TexasObserver]

190. It's a very small number of posters who embrace the "let it burn down" view.

But they are posting by the hundreds of posts on the topic. If you put about ten people on ignore, 90% of the "let it burn" comments would disappear.

Seriously, most of the "let it burn" posts are coming from a handful of posters.

The DU poll on subject this showed that 85% say "don't let it burn."

[jonnyblitz]

25. apparently some feel the homeowner should be punished

for having the wrong political philosophy.

[Jamastiene]

35. I wonder what the homeowner's actual political party affiliation is.

Has it been confirmed anywhere?

According to this article...(third paragraph)...
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/southeast/2010/10/05/113824.htm

...the wife, Paulette Cranick, stated that they had paid the $75 fee in years past, but had been away and had forgotten this year.

[Better Today]

70. Not for wrong political philosophy, but wrong financial priority.

[LiberalAndProud]

165. He doesn't 'deserve' it.

He could be the most liberal assed MFer in the whole damn county. His elected officials (county commissioners) have failed to fulfill their responsibility to provide for public health and safety. When that heppens, citizens are harmed. It is as simple as that. This is a consequence of living in a Republican Libertarian community.

[JuniperLea]

29. Money over people is not a liberal or progressive ideal

As long as they have theirs, fuck you.

[Better Today]

71. Not people, property. People were not injured or harmed.

[JuniperLea]

90. People were harmed...

Financially... and their pets were killed. The firefighters who are having a hard time emotionally are also suffering. I'm not sure how you figure no one was hurt here.

[Better Today]

105. How many times do you have to be told that the owners by the guy's own

comments are responsible for the pet deaths. A slow moving fire from a backyard to a house gave them plenty of time to get the pets, they chose not to. And a lot of folks who have done everything right still lose everything financially, and by the interview on Countdown, the guy says insurance is paying, so he won't be losing financially either.

I get being a bleeding heart liberal, I've been accused of being one on other topics, and I wear it proudly, but to avoid the facts as so many here seem to be doing is discouraging to say the least.

[JuniperLea]

107. I don't care who is at fault... pointing fingers means nothing afaic

I don't care if he poured gasoline on the house and the animals... it makes no difference. The fire should have been put out, period.

[Better Today]

112. Blame the FD but don't make the owner have one ounce

of personal responsibility for his actions or lack thereof. Sorry, can't go there with you. He's scum and he deserved what he got. Even with the best responses, sometimes pets die, sometimes people die, and sometimes property is a complete loss. This man and his family brought everything upon themselves because they were sure that regardless of never paying for services, even after they already had put out a fire at his house once when he hadn't paid his dues. Then he apparently sat on his ass while his pets and house burned up. I feel nothing but schadenfreude for this man and all his neighbors that are attempting to ride on the taxes of the lower class city dwellers.

SCHANDENFREUDE, yep that's exactly what I'm feeling, and proud of it.

[JuniperLea]

159. "He's scum and he deserved what he got"

Wow... how very progressive of you. Schadenfreude? Really? That's fucking sick.

[seabeyond]

182. hey,...

Schadenfreude?

i have seen it a couple times. what is it about

and

are we cool now. i am thinking about this still, the fire issue. listening to people. learining lots. cant say i am in line with you, but for me it was huge in listening to people

[SOS]

174. "He's scum and he deserved what he got."

A Firefighter’s Pledge

I promise concern for others.
A willingness to help all those in need.

I promise courage - courage to face and conquer my fears.
Courage to share and endure the ordeal of those who need me.

I promise strength - strength of heart to bear whatever
burdens might be placed upon me.
Strength of body to deliver to safety all those placed within my care.

I promise the wisdom to lead, the compassion to comfort,
and the love to serve unselfishly whenever I am called.

-Author Unknown

The best of society.
Those who glory in the destruction of a fellow American citizen are not in that category.

[seabeyond]

129. wow... wow. well, as a humanitarian, i find that horribly offensive. i do see that it matters

the man is lying or allowed pets to die. that matters.

[LTX]

185. Really?

You say "I don't care if he poured gasoline on the house and the animals... it makes no difference."

