As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Miss a fee and firefighters watch your house burn. Maybe?

AumniAumni Registered User regular
edited October 2010 in Debate and/or Discourse
Ok so there are apparently several different 'versions' of this story. Proceed with caution.

http://www.comcast.net/news/newswrap/6218652/becauseofunpaidfeefirefighterslethomeburn/

So I just caught this while making my rounds across the internet and am quite shocked. The guy missed a $75 dollar fee, which according to his quote he had paid the previous years and just forgot this year, so the fire department pulled up to his house while it was on fire and sprayed the houses around his that did pay the fee so they wouldn't catch.

The guy [Gene Cranick] lost his posessions, 3 dogs and a cat.

So his son punched the fire chief in the face.

I cannot imagine sitting by while my posessions and pets [I live on an almost farm with a lot of dogs, horses, goats , the works] burned. While the fire department sat next to me making sure the neighbors houses didn't catch.

I mean...sheesh. What are your thoughts guys? Are you ok with him missing a fee and getting the appropriate response from the Department?

http://steamcommunity.com/id/aumni/ Battlenet: Aumni#1978 GW2: Aumni.1425 PSN: Aumnius
Aumni on
«13456710

Posts

  • Options
    KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Better than socialism, mirite?

    KalTorak on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    KalTorak wrote: »
    Better than socialism, mirite?

    I don't know bro, looks like the free market killed his cat in a fire.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    adytumadytum The Inevitable Rise And FallRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Libertarian paradise, mirite?

    This story has been burning up all the blogs.

    adytum on
  • Options
    CiSTM K0nFLiqTCiSTM K0nFLiqT Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Doctors watch people die in America everyday because they can't afford health insurance. And this actually surprises you?

    Everything costs money in that society. Don't be shocked when police start watching people get raped when they can't provide proof of some kind of insurance.

    CiSTM K0nFLiqT on
    I like your suit, love...
  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Doctors watch people die in America everyday because they can't afford health insurance. And this actually surprises you?

    Everything costs money in that society. Don't be shocked when police start watching people get raped when they can't provide proof of some kind of insurance.

    This is untrue in most cases, deaths from lack of insurance are generally from chronic conditions. Once you're in the ER they'll do what they can to save you because most hospital employees are actually human beings.

    If you need $1000/month medications to keep living though, you won't get those, because the suits are absolutely not human

    override367 on
  • Options
    DeebaserDeebaser on my way to work in a suit and a tie Ahhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Correction to the OP, Gene Cranick did not punch the fire chief in the face. His son punched the fire chief in the face.

    I'm really curious if they're actually going to prosecute that one.

    Deebaser on
  • Options
    KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Doctors watch people die in America everyday because they can't afford health insurance. And this actually surprises you?

    Everything costs money in that society. Don't be shocked when police start watching people get raped when they can't provide proof of some kind of insurance.

    Umm, actually if someone shows up to the ER and needs lifesaving treatment, the hospital is required by law to give it to them. If they don't have insurance, the state pays for it.

    No hospital is allowed to throw out a dying person because they don't have insurance.

    KalTorak on
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Doctors watch people die in America everyday because they can't afford health insurance. And this actually surprises you?

    Everything costs money in that society. Don't be shocked when police start watching people get raped when they can't provide proof of some kind of insurance.

    Actually...
    The bill would require also rape survivors to personally report the crime and identify the assailant, if known, within 72 hours in order for their health insurance to cover an abortion procedure.

    Not quite there, but closing in!

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Deebaser wrote: »
    Correction to the OP, Gene Cranick did not punch the fire chief in the face. His son punched the fire chief in the face.

    I'm really curious if they're actually going to prosecute that one.

    I wonder if they'd let someone burn to death if they didn't pay the fee

    override367 on
  • Options
    DeebaserDeebaser on my way to work in a suit and a tie Ahhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    adytum wrote: »
    Libertarian paradise, mirite?

