Forum Post: Firefighters Watch House Burn in Tennessee: American Dream Goes Up in a Blaze - Literally
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 9, 2011, 6:06 a.m. EST by JadedCitizen
(4277)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Summary: firefighters let a resident's property burn over $75 fee for fire protection. I provided a link from Fox News radio, NBC affiliate, and Comedy Central for comparison of how the media covers the story.
Does this story burn you up, or did she get what she deserved?
http://radio.foxnews.com/2011/12/07/tn-firefighters-respond-to-house-fire-watch-it-burn-to-ground/
http://www.northwestohio.com/news/story.aspx?id=694746#.TuHfVoQbfPU
This is a clear demonstration of rightwing ideology at work. I am a professional firefighter and have been for for nearly 29 years. The war on public employees and taxes by the right has brought us to this. The concept of a public servant which exists because of tax revenues is anathema to the rightwing. If they had their way this is how all of emergency services would be handled. This is the future of governance in the hands of the right.
Thank you, so nice to hear from a Real firefighter on this subject. Stay safe.
Would you fight a fire if you were told you had to assume all the risk yourself? I think that's Jaded's point. She seems upset at the fact that the firefighters just watched. In other articles on similar fires it was stated that if the firemen fight the fire they do it with no coverage at all.
In this case in particular, how involved is a trailer by the time the firemen get there, is there even much to save?
Interesting that you say that since South Fulton and many of the surrounding towns are represented by independents. South Fulton has an Independent Mayor and City Commissioner as does Union City. The district is represented in TN by Judy Barker (D)
There is the right and there is the left and that is it. the right goes by many names, independent, tea party, and others, but they are all rightwing. There is only the right and the left whatever name is currently fashionable is nonsense, you are either liberal or conservative. Since the formation of this country and before there have been Puritans and Libertines and that is the basis of political ideology.
It's all or nothing, isn't it? If you're against big government, then you must be FOR letting houses burn down, huh?
Yep you got it.
I believe people are more than just liberal or conservative. Why do you believe there are only two types of people?
Also, like many you confuse terms.
Liberal, Social, Conservative, Progressive, Republican, Democrat
I find that most people are confused about the meaning of these terms. Often I see posts where people believe that liberal is the opposite of conservative or the Republican and conservative are the same thing.
Conservative vs Progressive
Liberalism vs Socialism
Republican Vs Democrat These are both political parties
Right and left wing are groups within an organization having a conservaitve od progressive viewpoint. For example a labor union can have a right and left wing. "The union's right wing favored a moderate course of action."
By the way the Puritans were communists. The founding fathers were progressive classical liberals.
[Deleted]
Have you heard of volunteers retard?
I think it's fucked up
I think the costs to society will be far greater than the $75 dollars
I think attempting to even collect the $75 dollars is a potential waste of time when time itself is, in such an event, critical
I think it is an indication of ignorance and inbreeding
I think having such a policy and enforcing it hardens people against their own neighbors, changes perceptions over what is right and wrong
and I think this is just wrong.
Services cost money. Cities are doing all sorts of things to give people choices as to what services they want. For whatever reason her trailer didn't qualify to get insurance, she knew this.
[Deleted]
what an idiot. What a moron. What an imbecile. Apparently you can't even read simple English, simpleMind . . .
try anyway. good luck.
REPOSTING: ~ AGAIN
JadedJoe above, cited two sources, as follows:
The pertinent piece here:
Bell says her trailer doesn’t qualify for homeowner’s insurance, a requirement under the town’s ordinance for fire protection." ~Fox News Radio
it is fucked up. Everybody's been saying that the American Dream is gone. Here's the proof. This is the American Dream going up in flames - literally.
She made a choice to live in a structure that she couldn't get insurance for.
The odds are that she could not afford to move.
That very well may be true. I'm not sure it changes anything. If the place she was living in, for whatever reason was considered dangerous or uninsurable by the insurance companies. She's the victim of an accident. The fire wasn't anyone's fault, it's too bad that the town fire department is prohibited from getting involved, no one planned it.
Well, considering the poverty rate in rural areas and her living in a mobile home that could not be insured--it isn't looking like it was what we would call choice. That said, it is ridiculous that they decided to make a move like this. Now, she is in town without a place to live and in desperate need of other resources. This is not even close to sane thinking.
We agree on something.
Ahh, the ever-shifting modus operandi of blame-the-victim. Now it's a "structure she can't get insurance for".
Admit it, you don't believe in helping your community.
I, BTW, believe in low taxes! So you can skip that part of the slur which you're no doubt formulating.
No slur or anything else planned, just wondering if you read all my previous comments on the same situation? I've referred to it as a tragedy and an accident that was no one's fault.
I also stated that I don't know why her trailer was deemed uninsurable, but she did know that. She also knew she would not be allowed to pay for the fire protection because her trailer was uninsurable.
The entire thread started with the question "does this burn you up or did she get what she deserved?" My response to that was neither, it's an unfortunate accident, not her fault for living there, not the government's fault for allowing her to do so. Bad things sometimes happen, I also assume as in most communities her neighbors will respond with a helping hand.
You blame the victim of an emergency for not being able to provide the cost to cover the emergency. what compassion. I bet you want to end FEMA. I bet you want to go live in Tennessee now don't you.
[Deleted]
cough. cough.
Why is it someone else responsibility to pay to cover other people's property?
why do we have a society that treats people like shit?
You're making this more emotional than it should be. Perhaps that's why the first sentence in the original post misinterprets things. The story doesn't say she was poor or unable to pay the $75. There was some reason why her trailer was uninsurable. She suffered an accident, no one is to blame. This has nothing to do with FEMA or any federal agency. The story neither burns me up nor makes me feel she got what she deserved. Like any accident it's sad, an unfortunate part of life.
right, never feel empathy or emotion. watch firefighters stand around while they let a person's house burn down, but never feel anything. got you. never say to myself there has to be a better solution. fine. when you're house is on fire, I'll remember to take your advice to heart.
Finding a better solution doesn't help this woman. At the time something like this happens regulations are already in place. This may change those regulations, but that's up to the local government there.
I'm not sure what the situation is in this case. The last time this type of thing made the news it was because one town had eliminated it's fire department and contracted with the neighboring town to do it for a fee per home. I'm not sure what you would do to prevent this type of thing.
an honest answer with real good points.
--except, as reported, the fire department stood and watched.
It's not as if they were shut down or in another county, or short on funds. They were standing right there, so preventing it wasn't the problem.
JBP either didn't realize that, or is surreptitiously perpetuating his nihilistic perspective.
They can't fight a fire if the dwelling isn't covered, it violates their insurance, they would have to assume all risk.
I was trying to give him some mini-credit for at least admitting there is a possibility to prevent this type of thing. lol.
they do have some fucked up ideas down south
this one is clearly not even christian - how does this exemplify love thy neighbor . . ..
that's what you get under rampant repelicanism - lies upon lies.
I am glad this nation is secular, and is progressive - it at least embodies the hope of rising above this kind of nonsense.
What the hell does this have to do with Republicanism? These people knew the requirement of having to pay for fire protection, granted I think paying for it through property and other taxes is the way to go, They decided not to pay and took their chances, they lost, end of story.
JadedJoe below, cited two sources, as follows:
The pertinent piece here:
Bell says her trailer doesn’t qualify for homeowner’s insurance, a requirement under the town’s ordinance for fire protection." ~Fox News Radio
For all we know that may be because the trailer lacks the basics like water or electric. The only fact we have is that her trailer was uninsurable.
Apparently not. We also have the following:
an annual fee was required for fire services
this annual fee apparently also required insurance
She was not able to pay the insurance
insurance was a requirement under town ordinance to pay the fee
she could not pay the fire service fee without insurance
she could not receive fire services without payment of the fee
Since the fire protection services required a fee, and since payment of said fee apparently required insurance as per town ordinance, we can assume her fee would have been rejected, and therefore ability to pay becomes moot.
