View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"And anyone who claims my resulting resentment of the SOB in the White House is because he's black would be very stupid to say that to my face. There's little chance of that, of course, because most of you are too cowardly to even admit your real identities here."
A hardly veiled threat in isobars' comments above. Would he get physical? Given his mindset and comments over time, I would think he could. Of course though, that would be super stupid.
Regarding real identities, if one uses their name as some of us do, it can lead to the nonsense that isobars has been spreading for quite some time about us. His questionable research into our identities is then used to slander folks publicly here in bent and twisted ways. The guy completely lacks any class and finesse. He's like a terribly bad and revolting smell in the air. It's impossible to ignore. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009 Posts: 4303
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I assume that I am now plonked, so I can comment on the original subject without fear of my comments being misinterpreted or hijacked.
This one is a tough one! I have been involved with aiding volunteer fire departments throughout Western Colorado in design and construction of their facilities. The costs of training, insurance and required equipment to operate such an enterprise is growing rapidly.
Many small, rural communities cannot afford to provide these services; even with fire protection districts that provide tax revenue. Small municipalities are desparate for funding to continue to provide ANY essential services due to revenue shortfalls and increased employee benefit costs.
I don't think this will be the last we see of this type of situation. It may be that communities just will not offer these services at all outside of city limits.
It does seem particularly cold that the firefighters showed up and then refused to put out the fire. Firefighters I know cannot stand to let something burn! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
feuser
Joined: 29 Oct 2002 Posts: 1508
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
coboardhead wrote: | Big question then. How do you FORCE folks to be personally responsible without infringing on personal rights? |
By collecting a tax. The same way I am being "forced" to contribute to national security. _________________ florian - ny22
http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17752 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You notice that Isobars didn't actually explain what is unconstitutional--no real argument there, just invective. And then he makes a threat. Why is it the far right can make a rational argument? And Iso is so warped that he makes threats here about once a month. That's a pretty good way to get in a real fight, and people that like to fight usually beat up windsurfers, even fit ones.
Maybe he's been hanging around bars with matty and killing brain cells so he gets in a lot of fights? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanWeiss
Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Posts: 2296 Location: Connecticut, USA
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
coboardhead wrote: | Feuser
I agree. My comparison of Health Insurance and Community Services really is apples and oranges and on review - wrong!
Treating community and emergency services as an insurance plan was not accurate.
Now, living in a rural area, there is often resistance to creation of taxing entities (such as fireprotection districts). Relying on "donations" or "fees" like this for emergency services is really a bad idea. It can take a lot to get a special district established and funded, so; I can see how this situation got set up.
It may mean that an emergency provider has no choice, really, to respond to any emergency in their area. If there is no way to enforce funding, what can they do?
Big question then. How do you FORCE folks to be personally responsible without infringing on personal rights? |
The answer is very simple in concept if not so much in today's libertarian reality. Create a law stating that if the address is not on the list of included protected properties, the record owner receives a bill for services. The provision of such services creates a top-tier encumbrance on the title as a matter of law, similar to utility charges and property taxes. The bill will be paid no later than transfer of title, e.g., sale or refinance. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009 Posts: 4303
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If I am understanding this correctly, we have something similar here regarding backcountry rescue services. You can buy a rescue "card" as part of your hunting or fishing license or just pay a fee and you get "rescue insurance". This reimburses the cost of the rescue including helicopter etc. The funds go directly to the local agencies.
If you don't have the card, you still get rescued. You just better pay for it. I think the state can actually attach liens to property to pay for it! I don't know what happens to out of state folks when they need services.
I would guess this particular fire has received enough press, that municipalities are grappling with this issue! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanWeiss
Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Posts: 2296 Location: Connecticut, USA
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Other areas of the world regularly charge for rescue -particularly marine rescues. Our USCG does not charge, and nor do most other emergency services.
Why not charge? It is thought that people will hesitate to call for help when considering a rescue charge. Some will delay too long and find themselves in far greater peril than if they made the call much earlier. Not only does the risk to potential victims rise dramatically with each hour needed help is delayed, but the cost of rescue rises very quickly as well.
Paying for fire/rescue service with real estate taxes seems to be the best way to spread the real costs through every land owner in the district. Allocation of those costs is fixed every year and avoids those with more valuable property paying more in real dollars for such service. The result is that the sirens blare whenever anyone calls 911. Unless, of course, you live in Bed Stuy, where 911 is a joke. (Sorry, couldn't resist.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009 Posts: 4303
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That works if you have a population base. Which we don't always in the intermountains.
My county has around 500 residents; but has hundreds of square miles of wilderness. Thousands of outdoor tourists using it.
Pretty expensive to tax 300 houses for these services.
I was involved in a rescue in SE Utah desert. Similar county, maybe 10000 residents, that gets inudated with tourists that constantly get lost. Utah did not have the same rescue card; so cost of the rescue was on the county.
My friends and I personally hired a helicopter to find and transport our lost friends because this county could not afford it.
Got to have some way to spread the risk! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588
|
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For some time now, private entities have been in involved in public projects. One only has to look to toll roads to see a bit more of what is often done. Actually, many Republicans and Libertarians are strong advocates of introducing fees instead of taxes for services and infrastructure projects.
However, when it comes down to local fire fighting services, the issue becomes far more volatile and divisive. Obviously feuser feels a bit differently than I do, despite the fact that we are on the same side of the street on most issues. It must be remembered that when important services are thrown into the arena of a fee for service concept, as unacceptable as that might be, you are in a territory that's untoward and unfriendly towards those without a pocketbook.
The thing to remember is that our realities are moving more in that direction. In proof of my point, I seriously doubt you could find a Republican that would support an increase in taxation of any kind. One has to keep in mind that they don't recognize the practical responsibilities of running much of local and state government services, and if the truth be told, they could give a crap.
I hope I'm wrong about this, but let's see if voters in November pass Proposition 21 in California. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
coboardhead wrote: | Got to have some way to spread the risk! |
Or not. Why should some couch potato city dweller be responsible for my safety when I race dirt bikes across remote SE Utah deserts or WS two miles west of Oregon? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|