I can see (sort of) a view that the homeonwner's own negligence here should have been overlooked by the fire department. But in your view, citizens have a right to force other citizens to risk injury or death to put out a fire that they deliberately set? Why?

[seabeyond]

128. there are a couple things, but this is what i find amazing. the inherent dishonesty continually

giving the death of animals to FD lack of respoense. it is so very dishonest. i dont get how people do it with a straight face... as they type. i cannot take it seriously. especially when i hear nothing back after the revelation.... and next post hear the same fuckin line

[stray cat]

32. Should unions protect employees who don't join the union?

I think they should - just like protecting houses

[Better Today]

73. No, people's choices should be honored, otherwise what's the point in giving a choice

in the first place.

[Bluenorthwest]

109. Fact is that Union won rights and benefits have been

widely shared with those who did not lift a finger to earn them, while Union people gave actual lives. Just about every workplace right held by all Americans was Union won.
Of course, in terms of actual representation of non union workplaces, Unions are legally forbidden from doing so. The FD was not legally forbidden. In a Union workplace, employees have to join the Union, so no one whom the Union can by law represent go unrepresented.
You need to try harder.

[Ganja Ninja]

38. I don't support the way the FD handled this.

However I am critical of this man and his neighbors for not having the wisdom, foresight and community spirit to support the FD. Quite frankly this place is teabagger country. Though the man claims he forgot to pay his bill I'm skeptical especially when his son seems to have had a previous similar circumstance where he didn't pay his bill either.

[notesdev]

41. Bravo

Good to see someone take a stand on what is right here.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

45. Your examples don't seem to meet the current condition

The guy wasn't in financial distress, he could afford the $75 a year. He refused to pay it before, and the fire department put out the fire anyway. Then they sent him the bill, and he didn't pay. He was given invitations, repeatedly, to pay for fire protection on the new house, and he declined. If he can afford to pay his share, why should the rest of the community be forced to carry him?

I gave to a few Katrina fund drives, as well as to Haiti relief. There were victims in those cases. In this case, the guy is not a victim, just made some poor choices. Oh, hell, if he can get Willie Nelson to sing about his plight, I'll send a few bucks.

The part I'm unclear on: how does he have homeowner's insurance or a mortgage without being REQUIRED to pay the $75 for fire department support? I think there may be a bankruptcy in this guy's future.

[ladjf]

47. To allow a house to burn and possibly kill multiple people comes

close to being an act of manslaughter on the part of the city officials. Fire protection is a public safety issue and the financial support should come from either city or county taxes. If individuals refuse to pay the taxes, the governments will apply apropriate liens. But, during the ensuing litigation, the homes would still have fire and police protection. I doubt that anyone would be willing to lose their home over a $75 fire protection fee.

[COLGATE4]

55. True - but that's not the issue here. There was no public fire

protection provided for Cranick - his county opted not to fund a fire department, so there's no issue about whether or not he paid his country taxes. What he could done was to buy into an optional, pay for service fire protection offered him by a fairly close local town fire department, which he chose not to avail himself of (repeatedly).

[SargeUNN]

49. isn't it fascinating that

that when confronted with having to defend such statements as the people voted for this and then when hit with having to refute established precedent they suddenly find ways to ignore the answer. Isn't that enough to show these people don't even buy into their own statements?

[seabeyond]

58. you think you really have a gotcha moment. but i really dont know wtf you are talking about. nt

[PVnRT]

78. It's been answered many times in many threads

You're just refusing to find it an "acceptable" answer.

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. You got two competing world views

one believes in taxes, common good, humans are essentially good.

The other believes you are on your own, humans are essentially bad and need to be controlled.

As to Katrina, it does put this in a whole new light...



Yes for the latter world view as far as Katrina victims is concerned... the feeling is clear...

Welcome to the US of A, and TWO competing world views about human nature.

I have said this before but the chasm is so deep we will face a civil war over it.

[seabeyond]

85. if you are suggesting these two world views on du, you are wrong.

one believes in taxes, common good, humans are essentially good.

The other believes you are on your own, humans are essentially bad and need to be controlled.



no one on this board is arguing on your own and humans essentially bad. both groups on du are in agreement on taxes, common good. hitting it different angles. one macro, one micro, both saying the same. and that is the absurdity to one position on du demanding the uncompassionate and every other name being thrown at the other.

