By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Firefighters let house burn down over $75

the county has another option and that is to look at setting up a volunteer fire fighting unit  that is what we have Australia wide . Here the States fund the essential services fire, police, ambulance etc but  regarding fire fighting we also have a strong volunteer force with there own tankers and stations through out rural and semi rural Australia  due mainly to our severe fire season it is part funded by federal and state grants as well as some rural  councils having  a fire levy surcharge these  go mainly to buy equipment  like tankers leasing of helicopters and some full time senior command personnel every thing else is raised by the local stations and the community themselves.



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

Around the Network
HappySqurriel said:
sapphi_snake said:
NJ5 said:


Maybe, but I think it reflects even more negatively on the country, which presents itself as civilized but can't guarantee the most basic of services to its citizens. Things like setting up military bases around the world are, in practice, guaranteed by the taxes Americans pay, but such a primary thing as fire protection isn't.

Ponder on that for a while...

True, but this is mainly a reflection of the genral atitude of many Americans (who hate taxes so much that they're willing to give up on public services like fire protection).

The problem in the United States isn't that Americans are unwilling to pay taxes to provide adequate essential services, the problem is that the money collected is used to pay for so many non-essential services that core services are underfunded.  People like to blame "the military" for this, but the military is an essential service, only takes up a small portion of the federal budget, and this is a problem in state and municipal governments (which don't pay for the military).


A small portion of the federal budget?

23% is a small portion?



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

NJ5 said:
HappySqurriel said:
sapphi_snake said:
NJ5 said:


Maybe, but I think it reflects even more negatively on the country, which presents itself as civilized but can't guarantee the most basic of services to its citizens. Things like setting up military bases around the world are, in practice, guaranteed by the taxes Americans pay, but such a primary thing as fire protection isn't.

Ponder on that for a while...

True, but this is mainly a reflection of the genral atitude of many Americans (who hate taxes so much that they're willing to give up on public services like fire protection).

The problem in the United States isn't that Americans are unwilling to pay taxes to provide adequate essential services, the problem is that the money collected is used to pay for so many non-essential services that core services are underfunded.  People like to blame "the military" for this, but the military is an essential service, only takes up a small portion of the federal budget, and this is a problem in state and municipal governments (which don't pay for the military).


A small portion of the federal budget?

23% is a small portion?


With how much "blame" it gets for being so wasteful, and the fact that a large portion of it is essential (most western countries still spend 2/3 as much relative to GDP as the United States does) it is a small portion ...

Realistically, in 5 to 10 years even if military spending remains stable with inflation it is likely that growth in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will push military spending below 15% of Federal Spending.

Edit: and you can't forget that Federal Spending isn't total government spending, you also have municipal and state spending.

My point still stands that the problem isn't that taxes are too low, the problem is that spending is too high and is mostly focused on non-essential spending.



viewtiful_jon said:

Taxes are a good thing when used right, wasting the money on someone who wont pay a tax would of been wroung.

They did a good job coming and stopping it spreading to the people who did pay. I just wish other goverments would follow suit and stop giving so much damn money away. Hell think how good the UK would be if the only money they spent on the immigrants was a ticket home, but no each family costs the tax payer over a million a year.

Back on topic the firefighters are probally getting underbudget due to putting out peoples fires that dont pay, and this is there wakeup call to people.

the same immigrants that came to Australia post WW2 and now employ a large sector of the community or supply the workforce needed  to prosper ,the US was built on the back of immigration



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

HappySqurriel said:
richardhutnik said:
sapphi_snake said:
richardhutnik said:

I think here, to bring up something Cenk said (the guy speaking in the video), there is a time and place where community is an important reality.  Putting out fires is a community concern, and has to be taken care of.  If you have an issue that is a county issue, then it needs to be resolved there.  I believe that the concerns of the community here override whether or not someone is a cheapskate or not.

The person acting against the community is the guy who doesn't want to pay the tax. He's the selfish one who's only out for hiw own interest.

There are individuals with a libertarian bent in their life philosophy, who believe communities are a myth and the only thing that exists are individuals who negotiate contracts among themselves.  They don't want to live anywhere others make demands on them and they have to go along with what the group says.  Ayn Rand's "enlightened self-interest" fits into this.


I don't think you understand what libertarianism is ...

One can politically be Libertarian and hold they believe, politically, that government needs to be small, and unimposing in society, but still believe society should provide a safety need, care for others, and people have morals and society seek to preserve certain set of values.  Philosophically, however, one can be Libertarian and not believe in charity, safety nets or any sense of community, and be like Ayn Rand is, and an Objectionist in their philosophy, believing that charity is vice.  Libertarian comes in a lot of forms actually.