Small town insurance agencies often have intimate relationships with local town officials - it is no small stretch to presume that networking may have taken place creating the possibility of an unlawful arrangement resulting in
urban renewal.
You can imagine anything you like from her living in a dangerous trailer, or one lacking the basics to qualify it as a habitable dwelling, right on up to some dark conspiracy. Whatever it was didn't have to do with her being unable to pay the fee due to poverty.
These situations have arisen a couple of times in recent years as one town shuts down it's fire department and contracts with a nearby town to do it for a fee. It's sad, knowing why it happened doesn't help the victim much.
How dumb to choose to eat instead.
bible thumpers have always seemed pretty twisted to me. they probably interpret this instance of - love thy neighbor - extending only to those good neighbors who pay taxes and anyone who doesn't, gets what they deserve for being a bunch of freeloading sinners.
I haven't checked the links above, but I've heard of this situation before, and I don't think it has to do with taxes.
I think it is if you can't pay at the time of service, you are screwed. Not sure.
It is crazy, however it is set up.
"Bell told the station that she called 911 when her mobile home caught fire, but the firefighters who responded did not take action to protect her home. The department has an annual subscription to its fire service in the rural areas of Obion County and Bell did not pay the $75-per-year subscription fee." ~NBC affiliate
"That’s because Bell hasn’t paid a $75 annual fee for the South Fulton Fire Company to protect her rural trailer. It’s not that she doesn’t want to pay it, she’s not able to pay it. Bell says her trailer doesn’t qualify for homeowner’s insurance, a requirement under the town’s ordinance for fire protection." ~Fox News Radio
"In the interests of freedom and fiscal responsibility, residents receive fire coverage upon payment of a $75 annual fee. Those who don't have the foresight to pay had better pull some water hoses from their bootstraps and get to sprayin'…" ~Comedy Central
I guess they treat fire service like it's a utility service. only when you don't pay your water bill, your house doesn't burn down. sigh.
I've never heard of not being able to get insurance on a mobile home.
Sounds to me like this is the inbred version of Urban Renewal.
Network with the insurance industry, deny certain homeowners insurance, make it policy that there is an annual fee, require home insurance as a part of that municipal process,
and then burn 'em out.
It all sounds so very, very, repelican
This has nothing to do with insurance. Firefighters in most civilized areas of America put out fires regardless of where they occur if they are employed by a city/town/municipality that pays them from taxes. This is an example of rightwing non-tax policies creating a tragedy for a family.
I was responding to JadedJoe above, who cited two sources, as follows:
The pertinent piece here:
Bell says her trailer doesn’t qualify for homeowner’s insurance, a requirement under the town’s ordinance for fire protection." ~Fox News Radio
My bad. Clearly if the town requires insurance as a prerequisite for fire protection than she was kinda caught in a catch 22. One more example of bad governance by the right. We cant put out your fire unless you do business with a private entity-incredible!
We cant put out your fire unless you do business with a private entity-incredible!
Yeah, but read it again - it claims the private entity refused to do business with the homeowner.
you have to pay the fee for fire service
as a condition of accepting the fee, you have to have home insurance
the insurance refuses to cover you
result - no fire service
Smells like repelican style urban renewal to me.
ZD, most insurers won't insure older mobile homes simply because replacement cost is so high...I personally do not live in a mobile home, but recently went with a friend to look at some. I've seen some reconditioned mobile homes that were lovely, well insulated, rewired, actually exceeding local building codes (rural MO has very few building codes).
Even these reconditioned homes are often uninsureable simply because of age.
I note that one poster wrote that insurance was required along with the $75 fee for fire protection to be active. So regardless whether she had paid the fee or not, with no insurance there would have been no service.
A quick look at South Fulton online, shows that the average yearly income for a family is $35,608 for a single female (head of household) it is $20,212 and that approximately 16% of the population lives below poverty level.
I also learned that the fire department is city funded, meaning no structures outside the city limits are strictly eligible for fire protection.
Still one would think that an attempt to contain and put out the fire would have occurred and a payment plan arranged for her.
Those who have not witnessed poverty in America tend to believe it's imagined, it isn't. Not by a long shot.
Thanks Pandora.
I was aware that trailers depreciate in value, just like a car. Funny tho, I've got a junk snow plow, and I can still insure that - I guess that doesn't apply. Liability is different from collision.
Still, I would think it is simply in the insurers interest to specify what they are covering, take the cash, and provide a form indicating the insurance requirement of the ordinance has been met.
But what do I know.
In any case, trailers do suck. They usually burn in seven minutes or less, and they blow away in a high wind.
It just took a couple phone calls to confirm the information, heck sometimes companies won't even insure a house. Go figure.
My dad was a firefighter - volunteer. I can't imagine any of the guys turning their backs on someone's home when it's burning.
I would quit over nonsense like that - or make them fire me.
But hey - we all know I ain't wrapped to tight, now am I . . . .
Tight enough guy, tight enough.
LoL!
I actually drove code three once
long story
but it was exciting - lights, sirens, traffic
when we got to the farm - and you know - farmers never call for an ambulance
we found the farmer laying on concrete, next to some scaffolding, and his helper lay next to the building.
They had been painting the barn - and had a ladder on the scaffolding to reach the dormer on the barn. The ladder pushed the scaffolding away and down they came.
The helper had a pool of blood come out his ear about the length of his arm.
He coded on scene.
The farmer was kinda fucked up, but had no real idea how fucked up, for worrying about his man.
The guy left behind a wife and three kids.
I guess the only real point behind that story is that as a human being, when someone, especially a neighbor, faces the kind of tragedy that includes loss of home, possessions, and possibly loved ones,
is simply no time to be quibbling like bank ceos, repelicans, or small children, over who will foot the bill.
that's just fucked up
and all ah you simpleminded nimrods can kiss my ass.
You're welcome.
yer like a breath of fresh air among the smog of madness - what is with some people anyway?
[Deleted]
can you read jackass? Do you have any supporting material, or just your own insane babbling to contribute?
I REPEAT for one last time:
I was responding to JadedJoe above, who cited two sources, as follows:
The pertinent piece here:
Bell says her trailer doesn’t qualify for homeowner’s insurance, a requirement under the town’s ordinance for fire protection." ~Fox News Radio
[Deleted]
Hey dumbfuck! It says that the was DENIED homwoner's insurance, which is a prerequisite to pay the $75 fee.
Let me put it this way... If she went to the fire department and said "here is my $75" a wek beforehand they would have said "We can't accept this unless you have homeowner's insurance." Meanwhile the wee before, the insurance company said.. "I am sorry. Your trailer is uninsurable."
Do you see a problem here? Are you really that fucking stupid Simon?
No, I don't see a problem. It's been covered ad nauseum and you are late to the argument.
[Removed]
They need to change the law. The law requires them not to respond to those who did not pay. The population of the town is just over 2,000 and the $75 was used to purchase the equipment and keep it running.
Perhaps they should change the policy to $75 a year if you pay up front. If not you get a bill for $2,000 to put out the fire since you did not pay up front.
I suggested something along those same lines to someone earlier and he called me childish. go figure.
Towns are cutting services all across the country, giving people the choice to buy in or not. Her choice was to live in a trailer that for some reason didn't qualify for insurance. Last time this happened the article mentioned that there were legal issues with fighting a fire when the structure wasn't covered. She didn't deserve the bad luck, no one does, that's just the way things go sometimes.
I've lived in America my whole life. I was born in 1970. Watching firefighters stand around while somebody's house burns to the ground is not just the way things go sometimes. Americans never acted like this before, and they shouldn't start now. It's Bullshit.
I was born in 65 and that was not the American way. Now these greed driven Ayn Rand psychopaths are taking control. Stay Classy Americans don't let these selfish people destroy what was once a great nation!!!!
Go to the head of the class. You are a decent human being.
Thank you, I try. I just wish more would try also, we have enough things against us already. :)
It's becoming common, there was something similar 6 months or a year ago. That one was with a home, the town had shut down the fire department for budgetary reasons and if you wanted protection you had to pay a fee to the next town over. It may be bull, but they voted to save a few dollars and some people tried to get by without paying. In that article it said that there were some legal or insurance reasons the firefighters couldn't do anything.
we're in pretty bad shape when being unable to afford fire service anymore is becoming common.