[nadinbrzezinski]

101. No, try to look beyond DU

You know like try to look at the nation.

You are telling me that these are not competing visions? Okie dokie.

[seabeyond]

103. i asked for clarification. when one isnt sure, a question is a good thing.

i can agree this is absolutely a national view. thanks

at the determent to our core values.

[SargeUNN]

75. those who keep trying to argue the case of the FD let me remind

you that you are proving the points I was making in my OP. While I appreciate the validation of my observation, you cause me to feel even worse about where we are as a country. Remember a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.

[Karenina]

98. And the links have been disintegrating for YEARS.

Solidarity seems to be a word that has fallen into antiquity...

[SargeUNN]

79. I think this discussion shows why we don't have single payer

how many would you count on that supports the hideous decision for whatever reason no matter how trivial, would support single payer for the very reasons they are giving now? I would certainly not expect them to support it unless of course they needed it personally.

[Pithlet]

84. I support the city and fire department. And I want single payer.

Guess you don't understand this as well as you think you do.

[SargeUNN]

93. then answer this

do you feel like a hypocrite? After all people who don't pay taxes would still get healthcare so how could you support that? How can you justify that in your mind? I think you must rethink your position on one or the other because you have major conflict in thinking that makes you look to be a potential hypocrite.

[Pithlet]

100. If there were somehow an analogous situation?

Let's say we did enact single payer healthcare. And somehow a bunch of anti-tax people found a way to group together on an island somewhere and their actions somehow jeopardized our single payer healthcare system in the same way these people were jeopardizing this city and its fire department? Then yes. I would feel the same way about those people. But that scenario seems highly unlikely, don't you think?

That's my problem with the story. The county is jeopardizing the city and its fire department. The fire department is in jeopardy if it keeps servicing the county the way it is doing now. That is why I'm in its side. If they keep putting out their fires without them paying, they lose. That is why they had to do what they did. They were driven to drastic measures.

[SargeUNN]

102. ok then let's look further

What ways could the government have handled his none payment that would have been more humane and less costly? How about putting the fire out, fine him a stiff but reasonable fine? Also isn't this a cruel and unusual punishment placed on him for failure to pay the fee?

[Pithlet]

130. They tried other way, and failed.

They aren't the cruel, heartless bastards they're being made out to be. They've shown up anyway, despite these residents not paying their fee, and put out the fires with the promise they'd pay after the fact. That's why they're in financial straits. THe thing is, they need to be funded. ANd being funded after the fact won't cut it. They simply can't operate that way. They're a city fire company. Not city county. And being expected to operate that way is hurting them because the county didn't want to fund them. Look, I'd understand if this had been the very first way they'd reacted. But it's not. They aren't even obligated to service the county, a count that isn't even in the same state.

[Better Today]

Not only is being funded after the fact not acceptable, but according to

a detailed post about the place in question, after years of attempting that strategy, most never actually paid after the fact, and the city had no way to force collections.

I've put the link to Hannah Bell's OP in many of the posts I've posted here. I'm sure you or anyone reading this can scan above and find them.

[Pithlet]

137. Exacly. I'm pretty familiar with details of the story.

I live in Tennessee, and my mom lives closer to the area being talked about. I understand if people aren't really familiar with it and at first glance it seems horrific. But after being made aware, some are still livid with the city and its department, and I'm just not understanding that. Why are they siding with this county??

[Better Today]

139. Yes, that why I put "anyone else reading" because

I was aware we are in agreement. However I can't say I'm against the "county" as it only represents what the unincorporated wealthy folks tell it to represent. My against-ness is directed at all those individuals who are choosing not to pay the fees, at the same time they are voting to not be taxed.

[Pithlet]

141. Well obviously, I'm not saying I'm against an entire county

I'm just "against" how they voted on an a particular issue. By being against I mean I think this particular situation is entirely their doing.

[Better Today]

146. I understand, just thought that county residents made more sense than

just the term county. Hey, I was having a nitpick moment, my bad.