Around the Network
viewtiful_jon said:

Taxes are a good thing when used right, wasting the money on someone who wont pay a tax would of been wroung.

They did a good job coming and stopping it spreading to the people who did pay. I just wish other goverments would follow suit and stop giving so much damn money away. Hell think how good the UK would be if the only money they spent on the immigrants was a ticket home, but no each family costs the tax payer over a million a year.

Back on topic the firefighters are probally getting underbudget due to putting out peoples fires that dont pay, and this is there wakeup call to people.


Over a million a year? Like, over 3,000 pounds a day?



richardhutnik said:
sapphi_snake said:
richardhutnik said:

I think here, to bring up something Cenk said (the guy speaking in the video), there is a time and place where community is an important reality.  Putting out fires is a community concern, and has to be taken care of.  If you have an issue that is a county issue, then it needs to be resolved there.  I believe that the concerns of the community here override whether or not someone is a cheapskate or not.

The person acting against the community is the guy who doesn't want to pay the tax. He's the selfish one who's only out for hiw own interest.

There are individuals with a libertarian bent in their life philosophy, who believe communities are a myth and the only thing that exists are individuals who negotiate contracts among themselves.  They don't want to live anywhere others make demands on them and they have to go along with what the group says.  Ayn Rand's "enlightened self-interest" fits into this.

Well such individuals shouldn't be complaining that their house burns down, and that nobody in the "mythical communities" wants to deal with them.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

HappySqurriel said:
sapphi_snake said:
NJ5 said:


Maybe, but I think it reflects even more negatively on the country, which presents itself as civilized but can't guarantee the most basic of services to its citizens. Things like setting up military bases around the world are, in practice, guaranteed by the taxes Americans pay, but such a primary thing as fire protection isn't.

Ponder on that for a while...

True, but this is mainly a reflection of the genral atitude of many Americans (who hate taxes so much that they're willing to give up on public services like fire protection).

The problem in the United States isn't that Americans are unwilling to pay taxes to provide adequate essential services, the problem is that the money collected is used to pay for so many non-essential services that core services are underfunded.  People like to blame "the military" for this, but the military is an essential service, only takes up a small portion of the federal budget, and this is a problem in state and municipal governments (which don't pay for the military).

What are these non-essential services?



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

sapphi_snake said:
HappySqurriel said:
sapphi_snake said:
NJ5 said:


Maybe, but I think it reflects even more negatively on the country, which presents itself as civilized but can't guarantee the most basic of services to its citizens. Things like setting up military bases around the world are, in practice, guaranteed by the taxes Americans pay, but such a primary thing as fire protection isn't.

Ponder on that for a while...

True, but this is mainly a reflection of the genral atitude of many Americans (who hate taxes so much that they're willing to give up on public services like fire protection).

The problem in the United States isn't that Americans are unwilling to pay taxes to provide adequate essential services, the problem is that the money collected is used to pay for so many non-essential services that core services are underfunded.  People like to blame "the military" for this, but the military is an essential service, only takes up a small portion of the federal budget, and this is a problem in state and municipal governments (which don't pay for the military).

What are these non-essential services?

I think a simpler way to look at this is what are the essential services that are provided by the government. On a federal level the government is responsible for national security, foreign relations, interstate relations, trade and a portion of the criminal justice/penal system. Any spending item that doesn't line-up with these responsibilities is not essential, because it doesn't have to be provided by the federal government. Similarly, state and municipal government have core responsibilities and any spending not related to these responsibilities is non-essential; and most emergency services (like the fire department) would fall into the responsibility of the state or municipal government.

When you start looking into social spending (as an example) it doesn't line-up with any responsibility the governments do (or should) have; and when you analyze the outcomes of most of this spending and understand that no-one benefits from this in the long run it is difficult to argue that it is something that should continue to exist.



HappySqurriel said:

I think a simpler way to look at this is what are the essential services that are provided by the government. On a federal level the government is responsible for national security, foreign relations, interstate relations, trade and a portion of the criminal justice/penal system. Any spending item that doesn't line-up with these responsibilities is not essential, because it doesn't have to be provided by the federal government. Similarly, state and municipal government have core responsibilities and any spending not related to these responsibilities is non-essential; and most emergency services (like the fire department) would fall into the responsibility of the state or municipal government.

When you start looking into social spending (as an example) it doesn't line-up with any responsibility the governments do (or should) have; and when you analyze the outcomes of most of this spending and understand that no-one benefits from this in the long run it is difficult to argue that it is something that should continue to exist.

Social spending? Such as (I'm not American, so I don't know exactly what those are over there).



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)