11 Oct '10 08:20>
Originally posted by zeeblebotYeah, just like those adulterers in Iran.
the guy tried to game the system and lost. his own fault.
Originally posted by zeeblebotThe purpose of fire departments is not to weed out people trying to "game" the system. Their purpose is to put out fires. All of them. If there was to be a penalty applied to the individual in question, the appropriate time to levy it would be AFTER the fire had been put out, not during it. In any event, the penalty FAR exceeded the magnitude of the offense. I repeat: if you think letting the man's house burn down was a just outcome, then you are a morally bankrupt individual with no coherent understanding of what justice is.
the guy tried to game the system and lost. his own fault.
Originally posted by rwingettits like the wajomastani's that are okay with free enterprise introducing sometimes dangerous objects like toys or household appliances into the home, where eventually its only the toll of maimed, injured or dying people that eventually leads to those objects being discontinued and these company's go under due to consumer backlash....assuming a fair and unbiased news service that would actually bother to report on these *accidents*
.....I repeat: if you think letting the man's house burn down was a just outcome, then you are a morally bankrupt individual with no coherent understanding of what justice is.
Originally posted by rwingettIn short: a modern American conservative.
The purpose of fire departments is not to weed out people trying to "game" the system. Their purpose is to put out fires. All of them. If there was to be a penalty applied to the individual in question, the appropriate time to levy it would be AFTER the fire had been put out, not during it. In any event, the penalty FAR exceeded the magnitude of the offense ...[text shortened]... then you are a morally bankrupt individual with no coherent understanding of what justice is.
Originally posted by zeeblebotif the city of South Fulton truly decides it will no longer put out any fires outside of the city limits: I would imagine that people living outside the city will have a very difficult time obtaining fire insurance -- perhaps this might make them inclined to pay the tax dollars needed to fund a county-wide firefighting system.
oops, found it, open on another tab, at a different site.
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/when-your-house-is-burning-down-how-good-is-a-public-good/?apage=5#comments
104. October 7, 2010 4:51 pm Link
It would be great if this blog or the linked articles told the whole truth about the situation, but then it just wouldn’t be as much ...[text shortened]... you want, but if you don’t live here or pay taxes here, then you don’t get a vote
— BillyBob
Originally posted by MelanerpesDid the victim and I use that term loosely know he had to pay for coverage?
if the city of South Fulton truly decides it will no longer put out any fires outside of the city limits: I would imagine that people living outside the city will have a very difficult time obtaining fire insurance -- perhaps this might make them inclined to pay the tax dollars needed to fund a county-wide firefighting system.
Other issues -- what if a ...[text shortened]... y, but by letting this guy's house burn, they were still playing with fire (groan intended).
Originally posted by cheshirecatstevensaccording to various reports including comments appended to the reports from people claiming to live in the area and to be familiar with the case:
Did the victim and I use that term loosely know he had to pay for coverage?