The man that lost his home could have afforded it, he chose to go without. This earlier incident was in a fairly well off neighborhood. From the picture I would say middle class to upper middle class homes.
"In the United States, 73 percent of all firefighters are actually volunteers and most work for a local firehouse, sometimes on their own and sometimes alongside paid career firefighters, performing back-up duties when other officials are out in training or in need of help.". http://www.ehow.com/about_4828578_volunteer-firefighters.html
everything in life is NOT about money. just saying.
It often comes down to money when a town has to look at the cost of the equipment and insurance for even a volunteer force. People seem to want it both ways, all the services and none of the taxes to provide them.
the issue of money is relevant of course, but we have a vast income inequality in this country. just saying.
"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a Communist."~Hélder Câmara
Income inequality is all over the world. Compared to the US it's much less in Japan or New Zealand, close to the same as the UK, worse in China. I'm not sure economic equality would help the situation. There don't seem to be enough rich people to pay for all the things people want.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Point at other problems around the world so we can deflect from and ignore our own.
Not saying ignore, but simply talking doesn't accomplish much either. This entire occupy movement is, in my opinion, throwing away a chance for real change. They have a national movement that could recruit people from dozens of congressional districts to run in primaries across the country. They have an opportunity to make change a reality. Instead they choose to do nothing beyond demonstrate and wait for someone else to make things happen. Economic inequality isn't an issue for me, ineffective use of time is. Unions, environmentalists, civil rights groups all get candidates elected, where individuals are powerless. Occupy could still be one of those groups.
Those are good points. I wouldn't be so quick to discard the power of talking however. Talking clarifies the problems. Action solves them. Protesting is an action.
You've been a good sport. I would recommend picking up a copy of 'The Spirit Life: Why Greater Equality Makes Society Stronger', before absolutely making up your mind on the Income Inequality issue. Question the powers that be before you decide.
Americans were never lazy before either. Now that we (generally) are, there's less money around and this is naturally what happens. Next time, pay up.
I got three words for you. Wall Street Greed.
They had it coming. Dont pay insurance and get into a car crash? Pay for the repair. Same thing.
Its not the same thing. Fires spread. Whole cities can burn down while you're looking down your nose at the person who had their house catch fire. But I suppose mommy and daddy pay for your fire protection.
Only rural areas have these fire protection payment fees. The firemen are around and won't let it spread. They just let the non-paying homeowner's house burn down.
We are not talking about condos in Manhattan okay?
Silly nilly. The resident can't repair her home. They let it burn to ashes, or did you forget that fact.
cars can be irrecoverable too - then you have to buy a new one. so buy a new house or rebuild.... and pay for fire protection next time.
let's cut to the chase. Do you think that there is a moral obligation to protect life and property?
“You could look out my mom’s trailer and see the trucks sitting at a distance,” Bell said.
Rural residents who want fire protection can get service from the nearby town of South Fulton, but they must pay a $75-a-year fee.
South Fulton Mayor David Crocker said that if the city’s firefighters responded to people who didn’t pay there would be no incentive for anyone to subscribe.
“There’s no way to go to every fire and keep up the manpower, the equipment, and just the funding for the fire department (without the fee),” he said.
Blount policy differs
While the Blount County Fire Department also employs a subscription service, Fire Chief Doug McClanahan said this situation would never happen in Blount County.
He said the department’s first priority is saving lives and property, whether a resident is a subscriber or not. The difference is that a subscriber, in the event of a fire, would be saving thousands of dollars.
Homeowners can purchase a $110 subscription annually to cover structure fires, car fires or other emergency situations firefighters would normally respond to throughout the year. For nonsubscribers, the fire department charges $2,200 for the first two hours firefighters are on scene and $1,100 for each additional hour.
When another Obion County resident’s home was left to burn last year, it became national news. In that case, firefighters went to the scene to keep flames from spreading to nearby property whose owners had paid the fee.
McClanahan said the Blount County Fire Protection District Board of Commissioners revisited the subscriber versus nonsubscriber situation last year after the first Obion County incident. The board agreed to keep the same policy they’ve had for several years, McClanahan said, which is to help whenever notified.
“Having subscribers is a good thing, but to punish people to the point that you don’t do anything for them is wrong,” McClanahan said.
Moral obligation
While as far as he knows there isn’t a law requiring a fire department to fight a fire, McClanahan said firefighters have a moral obligation to their community.
“As a firefighter you’re bound to say ‘I’m going to help people.’” McClanahan said. “If someone says you can’t do that, I don’t believe I could work for someone like that ... the community looks to us to help them and all of a sudden we’re not helping them?”
Both the Alcoa and Maryville Fire Departments are municipal departments whose services are rendered through taxpayer funds. Those residing inside the city limits are covered, but they can still purchase a subscription for Blount County Fire Department services.
McClanahan said the department has an annual $55 service for those who don’t own real estate in the county, but who may commute to work or spend a lot of time visiting, boating, etc., outside the city limits.
http://www.thedailytimes.com/Local_News/story/Obion-County-home-burns-as-firefighters-watch-id-018459
Do you agree with South Fulton's policies or with Blount's policies?
The guy's life wasn't at risk. There's no moral obligation to protect property.
Firefighters have a moral obligation to their community. You must be an outstanding citizen in your community. Do you kick homeless people for fun on your days off?
They have a moral obligation. And if they start fighting fires for those who haven't paid, soon everyone is going to do that. And there will be no funds. And then no fire department. And the whole community is going to burn down. How about that?
You are coming to those conclusions based on what evidence and research. Or is it merely opinion?
If you take care of someones house that doesn't buy into the coverage, then no one will buy into it.
right. screw the poor. let their houses burn. who wanted the bums around here anyway.
some people do not know the meaning of empathy or compassion.
It's 6.50 a month. You can't even go to McDonalds for that.
dollars and no cents. They could have found a better solution that letting her house burn down, but I guess you prefer that scenario. people, I swear.
I pay my bills and think that others should pay theirs too.
see what I mean, no empathy.
man works at factory for 20 years gets laid off. response: I pay my bills and buddy I don't care if you got laid off - you should pay yours too.
woman doesn't pay a fee for fire protection. response: I pay my bills and lady I don't care if your the firefighters watched your house burn, by god should pay yours bills too.
Not this response. well we need to go ahead and save the house, but then we're going to have to work out some arrangements to pay this in the future.
A lot of people struggling to make ends meet can't afford to insure themselves against unlikely events, maybe she chose to buy clothes for a job interview, who knows? Did she make a bad choice that came back to haunt her. Yes, was the $ 75 dollars worth a whole house. Hell No.
This isn't the America I grew up in. QUIT feeding me a bunch of bullshit that I should just accept it. We used to be neighborly and care about people. My grandparents had their character described in their days, as 'people who would give a stranger the shirt off their back."
THIS IS AMERICA. WE DO NOT LET FIREFIGHTERS STAND AROUND AND LET PEOPLE'S HOMES BURN DOWN!!!!!!!!
[Deleted]
This is why America is going to shit. people have no common sense. :-(
[Deleted]
I see why you call yourself simplesimon - because you're world view is very simplistic, self indulgent, and naive.
It is simplistic, and if my house catches fire the fire department will most certainly come, AND my insurance will cover any damages.
Simple is easy. Better than OWS mind-fucking each other with no action.
Here's another view of morality. It's complicated, but think about it real hard and maybe even a simple simon can understand
“You could look out my mom’s trailer and see the trucks sitting at a distance,” Bell said.
Rural residents who want fire protection can get service from the nearby town of South Fulton, but they must pay a $75-a-year fee.
South Fulton Mayor David Crocker said that if the city’s firefighters responded to people who didn’t pay there would be no incentive for anyone to subscribe.
