Fire Dept Lets House Burn-Because Local Fire Fee Not Paid

[Ted Menelly]

"but opinions like yours just had to be addressed" - Ted

And why is that, Ted? Am I not allowed an opinion that differs from your own?
Are you the "Opinion Police" on this forum?

Before I go further I wish to thank Bruce and Paul for their support and agreement with my views regarding the recent incident under discussion.

Ted, I've noticed that you fail to address the issue under discussion squarely. You spend a lot of time attempting to demean anyone who has a differing opinion than your own. It's a trait that I've seen in many other threads on this forum where you've contributed, and you've contributed a great deal.

I think any reader of this forum will agree that civil discourse begins with an assumed respect for others engaged in the discussion. Personal assaults, questions regarding someone's character or assumptions regarding the intentions of other contributors is completely out of place here.

As for "hard times" and personal experiences I think I've seen my share. I will confess that, for the most part, lean times could be directly attributable to my own decisions, or lack of preparation. In short, if I had been more prepared, lean times would not have been quite so lean.

Yes, the economy plays a part but I might have prepared myself better for this lean time. I think that many of us could see it coming. We just didn't know how bad it might be or how politicians would prolong the experience.

I was doing some research online yesterday on Prof. John Forbes Nash, Princeton Univ./Nobel Prize Winner. My wife and I were watching the movie "A Beautiful Mind" for the 2nd or 3rd time, and I decided to see what Wikipedia had to say about the genius mathematician. One of the biography contributors posted that "he (Nash) has criticized interest groups that promote quasi-doctrines based on Keynesian economics that permit manipulative short-term inflation and debt tactics that ultimately undermine currencies". (my bold lettering)

I found this entry very interesting in that Keynesian economics is what is practiced by this administration as well as liberal/progressives from either party in Congress. In modern times, it is well-documented how FDR delayed recovery from the depression by this means from 1933-1942 when this countries factories went back to work building armaments for Great Britain. In short, the math genius stated that our administration's current monetary policies "undermine currencies". I found that interesting. Don't you?

But I digress......Ted, you are correct in saying that there are many folks who find themselves on hard times, especially now. No doubt about it.

Tom

There is no problem addressing others opinions as I did with you and you with me. I never said you could not and I am not the opinion police. I did feel your opinion needed addressing as you felt mine and others needed addressing. I am not sure what the problem is here. As far as preparing yourself better? That cannot always happen. Sometimes things come first and the extra is brought forward for guarding against mishaps in the future. Sometimes It is the right idea at the time for chosing a particular career or work for someone else but around the corner it could be the biggest mistake you made.

Yes times are tough, for all, and may get worse before better. Hopefully better before to long. Yes you read past postings of mine. I am a passionate man. What can I say?

[Tom Edwards]

By the sounds of it both you and Tom are under the belief that it is screw everyone, they can take care of themselves camp. That is way way to far in the other direction.

Once again, a miss-characterization of others' views.

If you owned the fire truck and employed the fire team I would applaud your willingness to apply your own assets to the welfare and benefit of the unsubscribing/undeserving home owner. You can spend your own money any way you wish but you nor I have the "right" to expend materials and manpower on non-subscribers. We must be careful not to let our heart write checks that our wallet can't cash.

When the town made a public offer to include coverage for "subscribers" there was an inherent message that they would not cover "non-subscribers" which was acceptable to all that heard of the offering.

You don't know me or the fire chief in question well enough to characterize either of us as heartless. This thread is merely a discussion on whether the fire chief "should have expended material and manpower for the benefit of a non-subscriber" to protect property, not life. I support the fire chief's decision and you don't. This should end it.

[Tom Edwards]

Tom
I am a passionate man. What can I say?

Passion is good, Ted. I'd rather trade emails with an impassioned writer than one with indifference any day.

My only request is that you refrain from characterizing those with differing opinions or questioning their motives.

As an aside....the practice of motive questioning became so bad in Congress that they have a "standing rule" wherein "no member shall question the motive of another". The earlier practice led to a number of fights inside the assembly room, in the hallway and on the steps of the Capitol Building. Maybe Brian could establish such a rule for this forum.

Let your "argument" be based on facts if you can or on your personal "feelings" for the situation and those involved. Each of us may feel compassionate but direct action, IMHO, is not always warranted. In that, we may differ.

[Tim Allison]

Wow.

I'm with the collect fees after if need be. As a fire fighterI can't imagine watching someone's house burn and quote orders to them.

[Ted Menelly]

Tom

See Tims post above. I guess he is a village idiot as well.

Sorry Tim

As far as the rest there is way to much to combat and I do not feel like it right now.

Both jobs today got moved to tomorrow...To top that I did not get others that should have been for tomorrow. At the end of the month I may not have $75.00 to get the sticker on my truck and get some gas

[John Wortham]

Wow.

I'm with the collect fees after if need be. As a fire fighterI can't imagine watching someone's house burn and quote orders to them.

Pretty soon, if fees not collected by taxation, the word would go forth for those with that option you can just wait till it happens and THEN pay the $75.00. Be kinda hard for a company or goverment entity to operate on such a basis. Future planning and all. May be better to establish a fee for service of some amount for a fire response. I am betting if you take annual cost of sustainment per fire response it would be a pretty good figure! Probably in the thousands.

With regard to Tom's posts: I found Tom's post to be well reasoned and supported with no personal attacks. That's as it should be; attack the position, not the person. After all, this is America and for the time being we can still differ in opinion!

One more thing: I find that most often people find themselves in their current position due to the choices (good or bad) they have made. Choose wisely!

BTW: I am in a rural area served by a volunteer fire department of which I gladly pay for their services. A few years ago, a field fire broke out on my neighbors land. I had very little damage of no consequence. 5 different fire departments responded! ALL volunteer. Of which I was thankful.

[Damon McCarty]

Wow.

I'm with the collect fees after if need be. As a fire fighterI can't imagine watching someone's house burn and quote orders to them.

Only pay if your house burns. hmmm
What happens to the fire department if there are no fires in a year?

[James Norman]

They could have put out the fire then billed the home owner for the service. I sure that would have been way more than $75. If the home owner doesnt pay then put a lean on property.