[PVnRT]

177. Everyone who can afford to do so pays into Medicare

That's the point - those who can afford to so, pay in to provide the system for all. Quit pretending that this guy was some pauper who couldn't afford an additional 0.013% in property taxes or a $75 annual fee.

[handmade34]

81. it is difficult for me to

understand and believe also...

:shrug:

[orleans]

94. last night

on olbermann's show the man said he heard some of the firefighters were sick and cried.

i can't imagine how they could have stood around and done nothing to help him. simply put: helping him, saving his pets, it was just the right thing to do.

i think that policy of opting in for this type of "service" is horrible.

but when they have the trucks and hoses right there it makes me wonder: how can they be so cold?

i understand the thought train of "if you don't pay now you might end up paying later" crap.

but still... is compassion, empathy, humanity such a distant bell for some? what a shame.

[seabeyond]

104. you post made me more mad at homeowner. how dare he put the firemen in that position for a measly

75 fuckin dollars. and no, i dont believe he forgot.

shame on him.

and then further..... pets? it took quite a while for the fire to reach the house. there is no excuse at all, not a single logical reason for those animals to die in the house. the owner had more than enough time to get pets and then some.

i am not believing him on that story either.

[SargeUNN]

110. the more I read your replies

the more I feel sorry for you. I am just wondering if you favor cutting off a person's hands who is convicted of shoplifting. Must be upsetting to have to deal with that pesky 8th amendment for you.

[seabeyond]

122. wht bothers me is a person does all this to create his mess and then hurts all others

and endanger others and community and animals in so many ways and ensnares sympathy.

if the guy took ownership of his behavior and said simply, i fucked up.... i would be standing with this man.

and that has NOTHING to do with the decision of helping him or not.

important you can understand the difference, which i really really doubt you are able.

but getting to know you in posts... gotta say, you ought want to do some reflectin on the closed mindedness of yours and inflexibility.

[orleans]

151. i don't believe he "forgot" to pay the money either

he keeps referencing when this happened to his son's house and how he was allowed to pay when the fire started there a few years ago--

so, my impression from listening to him talk, was that just didn't want to pay--for whatever reason--not that he forgot to pay.

however--in spite of that--in spite of what his motivation was--how do you just stand by, watching and fucking do nothing?

the man may have purposefully chosen to not do the right thing. (my impression, as i said, is that was his choice)--but how do *you* follow that kind of lead and do nothing as well (not you specifically--the universal *you*)

and then with pets inside? (i think he said he had two dogs and a cat)

the guy didn't seem too sharp to me--how could the town allow such a policy and give people such a choice? they should know some people might actually forget to pay the fee, some people might think "fuck it" and blow it off, some people are horrible tightwads--for whatever reason--it should not have been a choice. it should have been included in some form of city/county tax. and if he's late paying the taxes (for whatever reason) he still gets the fire dept. to do what they were trained to do.

[seabeyond]

154. i dont justify it and havent. but dont let that stop the posters from labeling me...

(not referring to you)

first, to be clear, those animals should have gotten out of the house. i hate that people are using these dead animals for their outrage. it took a long time and lots of posters for me to wrap my brain around the twisted thinking on blaming city. it is not the way i live. it is not the way i think. but

the fire started way outside the house. there was lots of time before the fire hit the house. the owner is responsible, solely (imo) for the death of those animals. and shame on him. and shame on him for blaming the fire. and duers using the excuse of those animals.... they should have been gotten out of the house, or he is lying about the animals. i dont know. the man lies.

i dont justify letting it burn. i understand why the city did it. i totally get it. i could not do it. so i see both sides. now... maybe you can answer

there are 2500 people in city paying tax to fund the FD. there are 35,000 people in the county. half are not paying the subscription. they have more money than the city folk. 75% of the calls go to county service. city is already paying for this. they cannot continue. fd three years ago allowed a house to burn, reevaluated and kept it in place. people there are well aware of the policy. adn still dont pay. still expect service.

how do you, a democrat, in all your ideology and idealism demand that city pick up the support for all the 17,500 people that refuse to pay. an already over burdened FD.

two options

raise the tax on the city folks to support the 17,500? they can get the money from them, anyway. at least it will ensure the FD survives in case THEY need it.

does city say fuck you to county, and let them figure it out.

