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

highwaystar101 on 07 October 2010

I saw this yesterday.

It's an incredibly badly funded fire service if this is the case, they need to rethink it. But on the other hand I don't have much sympathy for this guy* either because he knew his tax should have been paid, but he didn't pay it. It was silly risk that ended up with him watching his house burn down.

In an ideal world this the tax system should have been set up so that everyone would have had adequete fire protection, but also everyone would have to contribute.

(*Outside of the loss of his pets, which I'm very sympathetic about)



Around the Network
mjk45 on 07 October 2010
Kasz216 said:
mjk45 said:
Kasz216 said:
superchunk said:
Mr Puggsly said:
kitler53 said:

the $75 should have been a mandatory tax.

I'm not savvy about laws. But I think it would be illegal to make it a mandatory tax.


All taxes are mandatory. I have to pay my state and local taxes as well as federal. I can't decide to opt out.

Not all taxes.  Some states and countries run on a subscription fee rather then a tax.  Like this fire department i'd guess.

you said i think making it mandatory  would be illegal and your question was answered by Kitler53. No it wouldn't it would just move from a user pays / fire insurance scheme or what ever the situation is to a  system where it comes out of your taxes either as a specific levy or from the broader town/ state budget,

No, I didn't?  I said not all taxes are mandatory... which they aren't... there are subscription taxes... like this one.

yes you did read it again "I'm not savvy about laws. But  i think it would be illegal to make it a mandatory tax"

plus Kilter 53 said just make it mandatory tax he didn't say all taxes where mandatory although the majority are



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

Kasz216 on 07 October 2010
mjk45 said:
Kasz216 said:
mjk45 said:
Kasz216 said:
superchunk said:
Mr Puggsly said:
kitler53 said:

the $75 should have been a mandatory tax.

I'm not savvy about laws. But I think it would be illegal to make it a mandatory tax.


All taxes are mandatory. I have to pay my state and local taxes as well as federal. I can't decide to opt out.

Not all taxes.  Some states and countries run on a subscription fee rather then a tax.  Like this fire department i'd guess.

you said i think making it mandatory  would be illegal and your question was answered by Kitler53. No it wouldn't it would just move from a user pays / fire insurance scheme or what ever the situation is to a  system where it comes out of your taxes either as a specific levy or from the broader town/ state budget,

No, I didn't?  I said not all taxes are mandatory... which they aren't... there are subscription taxes... like this one.

yes you did read it again "I'm not savvy about laws. But  i think it would be illegal to make it a mandatory tax"

plus Kilter 53 said just make it mandatory tax he didn't say all taxes where mandatory although the majority are

Errrr.... you're the one that needs to read again chief.

Look at the text box that says that.... then look at the username at the top of that text box.

You'll note... it says "Mr Puggsly".  If you'll notice... my username is not Mr Puggsly.

Additionally, you can't apply taxes to people outside of your jurisdiction.

The municpinal government of NY can't apply a fire tax on LA.

It's the same here... there is nothing their government or firedepartment could do.

It's all on his seperate local government. (if they even have one.)



Kasz216 on 07 October 2010
Farmageddon said:
Kasz216 said:
Rath said:
Homer_Simpson said:
Rath said:

Some things. In fact quite a few things. Should always be run federally.

The fire service is one of them, as are the other emergency services.


im assuming federally means local government?

if so, of course, heck, the fact it isn't is frankly insane and as this shows, potentially very dangerous for people.

I guess I should say by the government.

This is being run by the government.

The issue is that the house is outside of the incorporation of the local city.

Hence why, it actually IS Illegal to force them to pay a tax. (looked it up since then actually.  Turns out the guy who said it was illegal wasa right.)

That's why it's a subscription based service... he's outside of the cities "incorporated" zone... and there isn't another zone he's in.


Couldn't his local government (w/e it is) charge the tax and "hire" the other city as a third party for the service?

Oh for sure, that's on his local government though... not the fire department or their government.

The fire department and their city can't FORCE them to do it though.



mjk45 on 07 October 2010
Kasz216 said:
mjk45 said:
Kasz216 said:
mjk45 said:
Kasz216 said:
superchunk said:
Mr Puggsly said:
kitler53 said:

the $75 should have been a mandatory tax.

I'm not savvy about laws. But I think it would be illegal to make it a mandatory tax.


All taxes are mandatory. I have to pay my state and local taxes as well as federal. I can't decide to opt out.

Not all taxes.  Some states and countries run on a subscription fee rather then a tax.  Like this fire department i'd guess.

you said i think making it mandatory  would be illegal and your question was answered by Kitler53. No it wouldn't it would just move from a user pays / fire insurance scheme or what ever the situation is to a  system where it comes out of your taxes either as a specific levy or from the broader town/ state budget,

No, I didn't?  I said not all taxes are mandatory... which they aren't... there are subscription taxes... like this one.

yes you did read it again "I'm not savvy about laws. But  i think it would be illegal to make it a mandatory tax"

plus Kilter 53 said just make it mandatory tax he didn't say all taxes where mandatory although the majority are

Errrr.... you're the one that needs to read again chief.

Look at the text box that says that.... then look at the username at the top of that text box.

You'll note... it says "Mr Puggsly".  If you'll notice... my username is not Mr Puggsly.

Additionally, you can't apply taxes to people outside of your jurisdiction.

The municpinal government of NY can't apply a fire tax on LA.

It's the same here... there is nothing their government or firedepartment could do.

