Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

foxbusiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 214 posts

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#101

Post by robohoe »

Symbiote wrote: post #96
erfderd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We pay sales tax. What's so special about VAT vs. sales tax? Unless you are arguing for a federal sales tax, which OK sure federal tax is great, except it doesn't pay for local services. Also, now you also have to argue about the regressive nature of sales tax in general.

I think the relevant difference is that VAT is paid even if you are in a different EU country. I'm in Denmark, where the rate is 25%. I pay 25% on something I order from a Danish online shop. I pay 25% on something I order from a large German online shop, even though the VAT rate in Germany is lower. I pay 19% (the German rate) on something I order from a small German shop, to reduce the administrative burden on that…

You're supposed to report your online shopping when you do your taxes here every year.

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#102

Post by rayiner »

erfderd wrote: post #77
loceng wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

POTUS candidate Andrew Yang's foundation for his #1 policy/solution is a 10% VAT tax. Edit: Curious why facts are downvoted? Does HN not like discussing solutions and people actively working on solutions?

I'm not against sales tax; there are many benefits to it. However A 10% sales tax is a 10% tax on poor people's disposable income since they have almost no savings. How do we square that regressive circle?

In Europe they largely don’t try to square the circle, aside from maybe exempting necessities like food. They offer efficient, high quality welfare services to low income people in return for those taxes. (Of course, low income people get much more in services than they pay in VAT.)

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#103

Post by turk73 »

rvense wrote: post #20
slashdev wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've got the wrong way of looking at this. The government is unwilling to hire these people, so they're available to private individuals. If the government were winning to fork out tax dollars for private firefighters, there's nothing stopping them from doing so. The great thing about capitalism, for better or worse, but mostly better is that you or any one other person does not get to decide what constitutes effic…

> the market ends up magically having this sort of collective intelligence What if one person had enough resources to pay all firemen to not fight fires at all? The "collective intelligence" of the market has obvious blind spots.

That's interesting because the US has seen this kind of behavior in the past where moneyed interests simply paid the cops not to enforce the law or paid judges or others in positions of authority to look the other way. It's bribery, though, isn't it? That's not a market based solution, it is a form of corruption. We appear to be living through another Gilded Age where super wealthy individuals can run roughshod over the rest of the population by simply out spending the competition. This is, for example, why the Clintons have never been prosecuted.

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#104

Post by dsfyu404ed »

inanutshellus wrote: post #84
abathur wrote: post #33

I've seen similar variants of this headline floating around, so I don't want to over-blame this Fox outlet for something that's just in the water by this point (I don't recall if they were all on Fox-family outlets, but probably not). That said, the headline seems pretty manipulative... > However, private firefighters are more likely to contract with insurance companies like USAA to offer mitigation services to custo…

Another suggestion for a non-clickbaity title: Insurance Companies do Preventative Maintenance on High-Value Assets But yes, this feels like ... class-baiting or something. This headline is everywhere, made to rile up folk for.... what?

> This headline is everywhere, made to rile up folk for.... what?

People love having a strawman to tear down (or occasionally build up). They just don't know they love it. The news makes money off engagement so that's what they optimize for and outrage click-bait is very good at doing that job.

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#105

Post by dghughes »

rayiner wrote: post #64
mothsonasloth wrote: post #49

A: "You have selected Amazon's Prime Fire service" A: "A fire-engine will be dispatched within 20 minutes" --- In another part of the country --- A: "We're sorry we don't provide Prime fire service for your location, please direct your query to the local authorities" Local fire department: "We will try and answer your call as soon as possible, but due to budget cuts from a reduced corporate tax income we have had to…

Corporate tax is a red herring. Across the OECD, it makes up just 9% of tax revenue (just 6% in Sweden and Denmark). The US is about the same (8%). If you want to complain about tax revenue, point to the fact that Americans don’t pay VAT (like everyone in Europe does) on all the cheap crap they buy on Amazon. Or in the case of California, complain about Prop 13 limiting the property taxes people pay on McMansions. (W…

It's called Goods and Services Tax (GST) in Canada. There was confusion when it was first implemented over what was or wasn't taxed. For example a muffin wouldn't be taxed but that same muffin if heated would be taxed.

