mellyrn on September 08, 2011, 11:14:16 am
Quoting from an economics site that I read:

-------------------------------
Well, this fire situation here in Texas [author lives within a few miles of some of it.  --m] has gotten interesting now with "Perry, Romney discuss Texas wildfires"[linked in original] ahead of the republicorps presidential wannabe festival.

The fires -- which continue to burn -- are generating huge interest on the net.  One camp -- perhaps the better informed -- says the reason the feds on scene turned down local aid was that without training and integration into the teams [...] the volunteers could turn into more of a liability than asset.

OK, I might buy that.  Except that a contract fire fighting outfit source up in Montana sent me this:

Quote
    All the Texas fires have been the same...'Federal Only. No Contractors'. You'll see on the Bastrop fire they are ordering Type 2 water tenders, again Federal Only. We have 2 Type 1 tenders sitting here idle in Montana. They are 6,000 gallons and 5,600 gallons, can pump and draft simultaneously and can support helicopters. Type 2 Tenders are less than 4,000 gallons, usually much less. Of course we're contractors, so no calls even with a national contract. What a shame available resources are left sitting while people and property are lost.

Yeah, no kidding. 
-------------------------------

"We're from the government.  We're here to help you."

TMIAHM on September 09, 2011, 01:18:25 am
Latest strip ..what a nightmare!  (not the work, that is good)
 What is the nightmare is people from TAXACHUSETTS bringing a form of government

That is the stuff of nightmares!

ContraryGuy on September 09, 2011, 02:03:01 am
Quoting from an economics site that I read:

-------------------------------
Well, this fire situation here in Texas [author lives within a few miles of some of it.  --m] has gotten interesting now with "Perry, Romney discuss Texas wildfires"[linked in original] ahead of the republicorps presidential wannabe festival.

The fires -- which continue to burn -- are generating huge interest on the net.  One camp -- perhaps the better informed -- says the reason the feds on scene turned down local aid was that without training and integration into the teams [...] the volunteers could turn into more of a liability than asset.

OK, I might buy that.  Except that a contract fire fighting outfit source up in Montana sent me this:

Quote
    All the Texas fires have been the same...'Federal Only. No Contractors'. You'll see on the Bastrop fire they are ordering Type 2 water tenders, again Federal Only. We have 2 Type 1 tenders sitting here idle in Montana. They are 6,000 gallons and 5,600 gallons, can pump and draft simultaneously and can support helicopters. Type 2 Tenders are less than 4,000 gallons, usually much less. Of course we're contractors, so no calls even with a national contract. What a shame available resources are left sitting while people and property are lost.

Yeah, no kidding. 
-------------------------------

"We're from the government.  We're here to help you."

Disgruntled people are hardly a worthwhile source of trusted information.
Of course they are willing to paint the Feds in a bad light; fed firefighting largesse wasnt spread around to them.
If they were to be hired, all complaints would vanish.

ContraryGuy on September 09, 2011, 11:20:03 am
Quoting from an economics site that I read:

-------------------------------
Well, this fire situation here in Texas [author lives within a few miles of some of it.  --m] has gotten interesting now with "Perry, Romney discuss Texas wildfires"[linked in original] ahead of the republicorps presidential wannabe festival.

The fires -- which continue to burn -- are generating huge interest on the net.  One camp -- perhaps the better informed -- says the reason the feds on scene turned down local aid was that without training and integration into the teams [...] the volunteers could turn into more of a liability than asset.

OK, I might buy that.  Except that a contract fire fighting outfit source up in Montana sent me this:

Quote
    All the Texas fires have been the same...'Federal Only. No Contractors'. You'll see on the Bastrop fire they are ordering Type 2 water tenders, again Federal Only. We have 2 Type 1 tenders sitting here idle in Montana. They are 6,000 gallons and 5,600 gallons, can pump and draft simultaneously and can support helicopters. Type 2 Tenders are less than 4,000 gallons, usually much less. Of course we're contractors, so no calls even with a national contract. What a shame available resources are left sitting while people and property are lost.

Yeah, no kidding. 
-------------------------------

"We're from the government.  We're here to help you."

One other thing about the Texas fires, it seems that Rick Perry screamed for Fed help once he realized how big the fires had gotten; and then he whined and complained that the Fed help wasnt enough.