    This story has been burning up all the blogs.

    Except Freerepublic. I did a search for "fire", "Tennessee", "Olbion", "Dude's house burning to the ground", "Dead dogs", and "libertarian paradise" and I came up with jack shit.

    Deebaser on
  • Options
    adytumadytum The Inevitable Rise And FallRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/10/should-we-let-the-guys-house-burn-down.html
    David Henderson blogs some of the basic information (Cohn at TNR comments here). Here is the upshot:
    He refers to a story about a man who failed to pay an annual fee for fire protection and then, when his house caught on fire and he called the fire department, the fire department refused to show up.

    They wouldn't even let him pay up ex post. David notes that this is a government-run fire department and thus the story is not much of a moral reductio on the market. Arguably a private company would behave the same way, sometimes, but it 's odd to claim that government failure reminds you market failure is possible and so let's damn the market. By the way, markets do pretty well at setting up schemes with a penalty for late payment; that's how my mortgage works.

    I would make a broader point. Any social system must, at some stage of interactions, impose some morally unacceptable penalties. If you are very hungry, and you shoplift food, they still might prosecute you. If you don't pay your taxes, and resist wage garnishes, they might put you in jail. If you resist arrest, they might, at some point in the chain of events, shoot you while trying to escape. Somewhere along the line there is a doctor who can treat your rare disease except he doesn't feel like working so much, and so he lets you die or suffer; you can find both private and public sector examples here.

    Social systems proceed by (usually) covering up the brutalities upon which they are based. The doctor doesn't let you get to his door and then turn you away, rather his home address is hard to find. The government handcuffs you so they don't have to shoot you trying to escape. And so on.

    To borrow language from Thomas Schelling, social systems involve costs in terms of both "known" and "statistical" lives. It's the sum total of costs which is important. It's fine (though controversial) to argue that a "known" life should be more important than a "statistical" life, but it's not dispositive to pull out one example of a "known" life and draw a significant conclusion from that anecdote. That's what we teach students not to do in first year principles, sometimes citing Bastiat, the seen and the unseen, and so on.

    I don't favor the policies of this fire department, but simply pointing out the vividness one of these social brutalities doesn't much influence me about the broader principles at stake.

    Just some interesting thoughts from an interesting guy.

    adytum on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Deebaser wrote: »
    adytum wrote: »
    Libertarian paradise, mirite?

    This story has been burning up all the blogs.

    Except Freerepublic. I did a search for "fire", "Tennessee", "Olbion", "Dude's house burning to the ground", "Dead dogs", and "libertarian paradise" and I came up with jack shit.

    Yeah they didn't touch the O'Keefe CNN story either. That place is astounding in its ability to pretend something didn't happen.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    HappylilElfHappylilElf Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Doctors watch people die in America everyday because they can't afford health insurance. And this actually surprises you?

    Everything costs money in that society. Don't be shocked when police start watching people get raped when they can't provide proof of some kind of insurance.

    Four posts in and the terrible analogies start.

    Doctors don't stand around in the ER watching people die and actually I think I will be shocked if police start watching people get raped because they can't profide proof of insurance.

    Just as I'll be shocked and outraged when firefighters watch a house burn to the ground while standing idly by.

    HappylilElf on
  • Options
    takyristakyris Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Aumni wrote: »
    http://www.comcast.net/news/newswrap/6218652/becauseofunpaidfeefirefighterslethomeburn/

    So I just caught this while making my rounds across the internet and am quite shocked. The guy missed a $75 dollar fee, which according to his quote he had paid the previous years and just forgot this year, so the fire department pulled up to his house while it was on fire and sprayed the houses around his that did pay the fee so they wouldn't catch.

    The guy [Gene Cranick] lost his posessions, 3 dogs and a cat.

    So what did he do? Punched the fire chief in the face.

