They obviously aren't enough otherwise it wouldn't be an issue.
Full-time vs. Part-time and the Yarnell 19.
- Thread starter arnisador
- Start date
They obviously aren't enough otherwise it wouldn't be an issue.
Um, no. LOL. I'm just a guy who thinks the second line in the Declaration of Independence was good enough for the whole damn thing.
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
Sorry I would have been more accurate to have called you a Left-wing market anarchist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism
I believe in self ownership and property rights, so the I guess that puts me on the right. Ugh, the me of ten years ago is so ashamed. Lol.
But anyway, I misspoke. The government is actually subsidizing the property owners by paying for the smoke jumpers. If the government didn't pay for them, people wouldn't be able to live in those places unless they could pay for the high insurance premiums that would pay smoke jumpers salary. They would make far more money in the free market...of course there would be fewer of them as well.
Anyway, perhaps people should live in certain areas? Maybe there would be less need for people to take such risks and less death and less property damage if people had to pay the true cost of living in an area.
Anyway, perhaps people should live in certain areas? Maybe there would be less need for people to take such risks and less death and less property damage if people had to pay the true cost of living in an area.
the home owners do pay for the fire fighters through their property taxes. If those do not cover the expense, it's the city's problem.
Plus it is a calculated risk when you build your house further out of own than the trucks can travel.
Still no subsidies involved, since wildfires do not strike the same location that often.
A bigger problem is the interruption of wildfire cycles. In the past we had many smaller ones which we eliminated successfully, only to have the dead underbrush, etc accumulate. When it goes up now, it's a big fire, hard to control.
And yes, there are places were one dos not need to build a house.
I guess you aren't seeing the point that government actually subsidizes people who live in these dangerous ares by paying the piddly salaries of the men who take these kind of risks. If government did not do this, the real cost would drive up salaries and prohibit more people from moving to wildfire areas. This would happen because people would have an insurance actuary come in and assess the real risk and people would have to pay for that.