Which is it, Mr. Big Govt is Bad?  So big you get elected promising to cut it down, or not big enough to take of  your states emergencies?

Also, did you know that for this years budget, Mr. Govt is Bad Perry cut Texas' firefighting budget?

If this were an AnCap scenario, their would be no Fed help, but those Montana firefighters who werent allowed to help would have had to help for free, since Texas didnt have enough money.
(If they had enough money, there would have been effective fire prevention to begin with)

dough560 on September 09, 2011, 03:55:07 pm
Amazing how multi layered taxes eliminate options.  Especially when Texas money seized by the Feds, is now needed back in Texas.  The Feds tell you, You Can't Have It!  (Especially when you don't support Federal TransProg Plans and Policies!  Go ahead and Publicly Tell the President he's being stupid.)

See what it gets you.

Texas governments made the hard choices and balanced their budgets.

The Feds.....?

NeitherRuleNorBeRuled on September 09, 2011, 05:07:52 pm
If this were an AnCap scenario, their would be no Fed help, but those Montana firefighters who werent allowed to help would have had to help for free, since Texas didnt have enough money.
(If they had enough money, there would have been effective fire prevention to begin with)

Texans (not Texas, people have money, not areas of land) would almost certainly have had the money, possibly with the assistance of insurance that would kick in for sufficiently significant (and hence rare) cost to contain.  They would not likely have all the trained personnel and equipment instantly available, however, since that would not be cost effective -- such equipment and personnel would be much better "shared" with those in other areas, since such fires don't tend to occur everywhere at once.  When they do exceed the immediately available resource, the marketplace -- which will allocate those resources to those willing to pay the most, i.e., those with the most to lose, will come into play.

Oldhobo on September 09, 2011, 08:09:40 pm
Someone recently mentioned the Red Cross and the Salvation Army.  These organizations are not, I repeat not benevolent charity organizations.  While they hand out a few band aids on occasion both of these organizations lobby Congress to keep taxes high.  During a recent non-administration of this country, we were a few elephant hairs away from repealing the death tax and both the Red Cross and the Salvation Army lobbied against this.  To be clear I am all for charity but I am asking everyone to reconsider donating to these organizations.  Additionally, if you want to donate blood, go to your local Community Blood Center.  The blood does less traveling.  Recently the Red Cross lost tens of thousands of blood b/c of airline scheduling-the blood went bad on the tarmac-and then promptly declared 'an emergency', never telling people the truth about what had happened to all of their donations.  I am not saying do not be charitable, merely that the aforementioned organizations are not worthy of your hard-earned 10% that you have left over.  Another aspect of charity in an AnCap Society is that if a disaster befalls you and no one comes to your aid, perhaps you are not that much of a neighbor. 

NeitherRuleNorBeRuled on September 09, 2011, 08:39:59 pm
Someone recently mentioned the Red Cross and the Salvation Army.  These organizations are not, I repeat not benevolent charity organizations.  While they hand out a few band aids on occasion both of these organizations lobby Congress to keep taxes high. 

I would be very interested in seeing some documentation for this.  Not that I doubt it  -- especially the American Red Cross  (I'm not sure that the International Red Cross is that bad); however I've heard some pretty nasty stories about their former head, Benadine Healy, when she ran the Ohio State Hospitals.  She was pretty universally despised there (my Doctor practices with them, and I know several other folks who work or have worked there).  I first started asking about her when it was announced that she had cancer, and rather than be treated locally (OSU has a great reputation for treating the type of cancer she had) she went to the Cleveland Clinic to be treated.  Granted, her husband is in charge of it, but it meant being treated >100 miles away and it certainly isn't good PR to not "eat your own dog food" as we say in the software industry.

Oldhobo on September 09, 2011, 09:19:38 pm
they did lobby against the Death tax, along with Insurance companies and Bill Gates' Dad and a few other mega-millionaires.  What is it about having all the money that turns you into Ming the Merciless?

NeitherRuleNorBeRuled on September 09, 2011, 09:30:35 pm
they did lobby against the Death tax, along with Insurance companies and Bill Gates' Dad and a few other mega-millionaires.  What is it about having all the money that turns you into Ming the Merciless?