    I cannot imagine sitting by while my posessions and pets [I live on an almost farm with a lot of dogs, horses, goats , the works] burned. While the fire department sat next to me making sure the neighbors houses didn't catch.

    I mean...sheesh. What are your thoughts guys? Are you ok with him missing a fee and getting the appropriate response from the Department?

    In the version of the story that I heard, he chose not to pay. He was living on unincorporated land, knew that he had to pay, chose not to pay, and continued to burn shit in his yard.

    The fire department did arrive. They did help him. As I understand it, they asked permission from the mayor to go in even though the guy hadn't paid. The mayor denied them permission to do so.

    EDIT: Looks like the homeowner was never in danger, so there was no human rescue. The firefighters arrived to help the neighbor's yard. And the homeowner and firefighters never spoke with the mayor. Leaving original text in, just red, to keep context of later comments.

    I can see the guy's side of this. I forget to pay bills sometimes, too, and thank god I live in a city and the fire department stuff is just part of my taxes, so I can't forget to pay it.

    I can see the fire department's side of this. They're not vigilantes. They can't rush in against orders, and they did everything within their power.

    I can also see the mayor's side of this, to a very very tiny degree. Let's say he says, "Oh, okay, fine, go on in, guys, we'll collect his fee after the fact." Well, what he's just done there is tell everyone, "You don't have to pay your fire department fee. We'll take care of you anyway, and you can always say oops and pay if your house catches fire." That screws the fire department. There's also the question of whether the firefighters or the city would have been covered legally if one of them had been hurt, or even just lost equipment, while going in to fight a fire for which they were not legally authorized to do so. Maybe in that case, someone could have said, "The guy who owns the house can volunteer to pay for any injuries or damage to firefighter property," and in fact I believe the guy did volunteer to do this... but if you're the mayor of the town, I can understand not just taking the guy's word for it, from a "Will we get sued by someone down the line?" perspective. The mayor weighed that against the fact that no human lives were at stake and made the best call he could. It's not what I would have done, but then, I'm a hippie vegetarian bleeding heart liberal with seven pets, all of them rescues, so my priorities might not be completely neutral here.

    Blame the mayor for making the call, and/or the guy for not paying his damn bill, if you want. I'd lump a lot of blame on the idiotic "separate bill for fire protection" deal -- no matter where in the U.S. you live, that should just be lumped into the taxes, and hopefully this will get that changed.

    But don't blame the firefighters. I've seen nothing in this story to indicate that they sat there and chuckled while a dude's house burned down with the pets inside. My friend who took some first-responder training class (he was considering being an ambulance driver or paramedic, I think?) talked about the laws about when they could and could not go into a building when first on the scene. And some of those laws are brutal and heartbreaking. I imagine the firefighters are pretty much in the same boat.

    takyris on
  • Options
    Jolt ColaJolt Cola Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Maybe the FD will realize the market for ad-hoc fire protection and charge a $20,000 charge for not buying into the $75/year program.

    Jolt Cola on
  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Doctors watch people die in America everyday because they can't afford health insurance. And this actually surprises you?

    Everything costs money in that society. Don't be shocked when police start watching people get raped when they can't provide proof of some kind of insurance.

    Four posts in and the terrible analogies start.

    Doctors don't stand around in the ER watching people die and actually I think I will be shocked if police start watching people get raped because they can't profide proof of insurance.

    Just as I'll be shocked and outraged when firefighters watch a house burn to the ground while standing idly by.

    Well number 2 has happened, I'm sure number 1 is an eventuality.

    override367 on
  • Options
    CiSTM K0nFLiqTCiSTM K0nFLiqT Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    So they stabilize people in the ERs so they can go and die in the comfort of their own homes or on the streets later? Yeah, world of difference there.

    CiSTM K0nFLiqT on
    I like your suit, love...
  • Options
    AumniAumni Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Well that multiple stories thing throws a wrench into the impact of the situation.

    I can't wait for the truth version of this story.

