I don't see how that matters when you'd be getting the same average income in either situation.
The rate of income is more important in situations like this than the total. Again, you understimate how much this costs, and also underestimate how willing people are to insure themselves.
It's no different to the way the vast majority of people choose to have insurance, even though solely in terms of expected gain in money it's more efficient not to.
Actually, most people only have car insurance because they're forced to by law. Look at states that don't require it, and you'll find a surprising number of uninsured motorists. On top of that, tons of people choose not to carry insurance despite it being straight-up illegal to do so. Had I not been required to hold it, I would not have had collision insurance on my car while I had one.
Homeowner's insurance is the same way: people with mortgages are forced to carry it. Flood insurance... Look at how many people can't afford it or choose not to bother. By and large, people choose not to insure unless you force them to.
So yes, if you set it up properly, most people will go for the yearly fire fee over the one-time fee, but the one-time fee will remain an option.
Having the one-time fee option is a terrible idea that servers no purpose in this case. It adds overhead to no benefit. At best, it could be offered in the form of "double the yearly rate times the number of years you haven't paid." But even then, why bother? Fire fighting and basic emergency services should be covered by property taxes. Pulling an essential and lifesaving service like this, especially one so cheap in aggregate due to the risk pool, is a stupid and pointless endeavor compared to just funding it with taxes. Giving people a choice in some areas only enables them to make poor decisions at no benefit to anyone, and further increases the total costs of the whole endeavor.
I don't see how that matters when you'd be getting the same average income in either situation.
The rate of income is more important in situations like this than the total. Again, you understimate how much this costs, and also underestimate how willing people are to insure themselves.
I guess you mean overestimate for that one.
I agree that it's better to use taxation to fund it in the first place; I never stated otherwise.
It just seemed to me that if you were going to use a fee-based system, you'd still want to get past the inefficiency of letting a house burn when you could stop the fire for less than the house costs.
You only need tax money or a loan to start the program off, however (as with pretty much anything). Once fires start happening, it becomes sustainable, though you do need to keep a buffer in case you don't get many fires one year, or the like.
That's highly unlikely to work and overly complex. Fires are rare as it is, and you still vastly underestimate how much it costs to maintain a firefighting squad and equipment.
Well, if fires are so rare, and we need money to maintain the departments, we can just start setting them more often. Then we will have job security and a steady source of funds to maintain the department. Problem solved!
Radley Balko, who covers criminal justice issues for Reason, called Wednesday’s contempt charge, “just astonishingly ignorant, arrogant, and thuggish. Oh, and illegal. It’s also way illegal. Like, not even close.†David Hudson Jr., an expert at the First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University, told the Daily Journal that forcing Lampley to repeat the pledge was an obvious violation of his right to free-speech. "I've never heard of a judge jailing a lawyer over this," he said.
Sharon Angle is the degeneration of reason. She is a backwards Neo-Luddite, an enemy of all progress. She believes that church and state are not separated by the constitution. She is a mentally-deficient theocrat fueled on hate and misogyny, attempting to force our nation into a state of total retardation to fit her perverse worldview.
If she is victorious, it will be an atrocity, a crime against humanity.
It should be remembered that ‘democracy’ was originally advocated by the philosophers Plato and Socrates, both homosexual pedophiles. Some contend that these historical facts are irrelevant. There are others who claim that, because of this, democracy is inherently homosexual. This may well be the case. Consider the fact that, just recently, the people of Canada and Spain, along with quite a few other democratic Christian nations, actually voted in favor of same sex marriages. For the first time in more than 2,000 years, the State was now allowed to sanction sodomy as an individual right and to give explicit approval and encouragement to the act of anal sex.
Jason Nicholas Korning, The Eternal Order of St. Judas Maccabaeus 67 Comments [10/10/2010 5:05:12 AM] Fundie Index: 69 Submitted By: Robert
So, who here can point everything that is wrong about the above?
I loled when Democrats picked Alan Greene in the primaries but now I'm crying when the "Tea Party" candidates open their mouths. Well, atleast they are being vettted by the media before the general election.
I loled when Democrats picked Alan Greene in the primaries but now I'm crying when the "Tea Party" candidates open their mouths.
Why? Most things you say sound very much like the standard teabag stuff. Anyone who read your stubborn birther rants would be pretty hard pressed to distinguish you from the average teabagger
Why? Most things you say sound very much like the standard teabag stuff. Anyone who read your stubborn birther rants would be pretty hard pressed to distinguish you from the average teabagger
Oh come on Joe. Steve just posts the articles and sees what we say most of the time he doesn't say what he believes when he posts those stupid articles. Steve is no Birther. (At most he is trolling).