My province was really raking it in. We paid a 10% provincial ("state") tax and then the GST on top of that tax. Yes a tax on a tax.

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#106

Post by couchand »

Symbiote wrote: post #96
erfderd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We pay sales tax. What's so special about VAT vs. sales tax? Unless you are arguing for a federal sales tax, which OK sure federal tax is great, except it doesn't pay for local services. Also, now you also have to argue about the regressive nature of sales tax in general.

I think the relevant difference is that VAT is paid even if you are in a different EU country. I'm in Denmark, where the rate is 25%. I pay 25% on something I order from a Danish online shop. I pay 25% on something I order from a large German online shop, even though the VAT rate in Germany is lower. I pay 19% (the German rate) on something I order from a small German shop, to reduce the administrative burden on that…

> My understanding is that, in reality, people pay 0% in the USA if they order from a different state.

That used to be the case, but online retailers now must collect sales tax for any state that demands it [0]. Many states have complicated rules on the matter, for details consult an attorney.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Wayfair%2C_Inc.

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#107

Post by smm2000 »

cco wrote: post #10
kortilla wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are private firemen. If they weren’t hired they would be off doing something else for money. It’s like complaining about people hiring private security guards when there is a police shortage. Read the article, they aren’t fire retarding private lawns. They are doing preventative work that keeps the fire far away. If it hits the lawn, it’s too late. More firefighters are better, regardless of which areas are bei…

This is mostly a zero sum game in the immediate term, and mostly zero sum in the longer term since there is a fairly limited pool of people available to fight fires. If you have the skills to be a fireman but a private individual pays you above market rate to fight their own personal fires then you will remove yourself from the pool of people fighting fires for the public and into a private pool. Will 20 such private…

It can be zero sum game short term (<1 months) but medium term (6 months) it's definitely not zero sum game. Pool of applicants that can be firemen includes all able-bodied males (and potentially female) 18-50 which is 10 million pool in California alone. Good pay will attract out of state candidates too. I would expect training to take less than 6 months or so. Considering fires happen every year, California can have as many firemen as it wants (and willing to pay for) by the time next summer fire season starts.

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#108

Post by big_chungus »

CapacitorSet wrote: post #90
cpursley wrote: post #65

Sometimes I wonder if firefighting is privatized, insurance companies would require more fire-resistant building materials and design (instead of the typical match-box American single-family home or low rise apartment). At least this the libertarian argument argued here (pg 241): https://mises-media.s3.amazonaws.com/For%20a%20New%20Liberty...

>if firefighting is privatized, insurance companies would require more fire-resistant building materials and design (instead of the typical match-box American single-family home or low rise apartment) This is what happens when firefighting and house maintenance are in the same interest. The libertarian argument argues for a private interest, but it could very well be turned on its head in favor of a public interest.

I think the point is that there are externalities of me building a tinder-box house; namely, the costs of the fire-fighting and potentially burning down the homes of my neighbors. One of the keys to privatization is each would be responsible for the damage his house burning down could cause to others. Thus, if I want insurance, my company may give me a huge discount for building a house of concrete. It would also likely provide my fire-fighting, as it's cheaper than paying for a whole new house.

Re: Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy

#109

Post by erfderd »

MayorMonty wrote: post #88
erfderd wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not against sales tax; there are many benefits to it. However A 10% sales tax is a 10% tax on poor people's disposable income since they have almost no savings. How do we square that regressive circle?

In Yang's case, the 10% VAT is accompanied by a $1000/month Universal Basic Income.

That should eliminate all the income from the VAT and then some, so the firefighters are still dropping your calls.

$ 1000/adultmonth = $ 12 000 / adultyear. -> requires $120 000 of disposable income spent per adult. Very few people spend $120 000 of VATable (A family making $300 000, a good income, doesn't spend anywhere near $120 000)

Post reply on HN