[orleans]

163. i don't know what the answer here is exactly

but i don't think that people should be given an option for something that is so serious and possibly detrimental--same with police protection. if they had to pay for that on an opt in basis then someone could be killing a resident but when the cops get the call they're gonna make sure you're on the "paid" list before going out there to help. it shouldn't be an option.

if this guy pays a county tax then fire and police should be included in the tax. because, as i said, people--for whatever reason--can make some really fucked up decisions.

i wasn't aware the fire started away from his house. if that is the case those animals should have been moved.

he helped to put the firefighters in a really fucked up position. so did whoever came up with the opt in option. i just don't understand how--when you have the means to help--you don't. especially if you're in a service profession like that.

[seabeyond]

183. agree on all. opt in/out should be illegal. need the collective pot.

all need to be covered including the stupid and selfish

those are the things that bugged the hell out of me with this man. he did put those firefighters in a horrible place. that escalates my anger more. how dare he. now they get blamed and they feel bad. he boasted for support that he saw fire men cry, (i think he said) as they stood there and did nothing. he did that to show his innocence. it did the opposite for me. made me explode that he put those men in that position

then i am catagorized as uncompassionate cause i dont feel for this man who is the supposed "victim". i see the neighbors as victims. the firemen as victims. the city as victims.

him

i see responsible.

doesnt mean i am not compassionate. jsut with different people than the makority on du.

isnt that interesting the mind think

[grahamhgreen]

95. The selfishness is legend.

How people have degenerated into greedy scum is beyond me.

[w4rma]

99. Fees are *not* the right way to do this. The county should have opted to pay a fire department a set

amount from everyone in the county's taxes. The voters in that county are to blame for putting county council members in place that voted to set up a FEE based libertarian wet-dream system. That fire department should wash their hands of the county or make them settle on a flat fee for the entire county. All or nothing. PERIOD. Let the county find another sucker location to leach off of or let them pay for the services as a whole.

[SargeUNN]

106. I find it disturbing that

a fee would be reason enough to refuse to put out the house, but I also find it more troubling that we would actually think there is any justification of such a decision. This poor decision disrupted this family's life more than was called for, it gave the community a very bad image (I know I would never consider living there) and it could turn up costing the insurance company more as well as the ones in that area that pay premiums to that company. Now to get to the morality of such a poor and stupid decision. This man offered to pay the fee and more so why not take it? The man's neighbor even offered but was refused, so what kind of moral values does this show of that county, the fire dept. and even the people in that community? If the people who say that a fine would be hard to collect believe that, then the better question is what is the problem with the government that is charged with the collection of such fines? There is absolutely no rational or reasonable justification for this indecent decision and those who made it have no business being in a position to make such a call. I would say the people there should be calling for dismissal of these disgusting people.

[Better Today]

108. The county is ruled by its voters, and the voters in the unincorporated areas chose

this option. Unless you're suggesting counties and other municipal and state governments should act without voter input, which would be totally unacceptable to most Americans

[SargeUNN]

117. you should have read my OP better

your reply holds no water at all. If we go by it then we must reinstate slavery in the South since the Southerners at the time were in favor of it. We must reinstate Jim Crow Laws since these laws were voted and approved by the voters in that region. Are you sure you want to present that as a rational reason? I stated this in the OP but guess you failed to read or comprehend it.

[Better Today]

120. Sorry but taxes are not the same as what you mention here.

And how daft does a person have to be to think that human rights are the same as public service taxes.

[SargeUNN]

121. no sale here. You ignore

the fact that taxes like any law that is deemed unconstitutional is struck down regardless of the fact that that area voted on it. Also it is being reported that this fee should not have been allowed in the first place. Sorry I can't tell more because I only heard some of it but Randi Rhodes was reporting it and I heard it earlier but didn't really retain all the details. Try again

[Better Today]

124. So taxes and human rights are the same? Wow, you do live in a different world.

Thanks for confirming. I look forward to you never reading anything I type again. Then I don't have to read your goofy responses anymore.