I loled when Democrats picked Alan Greene in the primaries but now I'm crying when the "Tea Party" candidates open their mouths. Well, at least they are being vetted by the media before the general election.
The sad part Steve, is that Alan Greene at least in theory could have been set up to win by a trick since it's in a state with open primaries and democrats tend not to show up in the primaries especially when there is no hope against Sen. DeMint (I wish that wasn't so). Most of those Tea-party people got elected in Closed primaries where independents couldn't vote. This year has been the a banner year for my argument against closed primaries.
"I just think my children and your children would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family, and I don't want them brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is an equally valid and successful option. It isn't,†said Carl Paladino. The remarks came right after Paladino said it was time to stop pandering to "pornographers and perverts." Paladino, whose nephew is gay, outlined his views on gay issues at two separate events with religious leaders, saying he would veto any legislation that granted gays the right to marry. Paladino skipped a line from his prepared text that read, "There is nothing to be proud of in being a dysfunctional homosexual." "I oppose the homosexual agenda, whether they call it marriage, civil union or domestic partnership,†said Paladino.
I seriously hope someone punches him in the scrotum.
Also, responding to statements above, Allan Green was a terrible choice and I can not believe that no single human being existed in the are that wouldn't have made a better candidate. I know NOTHING about being in government, and I'm pretty sure I could have made a better politician than that.
Paladino should go down in flames. Isn't the guy that said he would stop the GZ mosque via eminent domain? Doesn't a comment like that just piss EVERYONE off?
Not only is he being an islamaphobist with that stance but also pisses the right off by being pro-eminent domain! That's like saying you have no problem with gay people unless they want to actually be gay... no... wait... he did say that too.
This guy was only taken seriously for a few moments because there were a few (obviously) outlier polls that showed he had a snowball chance in hell of winning.
I'm surprised that more conservative sites are not saying "He is a Liberal plant" to motivate the base. I'm sure even people outside of New York read a story like that about a "tea Party" candidate and they have to wonder about there own..
Comments
Homeowner's insurance is the same way: people with mortgages are forced to carry it. Flood insurance... Look at how many people can't afford it or choose not to bother. By and large, people choose not to insure unless you force them to. Having the one-time fee option is a terrible idea that servers no purpose in this case. It adds overhead to no benefit. At best, it could be offered in the form of "double the yearly rate times the number of years you haven't paid." But even then, why bother? Fire fighting and basic emergency services should be covered by property taxes. Pulling an essential and lifesaving service like this, especially one so cheap in aggregate due to the risk pool, is a stupid and pointless endeavor compared to just funding it with taxes. Giving people a choice in some areas only enables them to make poor decisions at no benefit to anyone, and further increases the total costs of the whole endeavor.
It's a stupid policy.
I agree that it's better to use taxation to fund it in the first place; I never stated otherwise.
It just seemed to me that if you were going to use a fee-based system, you'd still want to get past the inefficiency of letting a house burn when you could stop the fire for less than the house costs.
Defense lawyer jailed for not saying the pledge.
And the stupid is almost unbearable.
If she is victorious, it will be an atrocity, a crime against humanity.
You have to admit that it is funny and effective at getting out their message. Especially the very end where he tries to eat a candy bar!
The "Democracy is Totally Gay" Award
Quote# 76795
It should be remembered that ‘democracy’ was originally advocated by the philosophers Plato and Socrates, both homosexual pedophiles. Some contend that these historical facts are irrelevant. There are others who claim that, because of this, democracy is inherently homosexual. This may well be the case. Consider the fact that, just recently, the people of Canada and Spain, along with quite a few other democratic Christian nations, actually voted in favor of same sex marriages. For the first time in more than 2,000 years, the State was now allowed to sanction sodomy as an individual right and to give explicit approval and encouragement to the act of anal sex.
Jason Nicholas Korning, The Eternal Order of St. Judas Maccabaeus 67 Comments [10/10/2010 5:05:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 69
Submitted By: Robert
So, who here can point everything that is wrong about the above?
Also, responding to statements above, Allan Green was a terrible choice and I can not believe that no single human being existed in the are that wouldn't have made a better candidate. I know NOTHING about being in government, and I'm pretty sure I could have made a better politician than that.
Not only is he being an islamaphobist with that stance but also pisses the right off by being pro-eminent domain! That's like saying you have no problem with gay people unless they want to actually be gay... no... wait... he did say that too.
Say hello to gov Cuomo New York!
I'm surprised that more conservative sites are not saying "He is a Liberal plant" to motivate the base. I'm sure even people outside of New York read a story like that about a "tea Party" candidate and they have to wonder about there own..