Private firefighters go to work for California's wealthy • Hacker News Board

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

#81

Post by rayiner » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:17 PM UTC

erfderd wrote: post #70

rayiner wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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.

VAT is somewhat different in mechanics from sales tax, because it is collected along different points in the value chain. More important, VAT in Europe typically ranges from 20-25%, and has a broader tax base. In a typical European country, consumption taxes make up almost 30% of revenue, versus 17% in the US.

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

#82

Post by erfderd » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:17 PM UTC

Shivetya wrote: post #74

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.

One is embedded so you do not easily identify just how much all those free services cost you. embedded taxes benefit the tax man and the easiest to make regressive thereby clawing back much of the money spent on services

Ya, Canada used to have a VAT like tax, and then got rid of it in the 90s.

My question was honest though. Is there something special (good) about VAT vs. sales tax that I'm missing? Because the OP implied we don't pay sales tax in the US, which is (generally) not true.

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

#83

Post by skunkpocalypse » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:18 PM UTC

ossworkerrights wrote: post #6

Amusing how anyone suggesting burying powerlines underground is immediately pushed back by "it's expensive" know it alls. Wondering if power-cuts like 3rd world countries enjoy are preferable over a slight increase in power supply costs, and wether impotence is more desirable over action bEcAuSe iT's eXpEnSivE.

Douglas County, Washington is a tinderbox much like NorCal. About 95% of the county's land is an arid drygrass plateau with high winds. They undergrounded 100% of the electrical distribution there. Must have cost a fortune, but they did it.

Oh yeah, and they're a Public Utility District. Wholly owned by the people whose houses will burn down if they don't do this. And state law limits them to growing no larger than a single county, so if the ship sinks they sink with it.

Are you listening, California? Nah, didn't think so.

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

#84

Post by inanutshellus » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:19 PM UTC

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?

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

#85

Post by rayiner » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:19 PM UTC

_visgean wrote: post #73

rayiner wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I am looking into https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates and i dont see the numbers you mentioned.

Those are rates, not revenue. The OECD has profiles that show how much of each country’s tax revenue comes from different sources. For example Sweden: https://www.oecd.org/tax/revenue-statistics-sweden.pdf

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

#86

Post by Covzire » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:19 PM UTC

Traster wrote: post #13

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…

Step 1: Rich people lobby to lower taxes Step 2: The government can't afford firefighters. Step 3: Rich people use the tax money they've saved to employ private firefighters to only protect their property. Step 4: Poor people are left to die in otherwise controllable fires.

Doesn't CA have the highest state taxes in the country?

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

#87

Post by eloff » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:20 PM UTC

Traster wrote: post #13

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…

Step 1: Rich people lobby to lower taxes Step 2: The government can't afford firefighters. Step 3: Rich people use the tax money they've saved to employ private firefighters to only protect their property. Step 4: Poor people are left to die in otherwise controllable fires.

Blame the poor who vote for these politicians, they control the elections and thereby the country, in theory. Why non-rich people insist on voting Republican (the party that caters to the wealthy) is a mystery to me.

Lobbying is a form of weak power by comparison.

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

#88

Post by MayorMonty » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:20 PM UTC

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

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

#89

Post by Nasrudith » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:20 PM UTC

blueblisters wrote: post #12

ossworkerrights wrote: post #6

Amusing how anyone suggesting burying powerlines underground is immediately pushed back by "it's expensive" know it alls. Wondering if power-cuts like 3rd world countries enjoy are preferable over a slight increase in power supply costs, and wether impotence is more desirable over action bEcAuSe iT's eXpEnSivE.

Is there literally no solution that exists between burying power lines and keeping the lines completely exposed that would be cost effective and improve fire safety by some factor? I imagine insulators in high risk areas might do the trick but I am no high voltage expert.

I personally wonder why they don't go with accessible infastructure tunnels like old city sewer systems instead of having to dig up roads for wires and pipes. The two obvious "why nots" I can see are the initial expense of such tunnels and rodents or other pests damaging it.

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

#90

Post by CapacitorSet » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 1:20 PM UTC

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.