I believe it  (well, I actually don't but that's because I don't really believe anything, although Descartes has me pretty sure I exist) , but I couldn't find any links to evidence easily.  I don't like citing something I can't back up, and unfortunately, "Oldhobo" isn't a particularly credible source to most folks (likely to their detriment).
« Last Edit: September 09, 2011, 11:47:27 pm by NeitherRuleNorBeRuled »

ContraryGuy on September 11, 2011, 02:36:40 am
they did lobby against the Death tax, along with Insurance companies and Bill Gates' Dad and a few other mega-millionaires.  What is it about having all the money that turns you into Ming the Merciless?


I believe it  (well, I actually don't but that's because I don't really believe anything, although Descartes has me pretty sure I exist) , but I couldn't find any links to evidence easily.  I don't like citing something I can't back up, and unfortunately, "Oldhobo" isn't a particularly credible source to most folks (likely to their detriment).
Theres too much astroturf on the internet to go around believing anyone and everyone.

ContraryGuy on September 11, 2011, 02:41:01 am
Amazing how multi layered taxes eliminate options.  Especially when Texas money seized by the Feds, is now needed back in Texas.  The Feds tell you, You Can't Have It!  (Especially when you don't support Federal TransProg Plans and Policies!  Go ahead and Publicly Tell the President he's being stupid.)

See what it gets you.

Texas governments made the hard choices and balanced their budgets.

The Feds.....?

As a result of the "balanced" budgets, there is a joke going around in Texas, "Sure Rick Perry created thousands of jobs; I'm working three of them."

Also, 3 out of 4 of the jobs that Rick Perry created were government jobs.

I thought if you balanced your budget, you got rid of redundant and unneeded things; not added more of them.

ContraryGuy on September 11, 2011, 02:52:16 am
If this were an AnCap scenario, their would be no Fed help, but those Montana firefighters who werent allowed to help would have had to help for free, since Texas didnt have enough money.
(If they had enough money, there would have been effective fire prevention to begin with)

Texans (not Texas, people have money, not areas of land) would almost certainly have had the money, possibly with the assistance of insurance that would kick in for sufficiently significant (and hence rare) cost to contain.  They would not likely have all the trained personnel and equipment instantly available, however, since that would not be cost effective -- such equipment and personnel would be much better "shared" with those in other areas, since such fires don't tend to occur everywhere at once.  When they do exceed the immediately available resource, the marketplace -- which will allocate those resources to those willing to pay the most, i.e., those with the most to lose, will come into play.


I see. So in the event of an emergency or disaster, AnCap isnt such a utopia after all.  Because the always fair and balanced (yet invisible) hand of the markets get to decide who lives and who dies.
And the poor and hard-working are the ones left homeless and bereft.  Or just dead and washed away, because they didnt have enough money to bribe the emergency responders to come soon enough or stay long enough.

Anyone who has ever made a large claim on their insurance knows that insurance comes in once it is safe and then tries to tell you that your claim is not valid.
Because you see, insurance companies are businesses first, and compassionate a distant second.
And all companies collude.  Its called "industry standard practice."  Even in an AnCap world, no insurance company is going to pay out everything that is claimed; how would they make any money?

So you see, I would rather have our oh-so-imperfect current system than have a disaster response system that starts with the phrase, "May I have your credit card number, please?"

ContraryGuy on September 11, 2011, 02:56:14 am
  Another aspect of charity in an AnCap Society is that if a disaster befalls you and no one comes to your aid, perhaps you are not that much of a neighbor. 

Or perhaps your neighbors think it would be easier to divide up your property if you were dead?

Or perhaps your neighbor is just cranky and wont help regardless of how you act.

I would hate to live somewhere knowing that I had to always be nice to everyone just in case I needed their help one day.

Bob G on September 11, 2011, 07:38:41 am
I would hate to live somewhere knowing that I had to always be nice to everyone just in case I needed their help one day.

The truth emerges!!! Here is CG in a nutshell: He'll be as cranky, obstreperous, and 'contrary' as he wants without consequences, and if he needs your help you should give it to him with no objections not because he's a nice guy but because you owe it to him.
Whatsoever, for any cause, seeketh to take or give
  Power above or beyond the Laws, suffer it not to live.
Holy State, or Holy King, or Holy People's Will.
  Have no truck with the senseless thing, order the guns and kill.

The penultimate stanza of Rudyard Kipling's MacDonough's Song

 

anything