Originally Posted by Cat Eye

We pay taxes to have policemen.

Where I live taxes are also used to cover the cost of hospitals and fire stations, which is the way I think it should be. I am not really buying into your argument that the fire station should not be a public service. As this tends to be the polarizing wedge between us, it is sufficient to end my post here.

Edit: You also seem to be misconstruing this as being about the firefighters. For my part at least, I am arguing against the law itself and the way in which they are funded.

Originally Posted by Cat Eye

I've mentioned this before I believe. They would've worked with him if he had called beforehand or came in beforehand and been like I can't pay this all right now. They would've worked something out with him.

Also, if you live in the city, you don't have to pay it.

Oh, you want me to be civil, but look what you just did there? Insulting those who save lives and house. THEY did not make the rule/law/protocol. They wanted to put out the fire, but you know what? They also wanted to keep their jobs so they could keep their house and food and the food for their family. Should they starve just to save a house? Not a life, just a house? And possibly have people starve? I think not personally.

If it had spread, and the owners had rural fire (I've already stated this I believe) they would've put it out in the other areas. I am really getting tired of repeating myself, but I will continue to do it if need be.

I'm going to do what Crimson Fang did, because it's rather useless to continue arguing over something you so fiercely wish to impose here. Fire stations should be a public service. Where I live, I don't have to pay a fee for the fire station to come put out my house. It should be in the taxes, as it is here. It makes no sense otherwise. So, as Crimson Fang did, I'm calling it quits here.

Originally Posted by Crimson Fang

Where I live taxes are also used to cover the cost of hospitals and fire stations, which is the way I think it should be. I am not really buying into your argument that the fire station should not be a public service. As this tends to be the polarizing wedge between us, it is sufficient to end my post here.

In case you haven't noticed, taxes alone aren't enough to pay for everything. Look at our national debt alone.

Also, my state, the state this happened in, does not has a state income tax. The tax money is all from shops. In this city there are two very small general stores. One semi-popular restaurant and that is it. The town is a town of 3000.

Do you think there's enough taxes (or that the state would approtiate (sp) enough grants) to pay for it all?

The rural fire was started to pay for a tanker we needed and couldn't afford on those taxes and grants alone.

----------

Originally Posted by ll P W E E P ll

I'm going to do what Crimson Fang did, because it's rather useless to continue arguing over something you so fiercely wish to impose here. Fire stations should be a public service. Where I live, I don't have to pay a fee for the fire station to come put out my house. It should be in the taxes, as it is here. It makes no sense otherwise. So, as Crimson Fang did, I'm calling it quits here.

Look at the post above this one.

My city is broke. It can't do it and the state won't give us enough grant money considering how small we are. You go start a fund to pay for people's rural fire if this is such a big deal. Even when it has happened before and no one cared then except the people in my little town. Why does it matter now?

And about it should be taken for taxes AKA essentially be free-especially for those no income-it can't be done. What else do you want for free that isn't free? We already have schools and police and some funding for fire fighting "covered" by taxes. How much more do you want? How much more taxes do you want, oh wait I can't put this in caps so I'll let you guess the word, to pay?

But now I'm done too since everyone wants to hate my town for doing what it was supposed to do by things it set up yet not enough people did not oppose. You can't blame a place because it went with what was set up and approved and no one really bothered to stand against it or picket it. And they still aren't. So apparently to most here it is no big deal-which means it shouldn't matter to any of you either.

Originally Posted by Cat Eye

Oh so everyone should get fired after putting it out and then starve to death after losing their homes?

Personally I think that one is worse.

If it had spread to another house, they would've the other house if it had rural fire. Durr.

And it is like having car insurance vs not. You have it and you hit a car? Your insurance goes/you pay a deductible. You don't? You are some deep crap.

Well, it is stupid to have a law (or protocol) and not enforce it. Then why would anyone pay for rural fire. Water, gas, firetrucks, and paying firefighters isn't free, and neither is insurance on those trucks and the station and everything else.

Wanna know what's stupid? That he didn't pay the $75 dollars BEFOREHAND! He wasn't a poor/broke.

I said the protocol was stupid - as in - them losing their jobs for not doing their job is stupid.

And you can't compare having car insurance to this. You have a dent in your car - big whoop. Losing your house and everything you own over $75? That is flipping ridiculous. Your town needs some serious re-adjustment.

Also, I did say they should enforce it.
They should have put the fire out, than made him pay the $75 and a fine. They even said in the news report that the family said they would pay whatever amount.

Even if it was a stupid decision on his part - it was a worst and inhumane choice on the part of the fire department and the government.

So apparently to most here it is no big deal-which means it shouldn't matter to any of you either.

We don't have to live in a place to care about what is going on there.
That is just close-minded.
And just because the people in that place don't care - doesn't mean others don't.
Take Turkey for example. They don't want help from anyone to clean up - but everyone is concerned and wants to help.

My parents and I were talking about this because it was on our radio station. We think it should've gone down like this. He didn't pay them, yeah, okay. He shouldn't just get off the hook. How about this? The fire started, and the station comes and puts it out. Afterwards, the man has to pay more than the normal taxes since he didn't pay them originally. Say about 100-200 dollars? If he doesn't pay that, he will face jailtime.
The story just generally irritates me. A firefighter's job is to protect the citizen's of it's down, give them security. They're seen as heroes, but i've never heard of heroes that just sat back and watched while something bad was happening. Even more so that pets died in the process! What if there had been a person trapped in that house? Would they still just let it burn, killing the person?

(By the way, I haven't read the rest of the thread. It's 3am and i'm a bit too lazy to. Sorry if someone has already mentioned what i've said)

That is unacceptable for the fire station to act in such a way, or rather not act. I mean yes it is wrong for the man to not have paid his taxes but really that is a serous thing. And it is the fire stations line of duty to aid in the instance of a fire. That man should be able to press charges.

That makes me worried. That kind of thing, in my opinion, is disturbing. It shouldn't matter if you pay your taxes or not, if your house is on fire and you call the fire department, they should put it out! That's what they're there for! >.> It makes me want to smack some sense into them. It's only $75. With the economic situation right now, I can understand not paying your taxes. Jeez.