“There’s no way to go to every fire and keep up the manpower, the equipment, and just the funding for the fire department (without the fee),” he said.
Blount policy differs
While the Blount County Fire Department also employs a subscription service, Fire Chief Doug McClanahan said this situation would never happen in Blount County.
He said the department’s first priority is saving lives and property, whether a resident is a subscriber or not. The difference is that a subscriber, in the event of a fire, would be saving thousands of dollars.
Homeowners can purchase a $110 subscription annually to cover structure fires, car fires or other emergency situations firefighters would normally respond to throughout the year. For nonsubscribers, the fire department charges $2,200 for the first two hours firefighters are on scene and $1,100 for each additional hour.
When another Obion County resident’s home was left to burn last year, it became national news. In that case, firefighters went to the scene to keep flames from spreading to nearby property whose owners had paid the fee.
McClanahan said the Blount County Fire Protection District Board of Commissioners revisited the subscriber versus nonsubscriber situation last year after the first Obion County incident. The board agreed to keep the same policy they’ve had for several years, McClanahan said, which is to help whenever notified.
“Having subscribers is a good thing, but to punish people to the point that you don’t do anything for them is wrong,” McClanahan said.
Moral obligation
While as far as he knows there isn’t a law requiring a fire department to fight a fire, McClanahan said firefighters have a moral obligation to their community.
“As a firefighter you’re bound to say ‘I’m going to help people.’” McClanahan said. “If someone says you can’t do that, I don’t believe I could work for someone like that ... the community looks to us to help them and all of a sudden we’re not helping them?”
Both the Alcoa and Maryville Fire Departments are municipal departments whose services are rendered through taxpayer funds. Those residing inside the city limits are covered, but they can still purchase a subscription for Blount County Fire Department services.
McClanahan said the department has an annual $55 service for those who don’t own real estate in the county, but who may commute to work or spend a lot of time visiting, boating, etc., outside the city limits.
http://www.thedailytimes.com/Local_News/story/Obion-County-home-burns-as-firefighters-watch-id-018459
Like I keep saying. This is a moral test. Blount County passes the morality test with real American values.
Really? I have a moral test for you. I want you to come to my house and pull the weeds out of my lawn. When you are finished I will say thank you and send you on your way.
If you complain about it, and say I wasn't fair about it, I will produce a neighbor who would be happy to pull the weeds out of my lawn free of charge because that is the standard in their town.
Or better yet, you can come to my house and cook for me, and when you are finished I will send you on your way without so much as a taste of what you prepared. If you complain, I will produce a series of friends who come my house and cook for me all the time without any compensation.
Apparently this lady called the wrong fire department. Darwinism at its finest.
Yes, let's not complicate matters with such things like morality. Keep it simple, Simon.
Ah yes, morality. Morality that makes it ok to steal from others because you don't have what they do. Morality that makes it ok to demand someone you didn't pay to work for you. Tell me, do you think you have right to the time of another person without some form of compensation?
This is wrong and, sadly enough, it is happening in other areas. It represents a side of evil that is unacceptable. This is what we pay taxes for.
over a measly $75 dollars they let a person's home burn. where is this person supposed to live now. anyone who finds this acceptable is certifiably evil.
You know, that may very well be the point. I spoke (lashed out) with a developer over the future destruction of property and the impact that it would have on the people that lived there. He told me point blank that it wasn't his problem and they didn't want "those people" there anyway. So, they may have very well known in advance that there were people that were not going to be able to pay and that it wouldn't be a loss.
They've developed this backwards, perverse idea of how to provide incentives for people. They punish them severely, i.e., let their house burn down, "there, that'll motivate them. snicker. snicker."
and detain you indefinitely if you fight back.
detain you indefinitely right after Pepper Spray Pike gives you a bath.
It wasn't the $75. The article said she wasn't permitted to buy the fire coverage because she couldn't get the trailer insured. There are legal and insurance reasons the firefighters can't do their job on an uncovered structure. I read about that the last time this happened.
There is something missing about the trailer too though, how come she couldn't find a company to insure it? What was wrong with the trailer? For all we know she had decided to live in something too dangerous to insure.
It's happened before. nearly every article names the fee as the reason they didn't put out the fire.
"It's the second time in two years firefighters in the area have watched a house burn because of unpaid fees. Last year, Gene Cranick of Obion County and his family lost all of their possessions in a house fire, along with three dogs and a cat, because the fire fee wasn't paid.
People in the city of South Fulton have fire protection, but those in the surrounding county do not unless they pay a $75 annual fee.
The city makes no exceptions."
http://community.thenest.com/cs/ks/forums/thread/60994685.aspx
The people of the town then are obviously in agreement with this policy, there hasn't been a successful movement to bring back their own fire department or negotiate new rules in at least two years.
What are the options? Bring your dwelling up to code and pay the fee, don't pay and take the risk, move to another town, organize voters to change the rules. These options don't help anyone after a fire, but what else can you do? The firemen in these situations are prevented from taking action. I suppose you could work toward national rules that forced any firefighter to fight any fire any time, force insurance companies to cover them in all situations.
Here's another view.
“You could look out my mom’s trailer and see the trucks sitting at a distance,” Bell said.
Rural residents who want fire protection can get service from the nearby town of South Fulton, but they must pay a $75-a-year fee.
South Fulton Mayor David Crocker said that if the city’s firefighters responded to people who didn’t pay there would be no incentive for anyone to subscribe.
“There’s no way to go to every fire and keep up the manpower, the equipment, and just the funding for the fire department (without the fee),” he said.
Blount policy differs
While the Blount County Fire Department also employs a subscription service, Fire Chief Doug McClanahan said this situation would never happen in Blount County.
He said the department’s first priority is saving lives and property, whether a resident is a subscriber or not. The difference is that a subscriber, in the event of a fire, would be saving thousands of dollars.
Homeowners can purchase a $110 subscription annually to cover structure fires, car fires or other emergency situations firefighters would normally respond to throughout the year. For nonsubscribers, the fire department charges $2,200 for the first two hours firefighters are on scene and $1,100 for each additional hour.
When another Obion County resident’s home was left to burn last year, it became national news. In that case, firefighters went to the scene to keep flames from spreading to nearby property whose owners had paid the fee.
McClanahan said the Blount County Fire Protection District Board of Commissioners revisited the subscriber versus nonsubscriber situation last year after the first Obion County incident. The board agreed to keep the same policy they’ve had for several years, McClanahan said, which is to help whenever notified.
“Having subscribers is a good thing, but to punish people to the point that you don’t do anything for them is wrong,” McClanahan said.
Moral obligation
While as far as he knows there isn’t a law requiring a fire department to fight a fire, McClanahan said firefighters have a moral obligation to their community.
“As a firefighter you’re bound to say ‘I’m going to help people.’” McClanahan said. “If someone says you can’t do that, I don’t believe I could work for someone like that ... the community looks to us to help them and all of a sudden we’re not helping them?”
Both the Alcoa and Maryville Fire Departments are municipal departments whose services are rendered through taxpayer funds. Those residing inside the city limits are covered, but they can still purchase a subscription for Blount County Fire Department services.
McClanahan said the department has an annual $55 service for those who don’t own real estate in the county, but who may commute to work or spend a lot of time visiting, boating, etc., outside the city limits.
http://www.thedailytimes.com/Local_News/story/Obion-County-home-burns-as-firefighters-watch-id-018459
Whose policy do you agree with, South Fulton or Blount?
I find Blount's offers residents better service. So now it's up to the residents and their representatives in South Fulton to decide. Under Blount's rules, would this woman be able to get fire protection or would she have been stuck having to pay the hourly rate because she couldn't get insurance?
I agree. This will cost the government considerably more than $75 in the use of social services and government programs. I would gladly pay the $75 for someone, then to stand by and watch their house burn to the ground. This is wrong on so many levels.
the elevators in Tennessee don't visit all the floors apparently. I wonder if they'll have this in the travel brochure.
I know where I am not building or buying a home. And it's sad because Tennessee is really beautiful.
