# Letting the House Burn Down: Our Fee-For-Service Future? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 17, 2006, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942 "2006-02-17T13:49:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/1 "2006-02-17T13:49:29Z")
From the AP: > [@](#): > > Rural firefighters stood by and watched a fire destroy a garage and a vehicle because the property owner had not paid membership dues. Fire Chief Ronnie Myers defended the no-pay, no-aid policy, saying the membership-based organization could not survive if people thought they would respond for free. Two questions. 1. Was the firefighters’ decision not to help justifiable? 2. Some argue that incidents like this are the natural consequence of an increasingly fee-for-service society, where once-publically subsidized services – including security, fire protection, and roads – are parceled out to private providers who will only serve those who have specifically subscribed. Do you think this is happening, or likely to happen? If so, will it be a positive or negative thing, on balance? We haven’t had a libertarianism thread in a while… ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/2 "2006-02-17T14:00:42Z")
If only a building and a vehicle were in danger, then there’s no problem with the decision. There would be problems if a life were in danger, or if other property (especially other people’s property) were in danger. Presumably the firefighters turned up to make sure the fire did not spread, and wasn’t endangering anyone, but why should they risk their lives? (and firefighting is always a risk – what if there are containers full of LPG or petrol in the garage?) ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/3 "2006-02-17T14:00:59Z")
1. Yes. I recon so. But it’s not pretty. Reminds me a bit of how the Roman Crassus made his money – and that man wasn’t a pretty sight either. Couldn’t they have some clause where you when they arrive at the fire will offer you an instant membership at a raised price? 2. If membership is voluntary, there’s always some who will opt out. That’s their choice. And it’s a positive thing. Ourselves carrying the consequence of our actions and choices. That’s what separates adults from children. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/4 "2006-02-17T14:04:52Z")
Does this fire service recieve any public money or is it wholly privately funded? If it’s the former than they should have responded regardless of whether the member paid his/her dues. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/5 "2006-02-17T14:06:43Z")
> [@Gadarene](#): > > 1. Some argue that incidents like this are the natural consequence of an increasingly fee-for-service society, where once-publically subsidized services – including security, fire protection, and roads – are parceled out to private providers who will only serve those who have specifically subscribed. Some might argue that, but this case doesn’t illustrate the point. This is not a case of a city that USED to have a municipal fire department, but shut it down in favor of a pay-per-use service. This happened in a rural area that probably never had a government-run fire department. In such areas, all you typically have are volunteer fire brigades and/or the occasional private service. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/6 "2006-02-17T14:11:22Z")
link [Mo. Firefighters Refuse to Help Non-Member](http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/3665823.html) ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/7 "2006-02-17T14:12:17Z")
Hmm, tricky. The thing about fire, like disease, is that it _spreads_. Thus, by ‘opting out’ you _are_ arguably affecting other people than yourself. After all, we wouldn’t let an Ebola victim wander around just because they had no health insurance. If one of your neighbours had opted out of fire cover, would you really wait until the inferno had got going well enough to threaten _your_ house before imploring the guys to turn on their damned hoses? Of course, that’s why I think things like prevention of fire, crime and ill health should be _mandatorily_ financed via taxes. It seems to me that introducing competition via privateering in these matters serves only to leave a lot more losers in very grave predicaments. (Of course, _extra_ cover via private firms is no problem, but the universal baseline must first be addressed). ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/8 "2006-02-17T14:15:08Z")
[Local -paper with more details as to what happened](http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060217/NEWS01/602170368) > [@](#): > > Firefighters near Monett stood by and watched a fire destroy a garage and a vehicle because the property owner, who was injured battling the flames, had not paid membership dues. > > Monett Rural Fire Department Chief Ronnie Myers defended the policy, saying the membership-based organization could not survive if people thought the department would respond for free. The department said it will fight a fire without question if a life is believed to be in danger. > > Myers said he would make an effort to explain the membership policy to the area’s new Hispanic residents after the property’s owner, Bibaldo Rueda, said he had never been told of the dues policy since moving there 1 1/2 years ago. > > Barry County Sheriff’s Detective Robert Evenson said the fire broke out Monday on four acres owned by Rueda south of Monett, about 40 miles southwest of Springfield. > > Four mobile homes and a number of vehicles were on the property. Rueda managed to get one mobile home out of danger, using a garden hose and buckets, but was burned in the process, Evenson said. > > The Monett Rural Fire Department responded to the scene but did not fight the fire. Firefighters stood by as the fire burned itself out, watching in case the flames spread to neighboring properties owned by members. > > “People need to realize you’ve got to become a member. If you live outside the city limits, you need to join one of the rural fire departments,” Myers said. > > Rueda offered to pay, Evenson said, but the Monett department does not have a policy for on-the-spot billing. > > Randy Cole, assistant state fire marshal, said there was no state law requiring membership-supported fire districts to help nonmembers in any situation. > > However, state law says those departments may perform services for a nonmember if they choose, and then charge the nonmember based on a set amount outlined in statute, Cole said. > > Though more membership-driven departments have been forming tax-supported protection districts, they still remain prevalent in rural regions across the state, he said. > > Cassville and Mount Vernon have gone to tax- supported rural fire districts, following a public vote, wherein all fires are fought. > > Rural Monett members have not been asked to choose between memberships and tax support, though they came out strongly against a proposed Aurora Rural Bi-County Fire Protection District, which was voted down in 2001. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/9 "2006-02-17T14:19:10Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > Hmm, tricky. The thing about fire, like disease, is that it _spreads_. Thus, by ‘opting out’ you _are_ arguably affecting other people than yourself. After all, we wouldn’t let an Ebola victim wander around just because they had no health insurance. If one of your neighbours had opted out of fire cover, would you really wait until the inferno had got going well enough to threaten _your_ house before imploring the guys to turn on their damned hoses? Mmmm…that’s not what we’re talking about here. That is mainly a concern in urban/suburban areas and the reason those municipalities fund fire service through mandatory and universal taxes. It’s also a good reason to not go to fee-based services in those areas. But this is a rural area we’re talking about, so there was probably little chance of the fire spreading due to the distance between the houses on adjacent properties (please note this is speculation since I haven’t seen an image). ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/10 "2006-02-17T14:33:07Z")