[SargeUNN]

134. Once more you prove you aren't able to defend your position

What I stated isn't what you said but you know that. Your reply was just your way of getting out of defending an undefendable position and now that I see what you are I see no reason to why anyone would take your post as anything of value. I will however put it so simple even a five year old could understand and hope you can, that a law of any type that is ruled unconstitutional is struck down regardless. Now if you don't get that I just hope people who read you will apply your lack of understanding into how much credibily you should be given.

[Better Today]

136. Geez, can't you even honor your own decisions? Put me on ignore already.

You are talking to yourself anyway. You quit being connected to reality quite few posts ago.

[SargeUNN]

145. wow glad you read my post but what does that say?

I have never put anyone on ignore and apparently you couldn't ignore me either. I usually keep open communications to most anybody unless it is like one spammer that doesn't reply but sends many emails a day. Glad you are so mature and open to discussion. Really says a lot about you.

[Better Today]

149. Ah, I misread you above post because I'm only barely scanning

your crap. It looked like you were saying "you on ignore". I also don't put people on ignore, nor will I let you try to pretend that I'm the obtuse or uninformed one. Everyone, and I mean everyone, I'm reading agrees that their system sucks, but it is their system and we don't get to control others. It was his personal property and he had a choices and made them, including letting his own pets burn up. How you can feel any sympathy for that type of heartless bastard is beyond me and says so much about you.

[SargeUNN]

155. nah I don't use that feature

I understand your statement but since I am from Mississippi I also am aware of how the caste system of the South works. I also grew up with Jim Crow and saw Walter Payton (my high school classmate and childhood friend) pretty much forced to go to Jackson State Univ. when traditionally white schools would rather pass on his talents than have a black on their team. I many talented people turn up in poverty and dispair simply based on the legal racial motivated laws. I witnessed as teen the cruel beating of a black man simply because he was angry with his wife and saw the black man as an outlet for his anger even as the police stood there and watched. I asked the cops and they said they wanted to stop it but if they did it would end their career. I was so glad to see Jim Crow die because I hated what it did to my town which is still to this day paying the price of that time. Had these travesties been stopped earlier and the right of people honored, so many more would have been spared. So how does that relate to this story? This man had his house burned down with the FD there watching, just like the cops I saw as teen, unable to do anything. To force them to go against their morale values to teach this guy a lesson for not paying the fee, was hideous since there was other more reasonable options. Why not accept the payment and fine? Why blacken the image of the community which many must now feel is mean and uncaring, self centered and hateful?

[Better Today]

158. Myself and many others have answered your questions. You choose

to continue to ignore the answers. He had already not paid for a previous "oops I forgot to pay, thanks for showing up, I promise to pay from now on" situation. Watching a house burn is not the same as letting people be beaten. And finally, why would you personally witness those beatings you mention without action? I sure wouldn't have, and haven't when I was faced with similar. Cost me a few fists in the face, but I was able to stop the beatings of two people, and I'm a mere 5'5", lucky if I weight 100#s, and I'm old. So I'm wondering what's your excuse for inhumanely standing around with idle cops instead of doing something about injustice of an actual human. But here you are all passionate about a damned house. You are truly revealing yourself in this thread, and I'm not seeing anything pretty.

[Bluenorthwest]

113. I'm with you on this one

When the house is on fire, the thing to do is put the fire out and deal with it later.

[seabeyond]

133. they did deal with it later, a while ago. they ruled you dont pay, they dont service.

they dealt with it.

the other two options is

raise city taxes significantly higher (2500 people) to cover the non payer in county (35K)

or

pull from county and let them fend for themselves.

what is your answer

it is easy to be idealistic. then there is reality. that is what we are talking.

[dsc]

127. I have yet to hear a reasonable answer to this simple question

The city, which on average is poorer than the county, taxes itself to pay for a fire department. The county chooses not to do so instead having people pay the city to provide the service. The city, on several occassions, fought fires, tried to collect after the fact, and couldn't. So my question is this. What would you have this city do? They tried fighting the fires for free and it stretched them too thin. They tried getting paid after the fact and had no way to collect. They are at the point where they either collect fees from the county people, stop fighting fires for the county people, spend an inordinate amount of their budget fighting fires for both the city and the county, or have no fire department at all. What would you have them do?