It's all on his seperate local government. (if they even have one.)

my apologies i see now you where replying to superchunk .

From what i can find out basically if its a tax  then its mandatory  that's what being a tax implies ,subscriptions etc may pay for services but aren't taxes per say and yes you can avoid taxes but that is a matter of application rather than mandate PS i feel that both party's where jack asses the owner for not paying and the Fire dept for over reacting.

Maybe after this tragedy after all the animals died the law will be looked at .



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

Around the Network
Kasz216 on 07 October 2010
mjk45 said:
Kasz216 said:
mjk45 said:
Kasz216 said:
mjk45 said:
Kasz216 said:
superchunk said:
Mr Puggsly said:
kitler53 said:

the $75 should have been a mandatory tax.

I'm not savvy about laws. But I think it would be illegal to make it a mandatory tax.


All taxes are mandatory. I have to pay my state and local taxes as well as federal. I can't decide to opt out.

Not all taxes.  Some states and countries run on a subscription fee rather then a tax.  Like this fire department i'd guess.

you said i think making it mandatory  would be illegal and your question was answered by Kitler53. No it wouldn't it would just move from a user pays / fire insurance scheme or what ever the situation is to a  system where it comes out of your taxes either as a specific levy or from the broader town/ state budget,

No, I didn't?  I said not all taxes are mandatory... which they aren't... there are subscription taxes... like this one.

yes you did read it again "I'm not savvy about laws. But  i think it would be illegal to make it a mandatory tax"

plus Kilter 53 said just make it mandatory tax he didn't say all taxes where mandatory although the majority are

Errrr.... you're the one that needs to read again chief.

Look at the text box that says that.... then look at the username at the top of that text box.

You'll note... it says "Mr Puggsly".  If you'll notice... my username is not Mr Puggsly.

Additionally, you can't apply taxes to people outside of your jurisdiction.

The municpinal government of NY can't apply a fire tax on LA.

It's the same here... there is nothing their government or firedepartment could do.

It's all on his seperate local government. (if they even have one.)

my apologies i see now you where replying to superchunk .

From what i can find out basically if its a tax  then its mandatory  that's what being a tax implies ,subscriptions etc may pay for services but aren't taxes per say and yes you can avoid taxes but that is a matter of application rather than mandate PS i feel that both party's where jack asses the owner for not paying and the Fire dept for over reacting.

Maybe after this tragedy after all the animals died the law will be looked at .

One could hope.  Really, I Imagine it's a situation born out of his area not wanting to raise taxes any to pay for it.  Hence the "do it yourself" policy.



alekth on 07 October 2010

Stupid guy but also inadequately set up system.

Such a tax should be enforced on a level that a citizen cannot circumvent. However the town deals with arranging fire-fighters, it should be obligatory to have them arranged.
When last year some parents didn't bring their kid to the hospital for diabetes but decided to pray instead and the kid died, they were sued for homicide. Would this guy be sued for homicide if someone had died in the fire, and should he have the lawful choice to put anyone in such a situation?



Farmageddon on 08 October 2010
d21lewis said:

I'm of the mindset that the people responding to the emergency and the people receiving the emergency call should be seperate from the parties that collect the taxes.  Where I live, if you don't pay your taxes over a period of time, they'll probably be seizing/auctioning some property. 

On top of that, what if someone were inside of the house?  What if this were arson?  There is zero chance of discovering that this was a crime because all of the evidence has burned away.  No way of telling if an accelerant was used, where it initially started, why it started, or anything.  The guy was wrong for not paying his taxes but that should not have even been an issue here.  Mercenary firefighters.  I never thought I'd see the day.


What if the firefighters themselves started the fire because the guy was an ass?



Farmageddon on 08 October 2010
Kasz216 said:
Farmageddon said:
Kasz216 said:
Rath said:

I guess I should say by the government.

This is being run by the government.

The issue is that the house is outside of the incorporation of the local city.

Hence why, it actually IS Illegal to force them to pay a tax. (looked it up since then actually.  Turns out the guy who said it was illegal wasa right.)

That's why it's a subscription based service... he's outside of the cities "incorporated" zone... and there isn't another zone he's in.


Couldn't his local government (w/e it is) charge the tax and "hire" the other city as a third party for the service?

Oh for sure, that's on his local government though... not the fire department or their government.

The fire department and their city can't FORCE them to do it though.

I'm sorry if I'm not following you, kind of drunk right now, but can't his government tax them, and then use the money to hire the other city to the firefighting? What would the problem be with that?



Kasz216 on 08 October 2010
Farmageddon said:
Kasz216 said:
Farmageddon said:
Kasz216 said:
Rath said:

I guess I should say by the government.

This is being run by the government.

The issue is that the house is outside of the incorporation of the local city.

Hence why, it actually IS Illegal to force them to pay a tax. (looked it up since then actually.  Turns out the guy who said it was illegal wasa right.)

That's why it's a subscription based service... he's outside of the cities "incorporated" zone... and there isn't another zone he's in.


Couldn't his local government (w/e it is) charge the tax and "hire" the other city as a third party for the service?

Oh for sure, that's on his local government though... not the fire department or their government.

The fire department and their city can't FORCE them to do it though.

I'm sorry if I'm not following you, kind of drunk right now, but can't his government tax them, and then use the money to hire the other city to the firefighting? What would the problem be with that?

There wouldn't be... except they're unwilling to do so.

There isn't anything the firedepartment and the departments government can do if his government doesn't want such a law.

If there even is a government in place.  Honestly he might just live on completely unincorporated land.