Thanks, you made my point for me. This is larger than one person's home, it negatively affects the reputation of an entire state. It blows my mind that anyone can be in favor of practices like this.
I do not wish negative karma upon anyone. But these types of people have some coming their way by their own doing. Maybe after an experience of tragedy involving themselves or loved ones, they will realize they may have been mistaken. One hopes this is true anyway. But some seem to have no hope in this lifetime. I pray for them that this is not the case.
You're a smart person. I wouldn't wish this on anybody, but it may have to happen to some people personally before it opens their eyes.
Why not? License to act like a complete ass is only $75 a year. I mean if you pay that $75 then you can stand on the sidelines and talk about "teaching someone a lesson". It's a ..........dick tax. Pay the tax and you can act like a dick.
Wishes are free.
I bet that took a lot of effort to twist all those words around to obfuscate the meaning.
Not really. :D
I was just running through my head the logic of "I wouldn't wish name-what-have-you thing" on anyone. We say to each other consistently those words while someone is actually carrying out the act knowing full well what the repercussion will be.
More of the my logic is better than your logic twisting of words. You're brain must be shaped like a pretzel. &
This was originally intended for humor. But, I can see clearly now that it is far better to continue insinuate and that we not say those things. Out loud. :/
I thought the pretzel joke was hilarious. I don't know what in the what or why in the why you are going on about my intended humor.
Oh, I'm sure.
this $75 is a new tax since the irresponsible local governments spent too much, wasted too much and didn't fund their pensions and are basically broke across the country. my friends' daughter now asks for donations for the public school for books, and there's now fees to play sports to fund the extra payments to coaches and equipment for the kids--again a new tax.
We have the same problem.
Welcome to the Right's idea of privatization. Imagine if they privatize medicare, city parks, beaches, water, and anything else that might help the community as a whole.
Crazy world we are living in and it is getting crazier.
It's crazy to even need to discuss this, but here we are. Isn't this similar to how mafia operates, extorting money in exchange for protection.
Aren't all taxes a form of protection? We pay for services, if we don't pay why should we get the service? The fact that her trailer doesn't qualify for homeowners says something to this particular situation. What was wrong with this place that no one would insure it?
This post is a morality test. Quit trying to turn it into let's blame the poor owner because she couldn't pay her fee. I've struggled before in my life. I've missed a water utility payment before, and the city cut my water off. The difference is they didn't let my GOD DAMNED house burn down. You don't let someone's house burn down for $75 bucks, not in my book.
I don't know enough about this situation, the other thing like this that I read about indicated that there are legal reasons why a fireman can't do anything if the building or whatever isn't covered. This case is much worse because this woman's trailer couldn't get insurance, it wasn't about trying to save a few dollars.
Is morality merely following laws? Are all laws just?
Is it just to ask everyone to pay a share to protect themselves? Yes! It may even have been a just decision to judge this woman's house uninsurable, that I don't know. I can see conditions where it would be. Towns have a right under our laws to set standards, this is something the majority has agreed to.
A fireman faced with a choice, try to save a trailer and risk injury that isn't insured or sit back and let it burn, might think long and hard about risking his safety for property.
Here's another view.
“You could look out my mom’s trailer and see the trucks sitting at a distance,” Bell said.
Rural residents who want fire protection can get service from the nearby town of South Fulton, but they must pay a $75-a-year fee.
South Fulton Mayor David Crocker said that if the city’s firefighters responded to people who didn’t pay there would be no incentive for anyone to subscribe.
“There’s no way to go to every fire and keep up the manpower, the equipment, and just the funding for the fire department (without the fee),” he said.
Blount policy differs
While the Blount County Fire Department also employs a subscription service, Fire Chief Doug McClanahan said this situation would never happen in Blount County.
He said the department’s first priority is saving lives and property, whether a resident is a subscriber or not. The difference is that a subscriber, in the event of a fire, would be saving thousands of dollars.
Homeowners can purchase a $110 subscription annually to cover structure fires, car fires or other emergency situations firefighters would normally respond to throughout the year. For nonsubscribers, the fire department charges $2,200 for the first two hours firefighters are on scene and $1,100 for each additional hour.
When another Obion County resident’s home was left to burn last year, it became national news. In that case, firefighters went to the scene to keep flames from spreading to nearby property whose owners had paid the fee.
McClanahan said the Blount County Fire Protection District Board of Commissioners revisited the subscriber versus nonsubscriber situation last year after the first Obion County incident. The board agreed to keep the same policy they’ve had for several years, McClanahan said, which is to help whenever notified.
“Having subscribers is a good thing, but to punish people to the point that you don’t do anything for them is wrong,” McClanahan said.
Moral obligation
While as far as he knows there isn’t a law requiring a fire department to fight a fire, McClanahan said firefighters have a moral obligation to their community.
“As a firefighter you’re bound to say ‘I’m going to help people.’” McClanahan said. “If someone says you can’t do that, I don’t believe I could work for someone like that ... the community looks to us to help them and all of a sudden we’re not helping them?”
Both the Alcoa and Maryville Fire Departments are municipal departments whose services are rendered through taxpayer funds. Those residing inside the city limits are covered, but they can still purchase a subscription for Blount County Fire Department services.
McClanahan said the department has an annual $55 service for those who don’t own real estate in the county, but who may commute to work or spend a lot of time visiting, boating, etc., outside the city limits.
http://www.thedailytimes.com/Local_News/story/Obion-County-home-burns-as-firefighters-watch-id-018459
Like I keep saying. This is a moral test. Blount County passes the morality test with real American values.
Different communities have different ways of trying to solve their problems. I don't know the answer. Obviously the one county felt the fee wouldn't be paid or there wasn't a way to be sure they could collect money after the fact. None of it really matters to the victim in this case. It's only an exercise in ethics. Right or wrong however, the rules for her town were known. The fact they might be considered immoral doesn't change much.
You are pathetic. Do you really ever listen to your own words.
None of it really matters to the victim in this case, you're so compassionate
It's only an exercise in ethics, still rehearsing your own ethical standard, I see
considered immoral doesn't change much, speechless
"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a Communist."~Hélder Câmara
The fire is over, any moral games don't help her. That's nothing more then stating the obvious, compassion has nothing to do with that much of it. I feel sorry for her, but that too is little actual help to the poor woman.
Your original question poses two choices, but I don't see either as the answer in this situation. No one deserves to lose their house, but in a world where we are allowed to make choices the story doesn't inspire any rage in me either. Maybe if there were more facts available, but there isn't a lot of information in the articles you linked to.
In a world where we are allowed to make choices, you are making the immoral choices. Have a nice life.
Morality is only what the majority say it is. I'm immoral just driving a car in some cultures. I'll live with the rules of the society I'm in. In this one I choose to work to change it's morality. Just trying to make it better gives me the feeling of having a good life.
We ran out of room to discuss.
Too much anger not enough real action. Gather like minded people together, select a goal, and vote. Voting too slow or too much work I'm not sure what someone would do. Small rebellions don't usually end well.
Your reading list certainly makes appeals using some form of established authority. Take those opinions and actually make some change happen.
Am I changing your mind? Is that not taking action? Hasn't the whole political dialogue of the country been transformed?
I'm not sure if the political dialogue has changed much at all. It may simply appear that way when we are isolated within a group. In general people don't seem to change there minds, they seem to see discussion almost as a contest. Friends that are liberal or conservative each remain true to their different beliefs and site different bit of truth. Too often it ends in either an uneasy truce or name calling.
We started out with a simple news item. One town's imperfect solution to a fiscal problem and the life it impacted. Not sure how we got so far off the track, but it's been interesting. Unfortunately it doesn't solve any problems just points them out and sooner or later it takes more then that.
I guess that's the fundamental difference between you and I. You'll live with the rules of society without questioning authority. I will not.
"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using his intelligence; he is just using his memory." ~Leonardo da Vinci
Soaring Poverty Casts Spotlight on ‘Lost Decade’ By SABRINA TAVERNISE Published: September 13, 2011
WASHINGTON — Another 2.6 million people slipped into poverty in the United States last year, the Census Bureau reported Tuesday, and the number of Americans living below the official poverty line, 46.2 million people, was the highest number in the 52 years the bureau has been publishing figures on it.