[seabeyond]

131. i hear ya. i would like to know too. raise taxes of the already burdened tax payer?

city leave county to fend for self.

i cant see anything else but that or what they have implemented.

does that make me mean, evil, uncompassionate, a troll?

[PVnRT]

148. Of course

It's entirely morally right to raise taxes on generally poorer people so that generally wealthier people don't have to pay taxes. And if you disagree, you're obviously a teabagger.

[seabeyond]

152. not a single... gotta at all cost put out the fire ... people have answered the question. here it

sits.

more have come on and said regardless.... we have to put out fire. shame.... you, shame on all you. this is DU???? look at what you people are. dsigusting. uncompassionate. you ugly people.... >>>>> shame.

but not a single answer.

all 50% plus of the 35,000 people... 17,500 people not paying there mere 75 bucks that would allow firefighters to do their job, not feel crushed because they cant do their job.... all 17,500 not paying must get coverage. bottom line. or you are evil.

not a mention of the burden on city. not a consideration to the taxpayer of 2500. not a thought to the people paying the taxes. not. a. word.

yet

i am not the democrat or the compassionate person. i am a troll.

[Pithlet]

132. Many DUers have answered. It seems the answer is

for the city to keep providing it anyway. Because it's cruel otherwise. That's how it's been explained to me repeatedly. And those of us who don't agree are heartless libertarian bastards.

[seabeyond]

135. well, that is not an answer. or if it is the answer, they are saying, increase city taxpayers

a significant amount so the piddling 25oo people in the city who are more poor can cover the 35k and wealthier peoples ass. i would like to hear if that is their answer. cause i hate to assume. it is just wrong. i prefer not to do that. it lacks integrity to assume.

[dionysus]

150. i find myself agreeing with people who i normally argue with, on this topic. the disconnect on this

issue astounds me.

[Recursion]

179. And it crosses the woodchuck/non-woodchuck divide, strangely

I'm not sure what to make of that.

[WinkyDink]

138. There's actually no point to "debating" this situation; it is over. To debate is : the NEXT time.

What if no changes to the law or payment system or whatever are instituted?

If they vote to keep the current law, then let them fight the fires of the non-paying, but attach some REAL penalty, say, quintupling the fee post-facto; then, if not paid, put out an arrest warrant for "theft of services."
Might concentrate some minds wonderfully.

[Zax2me]

140. I got sucked in with everyone else.

But quit posting on these threads because, well, its less than a month before elections, for one thing, what the hell am I doing.
As with most I thought just put out the fire, work out the fines/payment later, for gosh sakes. The opposing view was just so alarming to me and most others so we got flame wars.
Hopefully it is going to pass. Important topic but all sides have spoken here, not really anywhere else to go with it.
Strange that this of all things held GD hostage for a couple of days, huh...

[SargeUNN]

144. I might agree except

first this is such a hideous and horrible example of why we have such insane candidates as Angle, McDonnell, Paul, West and the others who actually sell this same type ideals to people. Also it is very disturbing so many here would try to even defend such a lack of concern for a fellow human being and instead of seeing the big picture they get caught up on some detail that suddenly to them overrides the wrong which caused that to be there in the first place. The fact we have this mentality to deal with also shows how easy to distract the voters with stuff that we are being fed.

I would also like to think (although I am getting more unsure) that we are capable of more than one topic and can be focused on more than one thing.

[Zax2me]

157. Yea, this is a good sidetrack example.

I see people here as easily our most educated voters. Even so, got sidetracked to the point where people defend watching a mans house burn?!
Can see why many here just can't overlook it and move on like everything is fine.
Want to stay away (personally), for the next month at least, from things that might be self-defeating like this story. As if we don't have enough arrows flying our way from the other side of the fence.

[Zax2me]

160. Additionally...

I'm working a low post count here, ice is understandably thin. Began posting recently mainly because of my involvement/worry/interests in upcoming elections.
Don't have the flexibility for battles and don't want any. None here, anyway, and surely not until after Nov.2.
This particular issue is going to work itself out without me despite my strong opposition that this mans house was allowed to burn.

[shireen]

143. i cannot believe it either ....