    Aumni on
    http://steamcommunity.com/id/aumni/ Battlenet: Aumni#1978 GW2: Aumni.1425 PSN: Aumnius
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Aumni wrote: »
    Well that multiple stories thing throws a wrench into the impact of the situation.

    I can't wait for the truth version of this story.

    I've never heard that second account, I'm waiting for a cite personally.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    There's a secondary angle to this.

    A friend of mine, who thrives on fact-finding on stuff like this, found some interesting dirt on Obion County (since this house is in an unincorporated area, the county has primary financial responsibility for fire control). The most telling one was a line from a state audit on the county:
    "The audit of the financial statements of Obion County disclosed significant deficiencies in internal control."

    I need to get the link from him. I'll post it later.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    takyristakyris Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I'm sure the truth version will clarify everything.

    I'll hunt for links that support anything I said. It's clearly not mentioned in your article.

    takyris on
  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    So they stabilize people in the ERs so they can go and die in the comfort of their own homes or on the streets later? Yeah, world of difference there.

    So...

    Do you have a point you're trying to make? Because I'm not sure what that is. Like at all.

    Santa Claustrophobia on
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    There are two worthwhile things to take from this:

    1) The neighbor who paid the fee and the fire was put out when it spread to his house? That's needless fire damage to his house because of a stupid fucking law. We have a government to solve community action problems such as this one. Or the one wherein people getting sick actually hurts other people too.

    2) This is an excellent situation for an individual mandate, if you're going to be stupid and have a separate fee for fire service.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    dlinfinitidlinfiniti Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    adytum wrote: »
    Libertarian paradise, mirite?

    This story has been burning up all the blogs.

    perhaps the blogs should've paid their $75

    dlinfiniti on
    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    dlinfiniti wrote: »
    adytum wrote: »
    Libertarian paradise, mirite?

    This story has been burning up all the blogs.

    perhaps the blogs should've paid their $75

    we have a winner.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    HappylilElfHappylilElf Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    dlinfiniti wrote: »
    adytum wrote: »
    Libertarian paradise, mirite?

    This story has been burning up all the blogs.

    perhaps the blogs should've paid their $75

    we have a winner.

    Yup, shut it down folks. Nothig else to be done here.

    HappylilElf on
  • Options
    Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    As an aside, I think a lot of people in urban areas don't know that government-run fire services are not a given in a lot of rural areas in the country. In a lot of communities, the only available fire services are ones staffed by volunteers. The local government may pay for the equipment, but the firefighters don't get paid a penny.

    Part of that is cost- densely populated areas can afford fire services, while trying to cover counties in rural areas can be prohibitively expensive for small local governments. Also, fires in densely populated areas are much more dangerous than in low-density localities. There is little or no danger that a fire in a rural area is going to spread to neighboring properties.

    Modern Man on
    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • Options
    takyristakyris Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I take back anything about asking the mayor personally. I misread something. The mayor was asked about it afterward, but it doesn't look like he was asked beforehand.

    While hunting, I did find this gem:

    "I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong," said Gene Cranick.


    Well, good on you for believing in the collective power of when-it's-convenient-for-you socialism.

    Also, the pets are now in doubt. The fire evidently started on his land, and he had several hours to get into his not-burning home to get out any pets. The pets aren't mentioned until the homeowner goes on Olberman.

    takyris on
  • Options
    PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Didn't this fire damage some nearby property? I recall reading that in one version of the story, but this story in particular seems to be "evolving."

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • Options
    JokermanJokerman Everything EverywhereRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Jesus christ, it's like the fire department is running a protection racket.

    nice house, be a shame if something were to happen to it.

    Jokerman on
  • Options
    juice for jesusjuice for jesus Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    This is THE textbook example (literally, down to the fire crew going into action when a paying homeowner's property was in jeopardy) of the free rider problem in insurance, and it is the primary reasoning for government mandated or administered insurance. The 75$ fee should have been made mandatory for all homeowners in the unincorporated area, but wharglebarble the taxes! Instead this guy though he could "free ride" and found out you really can't.

    juice for jesus on
  • Options
    Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    This is actually how fire fighting and insurance as a whole started.