Income and Poverty Rate at 1990s Levels
Readers’ Comments Readers shared their thoughts on this article. Read All Comments (800) »
And in new signs of distress among the middle class, median household incomes fell last year to levels last seen in 1996.
Economists pointed to a telling statistic: It was the first time since the Great Depression that median household income, adjusted for inflation, had not risen over such a long period, said Lawrence Katz, an economics professor at Harvard.
“This is truly a lost decade,” Mr. Katz said. “We think of America as a place where every generation is doing better, but we’re looking at a period when the median family is in worse shape than it was in the late 1990s.”
The bureau’s findings were worse than many economists expected, and brought into sharp relief the toll the past decade — including the painful declines of the financial crisis and recession —had taken on Americans at the middle and lower parts of the income ladder. It is also fresh evidence that the disappointing economic recovery has done nothing for the country’s poorest citizens.
The report said the percentage of Americans living below the poverty line last year, 15.1 percent, was the highest level since 1993. (The poverty line in 2010 for a family of four was $22,314.)
The report comes as President Obama gears up to try to pass a jobs bill, and analysts said the bleak numbers could help him make his case for urgency. But they could also be used against him by Republican opponents seeking to highlight economic shortcomings on his watch.
“This is one more piece of bad news on the economy,” said Ron Haskins, a director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution. “This will be another cross to bear by the administration.”
The past decade was also marked by a growing gap between the very top and very bottom of the income ladder. Median household income for the bottom tenth of the income spectrum fell by 12 percent from a peak in 1999, while the top 90th percentile dropped by just 1.5 percent. Overall, median household income adjusted for inflation declined by 2.3 percent in 2010 from the previous year, to $49,445. That was 7 percent less than the peak of $53,252 in 1999. Part of the income decline over time is because of the smaller size of the American family.
This year is not likely to be any better, economists said. Stimulus money has largely ended, and state and local governments have made deep cuts to staff and to budgets for social programs, both likely to move economically fragile families closer to poverty.
Minorities were hit hardest. Blacks experienced the highest poverty rate, at 27 percent, up from 25 percent in 2009, and Hispanics rose to 26 percent from 25 percent. For whites, 9.9 percent lived in poverty, up from 9.4 percent in 2009. Asians were unchanged at 12.1 percent.
An analysis by the Brookings Institution estimated that at the current rate, the recession will have added nearly 10 million people to the ranks of the poor by the middle of the decade.
Joblessness was the main culprit pushing more Americans into poverty, economists said.
Last year, about 48 million people ages 18 to 64 did not work even one week out of the year, up from 45 million in 2009, said Trudi Renwick, a Census official.
“Once you’ve been out of work for a long time, it’s a very difficult road to get back,” Mr. Katz said.
Median income fell across all working-age categories, but was sharpest drop was among the young working Americans, ages 15 to 24, who experienced a decline of 9 percent.
According to the Census figures, the median annual income for a male full-time, year-round worker in 2010 — $47,715 — was virtually unchanged, in 2010 dollars, from its level in 1973, when it was $49,065, said Sheldon Danziger, professor of public policy at the University of Michigan.
Those who do not have college degrees were particularly hard hit, he said. “The median, full-time male worker has made no progress on average,” Mr. Danziger said.
The recession has continued pushing 25-to-34-year-olds to move in with family and friends to save money. Of that group, nearly half were living below the poverty line, when their parents’ incomes were excluded. The poverty level for a single person under the age of 65 was $11,344.
“We’re risking a new underclass,” said Timothy Smeeding, director of the Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
“Young, less-educated adults, mainly men, can’t support their children and form stable families because they are jobless,” he added.
But even the period of economic growth that came before the recession did little for the middle and bottom wage earners.
Arloc Sherman, a senior researcher at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that the period from 2001 to 2007 was the first recovery on record where the level of poverty was deeper, and median income of working-age people was lower, at the end than at the beginning.
“Even before the recession hit, a lot of people were falling behind,” he said. “This may be adding to people’s sense of urgency about the economy.”
The suburban poverty rate, at 11.8 percent, appears to be the highest since 1967, Mr. Sherman added. Last year more Americans fell into deep poverty, defined as less than half the official poverty line, or about $11,000, with the ranks of that group increasing to 20.5 million, or about 6.7 percent of the population.
Poverty has also swallowed more children, with about 16.4 million in its ranks last year, the highest numbers since 1962, according to William Frey, senior demographer at Brookings. That means 22 percent of children are in poverty, the highest percentage since 1993.
The census figures do not count noncash assistance, like food stamps and the earned-income tax credit, and economists say that as a result they tend to overstate poverty numbers for certain groups, like children. But rises in the cost of housing, medical care and energy are not taken into account, either.
The report also said the number of uninsured Americans increased by 900,000 to 49.9 million.
Those covered by employer-based insurance continued to decline in 2010, to about 55 percent, while those with government-provided coverage continued to increase, up slightly to 31 percent. Employer-based coverage was down from 65 percent in 2000, the report said.
NOPE! NOTHING TO QUESTION HERE! GO BACK & BURY YOUR HEAD IN YOUR IMMORAL, UNINTELLIGENT PLAY BY THE RULES WORLD! AND DON'T COME BACK UNTIL YOU GET IT! FOLLOWER!!!!!
Too much anger not enough real action. Gather like minded people together, select a goal, and vote. Voting too slow or too much work I'm not sure what someone would do. Small rebellions don't usually end well.
Your reading list certainly makes appeals using some form of established authority. Take those opinions and actually make some change happen.
Where do you think the mafia finally ended up? They went into politics and government.
They are bleeding us all in some way or another. Pretty soon they will suggest that Blackwater or Z, or what ever it is called, be the private police force of the land. If you don't pay them you might find yourself with broken legs.
What kind of country do we want to be?
ha. no doubt. This story really made my jaw drop when I read it. It really shows the cold hearts of the loonies who want to take this country and turn it into a jungle where every man, woman, and child fends for themselves. To hell with good neighbors. I got mine and fuck yours.
no kidding. always gotta make a buck, everyone's got their hand out, constant marketing, constant taking...
This isn't privatization, this is a government we are talking about here. Two points here:
1) I seriously doubt that they would let someone burn in the building.As long as everyone is out safely it is YOUR responsibility to protect your shelter
2) A private company would have been more than willing to put out the fire and would have been there with a credit card machine in hand.
ha!! a credit card machine... so true,,, we have devolved, not evolved.
Ridiculous. This is rightwing policy plain and simple. For goodness sake it's Tennessee, of course this is rightwing policy run amok.
1) gee. I'll run right out and buy a firetruck
2) do they take i.o.u.'s
@Jaded
1) Or you could pay the $6.25 PER MONTH insurance policy being offered by the community you live in. How much you want to bet the woman living in this trailer either smoked, drank, or had some other vice from which she could squeeze $6.25 for basic fire insurance?
how much you want to bet it's cold heartless people like you that make people like this want to drink? Hell, I feel the need to get plastered after reading this kind of evil bullshit.
I am cold and heartless huh? Its liberal whacko's like you that have perverted the American system to the point that people no longer feel the need to provide for themselves or their families. You have this person who refuses to pay the BASIC insurance she needs to ensure what little belongings she has are secured, then complains when she loses them all. You have the woman in the news who has 15 (yes thats right FIFTEEN) kids and says "Someone has got to pay!". The stories go on and on. Guess what? I WORK. I pay for my family, I pay for my children. I make sure my home and my life are as safe as I can make them. I do all of that before I pay for TV, alcohol, or other recreation. Why shouldn't these people do the same?
I grew up POOR. I mean POOR. Yet my dad worked two jobs to keep us afloat and my parents did without new clothes, vacations, TVs, etc all so that they could put a roof over our heads, put food on the table, and provide the basic protections to make sure all of those things were safe.
