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

Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

tomscott.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 440 posts

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#181

Post by grogenaut »

bombcar wrote: post #162
fatbird wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reporter on the scene spoke to the homeowner, who said he didn't pay the fee because he thought he could just pay after, like happened previously. He literally thought he could get away with not paying unless a fire happened. It's a textbook case of moral hazard. I discussed the case a lot at the time it happened, and it never came out that he "forgot" to pay the fee. It was very clear at the time that he thought h…

People do the same with AAA - don’t pay to renew until you need a tow and pay the renewal over the phone. I think they’re a bit smarter now and make you pay for the years you skipped.

That's hard as I wouldn't back pay but my insurance company goes back and forth on doing roadside depending on if you have comprehensive and has changed the rule and rates to be more or less competitive with AAA. When it's cheaper I use my I aurance, when not AAA. If they made me back pay I wouldn't use them. But I generally don't just do the sign up and tow immediately.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#182

Post by drstewart »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #143

Even with this information included. I think the moral of the story is America has some very serious third-world problems. The reason things like this go on in America and not in any other developed country is that Americans just accept it. "They didn't pay, so they die." Here is how much they accept it, firefighters literally stood and watched a building burn down instead of playing with their toys. Not only that, t…

>Here is how much they accept it, firefighters literally stood and watched a building burn down instead of playing with their toys.

I assume insurance of any kind doesn't exist in the rest of the world, since everyone else would have long figured out that you just don't need to pay it and then reap the rewards afterwards by just claiming it then? Or would insurance companies in Europe just stand by with their big bank accounts and refuse to pay? Sad state of affairs, very third world of them.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#183

Post by that_guy_iain »

RC_ITR wrote: post #171
that_guy_iain wrote: post #143

Even with this information included. I think the moral of the story is America has some very serious third-world problems. The reason things like this go on in America and not in any other developed country is that Americans just accept it. "They didn't pay, so they die." Here is how much they accept it, firefighters literally stood and watched a building burn down instead of playing with their toys. Not only that, t…

[flagged]

No post body was provided.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#184

Post by EvanAnderson »

cheriot wrote: post #175
zdragnar wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "They didn't pay, so they die." This isn't a thing in the US. Hospitals will stabilize anyone, regardless of ability to pay. First responders- police, ambulance, fire fighters- will save any life they are able to. Preventative health care is a different story, and even that is complicated. Unincorporated land holds a very tiny percentage of the population of the US; trying to use this as an analogy for the rest of…

> This isn't a thing in the US. Hospitals will stabilize anyone, regardless of ability to pay This is the bare minimum to avoid a PR disaster. When someone is dying slowing of a chronic condition (diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease) the US system will just watch them die unless they have insurance.

It's not done for "PR". US hospitals are required to treat emergency cases, by law. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act[0], passed under President Reagan, codifies the mandate.

(This is, to my mind, what caused the United States to end up with socialized medicine-- albeit a socialized medicine system where we don't get to have public discourse about how it works.)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_an...

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#185

Post by zpthree »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #143

Even with this information included. I think the moral of the story is America has some very serious third-world problems. The reason things like this go on in America and not in any other developed country is that Americans just accept it. "They didn't pay, so they die." Here is how much they accept it, firefighters literally stood and watched a building burn down instead of playing with their toys. Not only that, t…

If you want the benefits of society you can't ignore the costs. Every home that is protected by fire departments pays taxes in the developed world, this family chose to live in unincorporated land. Btw - The fire was started by the homeowners grandson who was lighting trash on fire and afterwards the homeowners son assaulted the fire chief.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#186

Post by mbg721 »

db48x wrote: post #179
bluGill wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends on which rural area. I've lived in several rural areas, and we always had automatic fire service provided by the township, it was just another required tax line item. Normally they contracted with the nearest town (I know in one case the township legally owned half the town fire department and paid half the costs, the others I don't know what the details were, just that there was service from the nearest…

Townships only exist in New Jersey and Pennsylvania; most of the rest have counties. As you say, it varies from place to place; any of them could start a fire service if the residents vote for it and fund it via local taxes.

Ohio has townships within its counties; they serve as a catch-all for areas that aren't otherwise incorporated as cities/villages, and that can make a big difference for local property tax and services.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#187

Post by bombcar »

Retric wrote: post #72
michaelt wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Consider the following: * The first Fire Brigade, in Rome, was established by someone who would insist on buying your building before extinguishing the fire [1] * In the present day, you can live in an unincorporated area, decline fire protection offers from the county and from your insurer, and the fire brigade won't come out if you have a fire [2] * The article provides 11 di…

The Rome thing may or may not be true. It’s quite possible it is true, but we are a long way from any direct evidence that it was generally the case.

Half the things we know about famous Romans come from writings that were attacking or making fun of them, and some are pretty clearly satire or jokes.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#188

Post by david422 »

HWR_14 wrote: post #166
fatbird wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reporter on the scene spoke to the homeowner, who said he didn't pay the fee because he thought he could just pay after, like happened previously. He literally thought he could get away with not paying unless a fire happened. It's a textbook case of moral hazard. I discussed the case a lot at the time it happened, and it never came out that he "forgot" to pay the fee. It was very clear at the time that he thought h…

I had not heard that. Reports I saw at the time said he "forgot". At any rate, in response to the story, the county changed it so paying when your house was already ablaze was a punitive but not impossible option. I believe it was $3,500 when they instituted it. Which, frankly, seems like the proper way to handle the moral hazard.

That's still the same problem though. If nobody pays the town is still going to be out money even if it's possible to collect $3500. And the reason they don't put out the blaze and then just charge if someone doesn't have insurance is because they won't be able to collect.

How do you deal with freeloaders in society?

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#189

Post by that_guy_iain »

LarryMullins wrote: post #151
that_guy_iain wrote: post #143

Even with this information included. I think the moral of the story is America has some very serious third-world problems. The reason things like this go on in America and not in any other developed country is that Americans just accept it. "They didn't pay, so they die." Here is how much they accept it, firefighters literally stood and watched a building burn down instead of playing with their toys. Not only that, t…

> "They didn't pay, so they die." This didn't happen. A building burned but everybody was fine. Had lives been at risk, the firefighters would have intervened. The "moral" you are taking from this story is predicated on gross misinformation.

No, the moral of this story is you taking a single part massively out of context. And the fire department didn't go out. So they wouldn't have known if someone's life was at risk. So stop you're nonsense.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#190

Post by that_guy_iain »

zpthree wrote: post #185
that_guy_iain wrote: post #143

Even with this information included. I think the moral of the story is America has some very serious third-world problems. The reason things like this go on in America and not in any other developed country is that Americans just accept it. "They didn't pay, so they die." Here is how much they accept it, firefighters literally stood and watched a building burn down instead of playing with their toys. Not only that, t…

If you want the benefits of society you can't ignore the costs. Every home that is protected by fire departments pays taxes in the developed world, this family chose to live in unincorporated land. Btw - The fire was started by the homeowners grandson who was lighting trash on fire and afterwards the homeowners son assaulted the fire chief.

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN