When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers • Hacker News Board

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#31

Post by TruthAndDare » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 10:41 PM UTC

andrepd wrote: post #18

TruthAndDare wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> predatory practices by private companies It does sound awful not to have access to fire service to someone like me who is used to it,* but then again, have the company done anything wrong by offering the service? Starting no company at all and offering no service at all would have been acceptable, right? I mean, that's what most of us do. Then, is there really anything wrong with offering people a service, even at…

That's a very simplistic way to do things. If there were no private firefighters then it wouldn't take long for there to be enough public pressure for a firefighting force to be financed by the state. Because these predatory companies are already in place, the government won't bother and will just shrug. So the alternative to private firefighters isn't no firefighters.

That would mean that the rest of the people (i.e. not the fire fighting company) aren't rational. I'm not sure we can put the responsibility on a company to behave so as to save everyone else from their irrationality.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#32

Post by URSpider94 » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 10:45 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #24

The article's focus on the private equity boogeyman is misdirected, for reasons that become apparent if you read far enough: > Private equity gained new power and responsibility as a direct result of the 2008 crisis. As cities and towns nationwide struggled to pay for basics like public infrastructure and ambulance services, private equity stepped in. The budgets of state and local governments around the country are…

There's more than enough blame to go around. Part of the issue is that private firms come in and pitch an option to cities and towns by which they can get out of their budget scrape by privatizing schools/fire/jails/traffic enforcement in return for granting a monopoly to a company and allowing them to charge new fees. This looks like an attractive option, rather than raising taxes, but I can't think of a time when I've heard of it working out.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#33

Post by dexterdog » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 10:46 PM UTC

andrepd wrote: post #18

TruthAndDare wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> predatory practices by private companies It does sound awful not to have access to fire service to someone like me who is used to it,* but then again, have the company done anything wrong by offering the service? Starting no company at all and offering no service at all would have been acceptable, right? I mean, that's what most of us do. Then, is there really anything wrong with offering people a service, even at…

That's a very simplistic way to do things. If there were no private firefighters then it wouldn't take long for there to be enough public pressure for a firefighting force to be financed by the state. Because these predatory companies are already in place, the government won't bother and will just shrug. So the alternative to private firefighters isn't no firefighters.

But does the public version cost less than the private one. I would be shocked if it did.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#34

Post by HarryHirsch » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 10:53 PM UTC

TruthAndDare wrote: post #14

illumin8 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good question, but many of these rural southern towns are very poor, and governed by conservative ideologues that have privatized all non-mandatory services. These towns are required by federal law to provide school service to children within them, however, anything else like police, fire, and ambulance services are not required. I think it's truly a shame that this has led to predatory practices by private co…

> predatory practices by private companies It does sound awful not to have access to fire service to someone like me who is used to it,* but then again, have the company done anything wrong by offering the service? Starting no company at all and offering no service at all would have been acceptable, right? I mean, that's what most of us do. Then, is there really anything wrong with offering people a service, even at…

In Germany, as far as I know, towns are mandated to have a fire service. Either the town raises a volunteer firefighter force, or the county will levy taxes and put a force in for the town. There's something to be said for a functioning civil service, not every issue has to be fought over every year in city council, and the only one who benefits are politicians seeking exposure.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#35

Post by HarryHirsch » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 10:57 PM UTC

winstonewert wrote: post #29

gozur88 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might not work out as well as you'd expect. Insurance companies are going to run the numbers, and if they make the most money by covering only 95% of the houses and then just paying out the last 5% that's what they'll do.

Is that bad? If it costs the insurance company more to stop the fire then to replace my house, the rational action to take is to let the house burn.

You'd be a ward of the state because your largest asset just burned down. Your neighbours might object because they have to foot your welfare now.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#36

Post by gozur88 » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 10:58 PM UTC

winstonewert wrote: post #29

gozur88 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might not work out as well as you'd expect. Insurance companies are going to run the numbers, and if they make the most money by covering only 95% of the houses and then just paying out the last 5% that's what they'll do.

Is that bad? If it costs the insurance company more to stop the fire then to replace my house, the rational action to take is to let the house burn.

I think it is bad, for two reasons. One, firemen do more than just put out fires. If there's nobody around to put out your burning house, there's nobody around to pull you out if you've been overcome by smoke inhalation.

Two, people tend to accumulate objects of sentimental value. Your great grandfather's watch (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFtHjV4c4uw) might be priceless to you and only worth $50 to an insurance company.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#37

Post by gozur88 » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 10:59 PM UTC

HarryHirsch wrote: post #35

winstonewert wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that bad? If it costs the insurance company more to stop the fire then to replace my house, the rational action to take is to let the house burn.

You'd be a ward of the state because your largest asset just burned down. Your neighbours might object because they have to foot your welfare now.

The scenario is the insurance company pays to replace your lost items because it's cheaper to pay out than provide fire service. So that's not an issue.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#38

Post by jimmaswell » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 11:00 PM UTC

winstonewert wrote: post #29

gozur88 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might not work out as well as you'd expect. Insurance companies are going to run the numbers, and if they make the most money by covering only 95% of the houses and then just paying out the last 5% that's what they'll do.

Is that bad? If it costs the insurance company more to stop the fire then to replace my house, the rational action to take is to let the house burn.

Yes, it's bad if people's posessions are destroyed or even lives are potentially lost.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#39

Post by jimmaswell » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 11:02 PM UTC

gozur88 wrote: post #37

HarryHirsch wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be a ward of the state because your largest asset just burned down. Your neighbours might object because they have to foot your welfare now.

The scenario is the insurance company pays to replace your lost items because it's cheaper to pay out than provide fire service. So that's not an issue.

Money doesn't replace one of a kind items or data on storage.

Re: When You Dial 911 and Wall Street Answers

#40

Post by toephu2 » Sat, Jun 25, 2016, 11:02 PM UTC

jzwinck wrote: post #16

In the US a lot of us grew up with the idea that when something really bad was happening you would dial 911 and people would appear very soon to help you. I don't know whether this myth was ever true, but it certainly is not true today. I have called 911 or its equivalent more than a dozen times on three continents. No magic helping people appear within five minutes. Or ten. Usually not twenty either. Sometimes not a…

YMMV. Just because you had a couple bad experiences w/ 911 doesn't mean everyone does.