And I am the evil one?
Quit using my sidewalks, my roads, my mail system, quit using the internet which was developed by the federal government through tax money, quit supporting the troops, take your own garbage to the dump, nope better yet bury it in your own back yard because the dump exists because of a local government which exists from tax money, quit using parks, quit obeying the police, quit recognizing traffic lights and signs, quit inoculating your young, quit watching weather reports, quit participating in our monetary system use barter only....you rightwing nut jobs really pick and choose what part of government you hate, you're a complete hypocrite.
So lets see, I rarely use the mail system as I find UPS and FedEx MUCH faster and MUCH cheaper, plus I do everything electronically. The internet MAY have started in government but it is a completely private entity, much to the chagrin of those in power. I don't really have a choice on the roads as that is the system we have. I also pay a private company to pick up my trash and do my OWN recycling.
All of the other things you listed, parks, police, traffic laws etc, are all things I support in my COMMUNITY. They are real things that I can affect change on.
You liberals don't understand the difference, and the danger, of Central government vs local government. Nor do you understand that libertarians are not "right-wing".
The part of government i hate, is that which I cannot change.
Barter? Really? LOL
Like I said, you rightwing zealots pick and choose, when it serves your purposes you're just fine with it, and when it doesnt you want it ended, like three year olds.
I saw the post about the woman with 15 kids and sided with her being irresponsible. This house burning thing is a different matter. How do you know that she refused? That's an assumption, you don't know this woman well enough to make assumptions. Irregardless, they could have saved her house and then fined her $75 dollars for not paying the fee and made her work to pay it off, do community service or whatever, and face stiffer penalties if she failed to do so.
I'm saying this is not the correct way to handle it. Period. It's bullshit. Evil bullshit. And nothing but Evil, Evil bullshit.
And its brought to you by government.
To your point, how can the community operate a fire department if it only charged when the fire was put out? And who in their right minds would pay $75 a year for protection if they knew that they would just be fined $75 if their house caught fire? That's like saying you shouldn't pay car insurance, but when an accident happens you can call Allstate and say you want covered. That's not how insurance works.
Don't generalize my statement and put words in my mouth - I did not say fine everybody. I said fine her. I said they could have found a better solution to this one instance rather than let her house burn down, but it is apparent you are evil, so go throw a house burning party and cheer with your like minded evil friends.
You keep calling me evil, yet you do not refute anything I say. Interesting. Have a nice day, I have some more people to go corrupt and some evil press conferences to hold. BOO!
I refute everything you say because you are Evil. I am incorruptible by your evil persuasions to convince me it is right to let people's houses burn down over a god damned $75 bucks. go put on your devil costume and dance in the ashes, you clown.
You refute with out reason and then call me names. You sound like my four year old.
my reasoning is clear. you are evil for defending a system that allow firefighters to sit around and watch someone's house burn down for $75 bucks. Anything you say otherwise is evil. are we clear.
LOL Yes. You are being very clear in your child like logic and complete lack of understanding on how INSURANCE works. LOL
And you, my Evil child hating friend, are also making crystal clear your complete lack of understanding on how human COMPASSION works. And why are you still here? I thought you needed to go spread some more Evil around. Did you forget your pitchfork or something?
This isn't the first time something like this has happened. It's actually a fairly common occurrence.
I've only found one other case. It was also in Obion County, Tennessee, but happened in 2010. If it's a fairly common occurrence, offer some proof to back up your statement please.
Couldnt afford? That is not true, they chose not to pay. Your a liar.
Another clone. I ignore clones.
There's that right wing utopia we've all heard so much about. I'm sure supply side Jesus would be proud.
Supply side Jesus. lol.
It occurred to me after hearing all the asinine arguments for letting this person's house burn down, why they simply don't get it.
Morality isn't something you can buy; therefore, it doesn't exist to these selfish money worshiping morons.
Firefighters -- i.e. American taxpayers -- not only put out the fire going on at Citigroup, BofA, Goldman Sachs and the other crooks.
But after the taxpayers rescued Wall Street, we gave them enough money to rebuild their "houses" and pay themselves obscene bonuses.
America's House is burning too. But only the rich seem to have full protection.
It's an amazing fact that 73% of firefighters in the United States are volunteers. They don't get paid a dime for risking injury to save property and lives. That's real morality.
It's the arrogance of the 1%, they thought they we're unsinkable and acted like fools on Wall Street, but now that we've run into an iceberg and the economy crashed, they think they deserve all the lifeboats.
Well said!
America's economic ship has hit the iceberg.
The people who steered the ship into the iceberg get all the lifeboats.
The plumbers, cooks, clerks, and others in the middle, who did nothing to precipitate the disaster, or steer the ship into the iceberg, get to go down with the ship -- i.e. lose jobs, have homes foreclosed, see industries outsourced overseas.
Time for the 99% to speak out. To rise up.
I'm givin' her all she's got Captain!
and what if there were a child in the house? Let the little fucker burn to death, we never got our 75$? More and more i begin to see just how crazy and in need of change the system is.
that seems to be the consensus: crazy!
She was living in a trailer that for whatever reason was uninsurable. Under whatever rules the town set up, she was prevented from buying the fire protection, not due to economic factors but because the trailer was uninsurable. This is something that she knew. No one deserves a tragedy, but she took a chance though and, in this case, lost.
And then the next county over would have done it for whomever was in their area and charged over 2,000 dollars for the first 2 hours. It is pathetic all the way around.
Every community makes it's own laws and regulations, it's only after a tragedy that we see how poorly government does at anticipating things.
Oh, I think that they anticipate quite well and they just don't give a damn.
Perhaps, but my own personal opinion is that government is simply not competent to meet all our needs.
There is a different between the competence of government and deliberately crippling government so that they cannot function with competence and then saying...............your not competent.
The above is what we have been dealing with for the past 10 years.
This is a local issue and at it's heart is probably money. It's happened before, one town cuts it's fire department and contracts with a neighboring town to save money. Sooner or later someone's house catches fire, they failed to pay, and we get this. If the local government was crippled it was by the taxpayers themselves trying to cut corners.
At it's heart, it is always about money. It's a repeated action.
Let's take a moral test. Do you have enough empathy to place yourself in the shoes of her or a firefighter on the scene. If you were the firefighter, would you have let the person's home burn down? If you were the homeowner what would you do? choose to sleep outdoors because you couldn't get insurance.
Yes I do, I remember reading an article on a similar fire maybe a year ago, the firefighters watched to keep the flames from spreading to a covered house next door. There are legal issues, if they fight a fire for an uncovered house they do it at their own risk. I think that would be a very difficult position to be in.
I don't know what motivated her to live in this trailer. It wasn't money that prevented her from getting the fire coverage, there was something wrong with her trailer, at least from an insurance companies point of view. We can make up any story we want about it, but the truth is we just don't know.
empathy is understanding how someone might feel. How would you feel in their shoes? Remember that laws are written by man and we are far from perfect. Just stand in her shoes and imagine how you would feel to watch your shelter burning to the ground and firefighters standing there watching it happen. How would you feel? That is empathy. Not what are all the conditions and who did this or who did that. It's how would you feel in this person's shoes? Do you really have enough empathy to put yourself in those shoes?
Go buy her a new home since you are so empathetic for her.
Nobody should have to buy her a new home. That is the point. They shouldn't have let it burn down in the first place.
So let me see, if they get a field file, brush fire, or forest fire they let it burn because they didn't get a fee for doing it! What kind of system is that..what if someone were traped in there! This is what creates class warfare Shame on them!
I wonder what the 911 system is like in Tennessee.
Victim: Help I'm being mugged.
911 responder: Okay that will be $25 dollars, all we need is your credit card number and we'll send someone right out.
Crazy people.
Why should a city fire dept put out a fire for a non-city resident for free? City residents pay taxes that covers the service. Non city residents don't pay city taxes therefore they don't get the service. 6.50 a month is not an outrageous amount to ask someone to pay.
right, people never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever have to struggle to make ends meet during a great recession. Clearly, we should burn down everybody's house when they fail to meet a fee requirement. your compassion is overwhelming me, please stop, you're killing me with your compassion.