    Sometimes on really old houses you can still see the old signs hung to identify which fire company the person paid for.

    Xenogears of Bore on
    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Modern Man wrote: »
    As an aside, I think a lot of people in urban areas don't know that government-run fire services are not a given in a lot of rural areas in the country. In a lot of communities, the only available fire services are ones staffed by volunteers. The local government may pay for the equipment, but the firefighters don't get paid a penny.

    Part of that is cost- densely populated areas can afford fire services, while trying to cover counties in rural areas can be prohibitively expensive for small local governments. Also, fires in densely populated areas are much more dangerous than in low-density localities. There is little or no danger that a fire in a rural area is going to spread to neighboring properties.

    Yes but when those services do exist, as they did here, you have access to them as a tax payer. This is simply a failure in pay-for-service fire department.

    And I'm not sure how rural we're talking here, he did have a neighbor nearby.

    But as was pointed out, shit like this was one of the primary reasons we have public fire departments now. Its in the communities best interest to see all fires put out immediately, regardless of the property owner's wealth.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    JokermanJokerman Everything EverywhereRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    This is THE textbook example (literally, down to the fire crew going into action when a paying homeowner's property was in jeopardy) of the free rider problem in insurance, and it is the primary reasoning for government mandated or administered insurance. The 75$ fee should have been made mandatory for all homeowners in the unincorporated area, but wharglebarble the taxes! Instead this guy though he could "free ride" and found out you really can't.

    he just missed a payment, he even tried to pay it back but they wouldnt let him.

    Jokerman on
  • Options
    ToxTox I kill threads he/himRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I have two thoughts on this matter:

    1) Save the guys house. Usually, if a 9-1-1 call summons fire fighters, it also summons police. Since he was rural, it would be the Sheriff, who works for the county (the county to whom he did not pay his fee). Once everything's saved, have the sheriff give him a $75 citation for using the service without paying the fee. Case closed, problem solved, money collected.

    2) Whoever was the on-site shot-caller for the fire fighters should have said to hell with the orders. I spent four years in the army, and virtually every NCO I worked for would always tell us "Rule 0: Do the right thing." That doesn't mean obey orders, that means do the right thing. He should have disobeyed orders, saved the guys house, gotten fired, and sued the county for being fired for doing his job.

    Tox on
    Twitter! | Dilige, et quod vis fac
  • Options
    juice for jesusjuice for jesus Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Jokerman wrote: »
    This is THE textbook example (literally, down to the fire crew going into action when a paying homeowner's property was in jeopardy) of the free rider problem in insurance, and it is the primary reasoning for government mandated or administered insurance. The 75$ fee should have been made mandatory for all homeowners in the unincorporated area, but wharglebarble the taxes! Instead this guy though he could "free ride" and found out you really can't.

    he just missed a payment, he even tried to pay it back but they wouldnt let him.

    Well, nobody really thinks their house will burn down until it happens.

    What they should have done, if they didn't want mandatory fees, is set up a system where non-payers would still receive the service, but in turn they would be billed for the full cost of the response. Poorly designed program, all around.

    juice for jesus on
  • Options
    OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Score another one for the Invisible Hand!

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • Options
    Modern ManModern Man Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    This is actually how fire fighting and insurance as a whole started.

    Sometimes on really old houses you can still see the old signs hung to identify which fire company the person paid for.
    You can still hire private fire companies. Some premium insurance policies (especially in fire-prone western states) include/require them.

    During a round of wildfires out west a few years back, a bunch of private companies did a really good job of saving high-end houses while neighboring properties burned down. In a wildfire situation, saving individual properties isn't high on the agenda for government fire fighters who need to focus on stopping the main fire.

