Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate | The Upshot Yahoo! News – Yahoo! News

This is  a disgrace to the human race.  It goes against all normal morals.  How low can you go is what I think when I read this nonsense.  I have known quite a few firefighters but never any who would act like this.

There are many ways the monetary problem could have been handled. The homeowner could have been billed after the emergency.  Maybe he could have performed a community service. Maybe he could have volunteered with the fire department. Instead he was held hostage by members of his own community. For a lousy seventy-five dollars!

Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate | The Upshot Yahoo! News – Yahoo! News.

7 responses to “Rural Tennessee fire sparks conservative ideological debate | The Upshot Yahoo! News – Yahoo! News

  1. True.

    But . . . “For a lousy seventy-five dollars!” he could have protected himself and his home.

    And he didn’t.

    Instead he “gambled” that he wouldn’t need their services.

    And he lost.

    Our actions (and omissions) have consequences. He learned that the hard way.

    You can bet that others in that county will remember to support their local Fire Department in the future.

    • Yes I thought about that fact but still I can’t believe a true firefighter would stand by like that. Could you really watch your neighbor’s house burn down over seventy-five dollars?

      • Could I? No.

        But maybe they have a problem getting people in that county to subscribe to the fire service. Maybe they have lots of calls from people who want to “buy the insurance” only after the barns on fire.

        I don’t know.

        But, from the totality of his comments, I question whether it really slipped his mind.

      • well I knew that “you” couldn’t. 🙂

      • Thanks. 🙂

        I’m really glad you posted this last night. It’s been an interesting debate going on in my head ever since you pointed me at the story.

        This morning, I saw other articles but don’t know that I would have focused on them.

        Ideally, the rule would be changed to prevent this “all or nothing” approach in the future:

        1. Subscribers have priority
        2. If non-subscribers need assistance, and assistance is available, they have to pay for the equipment rental and manhours at a set rate PLUS a penalty fee for not subscribing.

        I’m sure that the firefighters involved weren’t happy to watch his house burn to the ground.

        Sad for everyone concerned.

  2. Pingback: FIRE!!! « Spirit Lights The Way

  3. As much as I hate to admit it, I mostly agree with Ms. Hatch’s libertarian viewpoint. The problem I have is that $75 is hard to part with for those of us who are living hand to mouth as it is. Everyone is trying to suck money out of me everytime I turn around, so I would probably take the gamble too. I don’t think Ms. Hatch understands how people below the poverty line must make tough decisions in order to hold on to the little we do have. In the old days it was about neighbor helping neighbor. Nowadays it’s all about the money. It just shows what unrestrained capitalistic greed has brought us to.

Comments are welcomed

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s