Yes, I suppose that in the instances where the fire _definitely_ won’t spread to other buildings or woods _etc._ and there simply is no other fire cover at all, their actions could perhaps be justified. (I would still advocate some government cover be _introduced_, of course.) ---
**Author:** ![Stonebow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Stonebow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stonebow)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/11 "2006-02-17T14:46:08Z")
As a city-bred person, this just leaves me aghast. Looking at the specific circumstances, and the laws involved, I imagine what was done was legal. However, the possible lack of notification might be an issue, and, I’m hesitant to bring it up, but I won’t rule out race/culture issues as well (if only at the level of a language barrier) Does anyone else find this: _Rueda offered to pay, Evenson said, but the Monett department does not have a policy for on-the-spot billing._ both funny and very sad? ---
**Author:** ![redtail23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/3e96dc/32.png) [@redtail23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/redtail23)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/12 "2006-02-17T15:10:57Z")
I remember a similar thing happening to a schoolmate (would have been about 1980-81). The area in which we lived was not part of any town and had no services. Firetrucks would come out from one of the nearby towns, but only if your credit card had validated. No upfront money, no help. The area only recently added a property tax, which is used in some manner to fund firefighting service. I think the firechief does have a point - if all you have is a subscription service, and non-members get the same service, soon you won’t have subscriptions and shortly thereafter you won’t have a service. However, I also think that the fact that the guy was willing to pay and they refused indicates that there was something more going on here. State law specifically covers this situation (departments allowed to bill non-members needing services), but in who-knows-how-long-they’ve-existed, this department has never bothered to set a policy? Sounds fishy to me. That perception could be colored by personal experiences with rural folks and their common reactions to ‘furriners’, however. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/13 "2006-02-17T15:17:27Z")
Wouldn’t it be hard to get a mortgage under these circumstances? Would a bank lend money in areas that might not put out a fire if the owner hadn’t paid his subscription? What bank would take the chance that a borrower might not keep up the subscription payments? ---
**Author:** ![zamboniracer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zamboniracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zamboniracer)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/14 "2006-02-17T15:25:12Z")
> [@Fear Itself](#): > > Wouldn’t it be hard to get a mortgage under these circumstances? Would a bank lend money in areas that might not put out a fire if the owner hadn’t paid his subscription? What bank would take the chance that a borrower might not keep up the subscription payments? Just as a guess, the bank would make the loan conditioned on the insurance premium being made part of the mortgage payment to it, which the bank would then turn around and pay the fee with. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/15 "2006-02-17T15:59:17Z")
> [@](#): > > Mmmm…that’s not what we’re talking about here. That is mainly a concern in urban/suburban areas and the reason those municipalities fund fire service through mandatory and universal taxes. It’s also a good reason to not go to fee-based services in those areas. Just a note–just because an area is rural doesn’t mean the houses are far apart. Where I live is about as rural as it gets, but the mountainous terrain means that houses are bunched together on the rare spots of flat land. A fire in one house around here is very likely to be a danger to the houses around it–probably moreso than in the small city I used to live in. I’m “in town”, and we actually have a paid fire service; there are volunteer services throughout the county, but they’re all tax and donation supported. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/16 "2006-02-17T16:04:06Z")
I think that the question is _who_ let the house burn down. If blame is obligatory, blame the house’s owner. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/17 "2006-02-17T17:49:50Z")
> [@Fear Itself](#): > > Wouldn’t it be hard to get a mortgage under these circumstances? Would a bank lend money in areas that might not put out a fire if the owner hadn’t paid his subscription? What bank would take the chance that a borrower might not keep up the subscription payments? I don’t know about a mortgage, but it’s hard to find an insurance carrier willing to write a policy on a house that is served by a non-governmental fire company. Robin ---
**Author:** ![cckerberos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@cckerberos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cckerberos)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/18 "2006-02-17T18:27:15Z")
> [@redtail23](#): > > State law specifically covers this situation (departments allowed to bill non-members needing services), but in who-knows-how-long-they’ve-existed, this department has never bothered to set a policy? It’s possible that the amount they’re allowed to bill afterwards (which is set by statute) might be lower than what it costs to join. It is a little surprising that they don’t have an on-the-spot joining policy, though (obviously they would have to charge a surcharge.) ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/19 "2006-02-17T20:36:55Z")
> [@Gadarene](#): > > 1. Was the firefighters’ decision not to help justifiable?.. No. Aside from being petty and spiteful, it creates a dangerous situation. At worst they should put out the fire and perhaps bill the owner. That’s the reason we have government - to provide a basic level of certain services. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2006, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942/20 "2006-02-17T21:00:02Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > That’s the reason we have government - to provide a basic level of certain services. As shocking as this sounds not all county or municiple governments in the United States can afford the cost of maintaining a fire department. Marc [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/letting-the-house-burn-down-our-fee-for-service-future/344942.md?page=2)