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

331–340 of 440 posts

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#331

Post by n8cpdx »

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…

I don’t think this person actually has much experience with local governance in the US, because collectivized responsibility and mutual aid is a hallmark of basically every local government I’ve experienced, across the US.

Pass the guacymolo.

As an aside, “You're not with us, so it's not our problem” could better be stated as “you organized your entire life around not contributing to the collective welfare by dodging taxes in unincorporated land, then not contributing to the fire brigade.” The state should not incentivize people to engage in the worst antisocial behavior, and giving services to tax dodgers who should know better is a seriously misaligned incentive.

Perhaps life insurance companies should pay out to anyone who signs up and pays $20 from their deathbeds?

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#332

Post by aaron695 »

leetrout wrote: post #6

And here we are in modern times where we do, indeed, let buildings burn. > No pay, no spray: Firefighters let home burn > Firefighters in rural Tennessee let a home burn to the ground because the homeowner hadn't paid a $75 fee. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/wbna39516346

No post body was provided.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#333

Post by hypertele-Xii »

twblalock wrote: post #317
saiya-jin wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

What's wrong on a moral level about this story is that the homeowners refused to pay for the fire department, decided to live on unincorporated land, and then expected the firemen to risk their lives to save property -- not to save lives, just to save property. We can't have a functioning society if people who opt out of paying for it demand to benefit from it anyway. If people could get away with that, nobody would…

> We can't have a functioning society if people who opt out of paying for it demand to benefit from it anyway.

We clearly can. Why can't you?

Over here, we help first, figure out who owes who later. In America, first you gotta figure out who's paying, then you get help.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#334

Post by ekianjo »

qwytw wrote: post #135
legitster wrote: post #75

This reminds me of when I learned there was no such thing as "The Children's Crusade". As my history professor put it, "going to the Holy Land was an incredibly expensive endeavour reserved for a very few. There's no way anyone was going to waste it on young, inexperienced children". Nearly every source we had saying that the crusade involved children came much later, after a few writers referred to the same source w…

> As my history professor put it, "going to the Holy Land was an incredibly expensive endeavour reserved for a very few. There's no way anyone was going to waste it on young, inexperienced children". While a Crusade made up primarily of children is not realistic. The 'People's Crusade' was a thing. During the first Crusade 40 thousand or so poor peasants and various religious fanatics including many women and childre…

if I recall correctly most of them were enslaved even before making it to the Holy Land.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#335

Post by ekianjo »

relaxing wrote: post #267
legitster wrote: post #75

This reminds me of when I learned there was no such thing as "The Children's Crusade". As my history professor put it, "going to the Holy Land was an incredibly expensive endeavour reserved for a very few. There's no way anyone was going to waste it on young, inexperienced children". Nearly every source we had saying that the crusade involved children came much later, after a few writers referred to the same source w…

Wikipedia is right there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Crusade It's pretty big jump from "it never happened" to "some things happened, just not the way the stories told us."

Wikipedia is an excellent source to confirm the history books which are full of errors themselves.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#336

Post by ekianjo »

hypertele-Xii wrote: post #333
twblalock wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong on a moral level about this story is that the homeowners refused to pay for the fire department, decided to live on unincorporated land, and then expected the firemen to risk their lives to save property -- not to save lives, just to save property. We can't have a functioning society if people who opt out of paying for it demand to benefit from it anyway. If people could get away with that, nobody would…

> We can't have a functioning society if people who opt out of paying for it demand to benefit from it anyway. We clearly can. Why can't you? Over here, we help first, figure out who owes who later. In America, first you gotta figure out who's paying, then you get help.

Taxes is still paying.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#337

Post by jandrewrogers »

pas wrote: post #324
jandrewrogers wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The really funny part, I bet a lower percentage of the captia die from cancer in the UK than the US. The US, quite famously, generally has the highest cancer survival rates in the world. The standard bearers for cancer survival rates in Europe have traditionally been Switzerland and France, which are close to the same level as the US. A decade ago in the UK there was a public outcry when studies showed it had one o…

sincere question about medical costs of that cancer survival: it seems like a standard thing to compare. if we just look at the non-experimential stuff, is there something interesting? are US treatments better? even if adjusted for costs? can we even compare them somehow? purchasing power parity, sure, and cost breakdown of states/regions, differences in coding, market sizes and thus market efficiency, regulatory com…

Poor people in the US don't pay for their cancer treatments, the government does. They broadly use the same medical facilities as everyone else wherever they live, which do vary with locale. Some rural backwaters may not have the most advanced tech, you have to go to a city for that.

The segment of the US with most challenging cost problems are the lower-middle class. Not poor enough for the government to pay for everything while also being at risk of having little or no insurance. For people comfortably in the middle-class and up, this is much less likely to be the case.

The overall story is complicated. Demographics and health matter (not great in the US). The US medical system is profligate about speculative and preventative diagnostic tests which catch more cancers earlier (at great cost). But also early access to rapidly improving cancer treatments. It all blends together into the top-line numbers.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#338

Post by lmm »

RC_ITR wrote: post #319
lmm wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trains in Xinjiang compare very favourably with those in the US. The media paints a very one-sided picture of what life is like there; not to defend the CCP's awful actions, but if the way certain communities in St Louis get treated were reported the same way...

>Xinjiang compare very favourably with those in the US https://www.chinahighlights.com/china-trains/urumqi-lanzhou-... LOL, keep spreading that propaganda comrade!

So what's your point? A comparable part of the US railway network is what, Chicago to Denver: 10% less distance, 33% slower even over that shorter distance (much the same as the non-high-speed trains in Xianjing), 1/4 as frequent (and that's only if we ignore that Xianjing also has the slower trains) - and significantly less punctual IME (to say nothing of nicer to ride).

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#339

Post by relaxing »

ekianjo wrote: post #335
relaxing wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia is right there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Crusade It's pretty big jump from "it never happened" to "some things happened, just not the way the stories told us."

Wikipedia is an excellent source to confirm the history books which are full of errors themselves.

If you have another source, edit it in. There's plenty of debate on the Talk page about different books and journal articles as sources.

Re: Did insurance fire brigades let uninsured buildings burn?

#340

Post by Forgeties79 »

ekianjo wrote: post #335
relaxing wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia is right there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Crusade It's pretty big jump from "it never happened" to "some things happened, just not the way the stories told us."

Wikipedia is an excellent source to confirm the history books which are full of errors themselves.

Do you have any credible sources that contradict the information presented by Wikipedia?
Post reply on HN