Whatever happened to "do the right thing"?
Putting out that fire was the right thing to do, regardless of whether the homeowner had paid his fee or not.
All the justifications that people are presenting, as reasons for allowing the house to burn, pale in comparison to the magnitude of the loss.

Do the right thing. It's that simple.

I am amazed this is being debated at all, here in DU.

:(

[Iterate]

147. There are no winners here,

and I sure don't see any heroes.

One guy, careless or selfish or both, has an accident. It looks like he didn't have the feeling of obligation to his fellow citizens to be careful with fire or make sure he was protected. He lives in a county full of people who don't seem to have the good sense to look out after each other, no sense of community at all.

The neighboring town at least has the sense to have a fire department, but evidently they didn't see the implications of having a pay for service system, and their government is too weak or lacks the imagination to force an area-wide solution. The two states involved have been almost entirely absent in the discussion. I can only assume that not enough people there think they have an obligation to provide good laws and good financing so that rural fire departments can be maintained in a largely rural states.

And I surely don't need to say much about how the Senators and Governors from those states always manage to help their friends find "solutions" but not their fellow citizens. And were there no courts to do anything other that assess fines and fees? Were the states attorney generals incapable of filling a suit to force a solution before it was too late?

So you have no government on the one hand, and a weak and overstressed government on the other. As bad as that was though, it wasn't surprising. In fact, I think most of us here could have seen it coming if we had known the details of the situation beforehand. They're just lucky this was not a major fire.

And then worst of all was the "let it burn" reactions here (from what? 20% of DUers?). Because if there was anything that I always thought of as a core Democratic value, something I could always count on, was the idea that Democrats believe in community and always coming to the aid of a "fellow citizen" no matter how poor or stupid or unfortunate people think he might have been. To do anything less would be uncivilized. It was part of that impossible to describe "common decency."

So, yes SargeUNN, I think we are a much more cruel nation than you thought. Me too. Like you, I've seen more than my share of cruelty, not in the same way you have, but bad enough. But I don't think that either of us has seen the worst of it yet.

[tanyev]

153. Maybe fire departments should start checking city tax rolls before they answer a call

to see whether or not the person calling for help is delinquent on their taxes.

[Rex]

167. After reading a lot of threads on this subject it seems there are two

camps - one wants to blame the guy that owned the house, the other wants to blame the FD for not putting the fire out. Now, the MOST REASONABLE thing to do was to put the fire out. Of course the same could be said about the home owner, though most have said he offered the money when they showed up. So, imo, the FD should have taken his money and put the fire out.

Simple, easy, but no. Some here have to make a mountain out of a mole hill. To all those, you are right the idiot should have paid the money beforehand. So, in all fairness both parties are right and agree the fire should have been put out.

A few think he deserved what he got and a few think the FD members should be brought up on charges.

I think the whole thing could have been avoided and the animals would still be alive today if two groups of people would have done the right thing - neither did and the loss has had some profound affects on the DU population.

And that is all I am saying on this subject as it has been beaten to death by an old horse.

[Swamp Rat]

169. If anyone should be brought up on charges it's the City Manager who gave the order.

JFC!!! :eyes:

The dead horse is now a zombie horse, and I predict it will un-live on for the rest of the week.

[Rex]

170. I suggested that too, but you know how it goes around here.

:hide:

[Swamp Rat]

168. I'm with you 100% SargeUNN!

We know what it is like to be abandoned here in New Orleans. Hell, we are STILL trying to recover here since Katrina, then the oil spill happened... :grr:

I don't care if the farmer was a libertarian, a nihilist, or a moronic freeper who refused to pay his bill... WHATEVER!!! I would have helped the guy save his home and animals!!!

[EmeraldCityGrl]

171. This is about a much bigger issue.

It's about where we are going and what kind of a country we want to be.
I've come to my own peace with this issue that leads back to "all politics
are local." If this is acceptable in Obion County, Tn. I pity them and would
never live there. I live in a State and a county where this would never take
place. We pay a ton of taxes here, some argue too much, but we also have
a wonderful quality of life, an educated and civil population. Obion County
has chosen a different America, I wish them well.

[cynatnite]

188. K&R! n/t