[Removed]
"That’s because Bell hasn’t paid a $75 annual fee for the South Fulton Fire Company to protect her rural trailer. It’s not that she doesn’t want to pay it, she’s not able to pay it. Bell says her trailer doesn’t qualify for homeowner’s insurance, a requirement under the town’s ordinance for fire protection."
Guess that's what you get from a bureaucracy...
last time I checked the complaint against bureaucracy was inefficiency, not heartlessness. Are you saying she deserved to have her house go up in flames over a $75 dollar fee, yes or no?
What she did not deserve was to have the firemen provide their services for free. It is preposterous that they would be unable to offer their services just because a city ordinance required someone to (at least) qualify for homeowner's insurance. That was my complaint against bureaucracy. Although I suppose it was not quite appropriate given that a bureaucracy is an organization of non-elected officials.
It seems to me to be the case, not that she couldn't afford the $75 fee (and this is just from reading the three links above), but that there was government red tape that prevented her from obtaining services that, if the government had not intervened, would have otherwise been available.
This is a morality test. answer the question, yes or no? If you were the firefighter would you have let the house burn down?
It is a test which rests on no moral premise. It is a test, not of morality, but of servitude. I would not have joined a company of firefighters who's ability to sell their services was limited by another agency.
Thanks for taking the quiz. I'm sorry to inform you that you failed.
Libertarian public services financing at its best.
Now the whole community real estate value is dragged down by the empty lot.
Penny wise pound stupid.
This makes me so angry. Its like if we don't have money, then our life doesn't matter to the government. That mayor potentially made that woman homeless. Do you think she will be able to pay into your damn taxes now? Soon we will be paying to live, and doctors won't save lives because they haven't paid the "life tax". It's morally and ethically wrong. You can't put a price on someones worth. This is just creating more poverty than we already had. How could you just stand by and watch someone's life crumble to people while you are able to help. Isn't that what being a community is about. What happened to love for our people. Our love for each other? Does that all mean nothing? We are all living in man eat man world, but it doesn't have to be that way. We could live in peace and harmony, working together for a greater cause. But some men just like to watch the world burn.
This is an extremely disheartening fact. Money is more important than a human life in the current system. I often wonder how the people who perpetrate such acts of horror can pretend to care about their own loved ones and still have such a reckless disregard for other human life. This is unconscionable.
the jungle people have taken over. pretty soon they'll hunt us and eat us too. I think I saw the movie. what was the name of that movie? oh yeah, Rise of the Planet of Heartless Humans.
It's called Schadenfreude
(German) pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others
This German word is used as a loanword in English
-Wikipedia
What happened to the common good? Good neighbors? Good Samaritans? Who cares if one person doesn't pay, abuses the system, there are 99 others who do, no?
Plus, it's good economics. Look at department stores: do they close their doors to the 85 percent consumers who pay, because of the 15 percent who steal? No, they add one cent to each item to cover the cost of the theft, the security guard, the camera, etc.
As far as getting a society that works better: Returning to simple steps such as ensuring that members of essential professions (cops, nurses, teachers, firefighters, etc.) do live in the community they serve (making it mandatory and providing the proper resources) so they can be made accountable to the taxpayers while exercising their profession. If my understanding is correct, it would just be a matter of adding these professions to the list of politicians (no carpetbaggers allowed!)
common good requires common sense, which does not apply to the people responsible for this. this is what happens when perverted sense gets to much power.
Welcome to Ron Lawl's world. Disgusting. Pathetic.
It's the arrogance of the 1%, they thought they we're unsinkable and acted like fools on Wall Street, but now that we've run into an iceberg and the economy crashed, they think they deserve all the lifeboats.
I can't believe anyone would want to live in an America that lets houses burn down while firefighters stand by and watch. And, what kind of people are these firefighters? Lemmings? They don't know right from wrong? They didn't have the courage to do the right thing? They didn't know what the right thing was? Where have we failed as a society to teach the difference between right and wrong - the home, school, where?
right and wrong is part of it, just as slavery was wrong, but what was wrong with those people who owned slaves - answer: they didn't see their slaves as equal, they saw them as 'other', hence, no empathy. which stems from the real problem. income inequality.
Excellent, excellent point. I studied world history and the concept of the "other" is a very important one. I hadn't thought of that because I'm thinking of the U.S. as one "nation" and hence "others" are outside the nation, but you're right, it is an internal economic power struggle within the nation that is causing this.
thanks. a few people on this forum had recommended the book 'The Spirit Life: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger'. I am still reading through it, but so far it has really helped my understand the driving forces of animosity in our nation.
I'll check out the book. Thanks. I just want to ask some of these people why they feel the way the feel, you know? Like, what was it in their lives that caused them to think like this. Did they learn it from their parents? Did they learn it from the media, school, church, the playground, where? I look forward to any book that can explain this divide to me. And, thanks for the great post shedding light on what this country could become if we don't act.
He could buy a house and not afford $75. Someone's priorities may need shifted.
yes, yours.
Because they don't align with yours?
no, because they are heartless.
Far from it. People learn from mistakes and consequences not handouts. Also. If they are heartless they do not align with what you believe, therefore you do not agree with them.
you equivocate putting out a house fire, an emergency situation, with a handout. gee, someone is having a heart attack, well that's okay, let that person die and learn the consequences of their actions. my freaking word, you are not only heartless, you are insane.
Please sociopathic.
please lethargic bug. say hi to your fellow insectoids for me.
Will do.
?????
[Removed]
Because they are immoral, unethical, deleterious.
Oooh bug word on the end. However, I do believe that the harm has already been done to his house and I had nothing to do with it. I would like to point to the second part of by post above. If they are heartless they do not align with what you believe, therefore you do not agree with them.
Would you have let it burn down if you were there and you had the equipment to put out the fire?
And, yes, bravo, I don't align with them. No, I have morals and empathy and compassion and I know the difference between what is right and what is wrong.
Well spoken.
Mofia Head Games. Americas crooks and thieves hard at work? There's more to this puzzel than what is being reported. Why wouldn't the county commissioner just have added the fire service to the yearly property taxes? If I owned that trailer I would be SUEING the elected commissioner and the county. After all a county survives on taxes charged and collected from its property owners.
Citizen, you defined it succinctly - head games! Little by little, case by case, they want to desensitize us to scenes like this so we will accept it as a way of life.
Best head game of all is honest people trying to keep up with the Jones and that has caused many of Americas citizens to make Reckless Decisions. Some will steal to do it.
75 dollars a year doesn't sould like much unless you are in debt and in over your head.
My advice to anyone is if there's no choice but advice, ask for the decisiveness of an advisor or the advice of a decisive person before going into debt or deciding on your own that not protecting your property with insurance is a gamble worth taking.
[Removed]
These idiots should have paid the fee, pure and simple.
You have no idea what you are talking about. The consequences of such simplistic thought are far reaching. The public good of having a professional fire department paid for by taxes is a benchmark of civilization. While hate for your common man motivates many to insist that they pay for their own protection it is incredibly short sighted. A system where professional firefighters are trained to extinguish fires without regard to payment keeps your house from burning down because your neighbor didnt pay his yearly fire fee. We'll go back to the days of the great Chicago fire where you can sit smuggly by and watch the whole city burn down because while you paid your fee your neighbor didnt and now the whole block is on fire. Your understanding of the collective good of civil servants is childish at best.
Idiots. Interesting choice of words. Is it necessary for you to attack these people whom you do not even know? I do not understand why you feel it is necessary to call these poor people idiots. Show some compassion. Under different circumstances this could have been you. Thank you.
right, people never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever have to struggle to make ends meet during a great recession. Clearly, we should burn down everybody's house when they fail to meet a fee requirement. your compassion is overwhelming me, please stop, you're killing me with your compassion.
I do not believe he understands the word compassion or it's meaning.
not one iota.
[Removed]