    Modern Man on
    Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
    Rigorous Scholarship

  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    This is THE textbook example (literally, down to the fire crew going into action when a paying homeowner's property was in jeopardy) of the free rider problem in insurance, and it is the primary reasoning for government mandated or administered insurance. The 75$ fee should have been made mandatory for all homeowners in the unincorporated area, but wharglebarble the taxes! Instead this guy though he could "free ride" and found out you really can't.

    Some areas have a kind of 'ambulance fee'. Pay a certain amount per year and if you need to call for an ambulance, then you pay nothing extra.

    However, if you don't pay, they'll still come and do whatever. You'll just be charged in full for the costs of the services provided.

    Cell phones are required by law, that even if you don't have access to the services of a provider, you can still dial 911 for an emergency.

    Some toll roads that use those sensors that deduct from an account will simply send a bill to people who don't have the equipment rather than some kind of fine.

    It's not unreasonable to presume that if you call the fucking fire department, they'll show up and put a fire out whether or not you've paid a fee beforehand. It would've hardly been the worst thing in the world for them to put the fire out and then bill him.

    Santa Claustrophobia on
  • Options
    lazegamerlazegamer The magnanimous cyberspaceRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I don't know if there is much to say, this is pretty much the most bare-bones example of the conflict between individual liberty and collective responsibility that you can get. When left to their own devices, people will make decisions that will negatively affect their health and property. That responsibility is the cost of being able to make your own decisions, and the evaluation of the cost versus the benefit is going to vary from person to person.

    I'm a big fan of Coates and I think he does a better job of summarizing this conflict.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/10/mandates-and-moral-calculus/64097
    Here's an interesting, if tragic, story in which a local fire department stood around and watched as a citizen's house burned to the ground, because the citizen had not paid fire protection. It's worth checking out Jonathan Cohn's post on this:
    Fire protection is usually compulsory. You pay for it with your taxes, just like you pay for police protection, a national defense, and Social Security. But in rural areas, apparently, some people who could pay for fire protection don't--in the same way that some people who could buy health insurance today don't. The trouble with this arrangement is that some people who decline protection will need it.

    Foster (who, by the way, is a really interesting writer I just discovered a few weeks ago) says that the firefighters should have accepted the offer for payment, on the spot, and doused the flame. I'd go a bit farther than that. To me this is a classic case for requiring payment up front--that is, an individual mandate. People shouldn't have the option to decline fire protection if protection is available.

    If they refuse to pay the fees, assuming they are reasonable relative to their means, they should be subject to financial penalties. The same goes for health insurance. Don't let people go without basic coverage, but make them pay for it, to whatever extent their income allows. Does that make me a little paternalistic? You bet. And I'm ok with that. We all make really poor decisions sometimes.

    And while I think suffering the consequences of those decisions is generally a good thing, or at least a necessary thing, some consequences strike me as too extreme. Losing your life savings (or your life!) because you declined health insurance is one such consequence. Losing your house because you declined to pay for fire protection is another.


    I'm always intrigued by libertarian arguments, as I'm a firm believer in recognizing the importance of individual agency. I'm less convinced that people, left unfettered, won't eventually do something really catastrophic--if not to themselves, then to the broader society. (As fatalist as this sounds, I'm still not 100 percent sure we shouldn't let that play out, too.) What I see in Jon Cohn's piece is rather fascinating and, for me, viscerally repellent--not only are we ignorant, but we are prone to understating our ignorance and doing ourselves, and others, grievous harm.

    It does feel paternalistic, because I think we all like to think that we know best. Or maybe we like to think that we will live and die by our own individual decisions. I don't know. But reading this, oddly enough, has helped me better understand the critique of surrendering liberty for the good of the whole, and perhaps ourselves. It doesn't mean the critique is correct, but it's an interesting problem to turn over.

    lazegamer on
    I would download a car.
Sign In or Register to comment.