Firefighters Forced To Pay For Gear, Engine Fuel

Well, bloody good for him...

And that has WHAT to do with Fire Departments having to buy their own equipment and fuel to get to a site because Governor NumbNuts cut the budgets rather than supply them with what they need?

archer wrote: I am, however, amused at the lengths that some posters will go to prove a liberal wrong.,.....even if the whole idea of support for first responders.....and by extension, the military, as they are also government employees, would usually be something they would support. Just not if that support is promoted by the "enemy" liberals.

The amusement is ours. So what you say is that rural volunteer fire fighters are government employees. It's not a case of proving a liberal wrong as much as it is to try and keep them honest. We go from firefighters in Texas to our military to knowing what the posters who oppose you on one issue stand for on other matters. Simply amazing BS. Just for the record, you have no clue of what I will and will not support when it comes to our government. But go ahead and continue to make your multitude of ass..u..me tions. There is no sense participating in discussing an issue when others only wish to forward an agenda.

Selective reading comprehension much, archer?

What part of

Should they also get public support? Of course they should!

Should they get government support when their efforts, and support from their community, are totally overwhelmed? Of course they should.

and

I totally support the volunteers, and think that other citizens should do so also.

do you not understand?

Nowhere in this thread or anywhere else on this site that I can recall, with the possible exception of some of the BS posts from VL, have I seen anything posted that could be logically extended to

Now I hear from you that if someone decides to be a fire fighter, paramedic or a cop, they should have to pay out of their own pocket for the privilege of saving your ass. Way to treat your fellow citizens......hey fire fighter......thanks for saving my home....but no, I don't want my taxes to pay for that.....you pay for it yourself.

or

...you just don't want to pay for it...

As I said before, in the post you dismissed as being totally irrelevant,

As long as it is perceived that the 'government' is taking care of all the needs, however inefficiently, it is difficult to get concerned citizens to donate to what is really needed.

I don't know what the 'perfect' solution is, but total federal or state control is NOT the answer, IMO.

I did NOT say, or imply by any reasonable stretch, that firefighters etc. should have to pay out of their own pocket for all of the expenses involved in their volunteer, or paid, contributions to their community.

jf1acai wrote: Selective reading comprehension much, archer?

What part of

Should they also get public support? Of course they should!

Should they get government support when their efforts, and support from their community, are totally overwhelmed? Of course they should.

and

I totally support the volunteers, and think that other citizens should do so also.

do you not understand?

Nowhere in this thread or anywhere else on this site that I can recall, with the possible exception of some of the BS posts from VL, have I seen anything posted that could be logically extended to

Now I hear from you that if someone decides to be a fire fighter, paramedic or a cop, they should have to pay out of their own pocket for the privilege of saving your ass. Way to treat your fellow citizens......hey fire fighter......thanks for saving my home....but no, I don't want my taxes to pay for that.....you pay for it yourself.

or

...you just don't want to pay for it...

As I said before, in the post you dismissed as being totally irrelevant,

As long as it is perceived that the 'government' is taking care of all the needs, however inefficiently, it is difficult to get concerned citizens to donate to what is really needed.

I don't know what the 'perfect' solution is, but total federal or state control is NOT the answer, IMO.

I did NOT say, or imply by any reasonable stretch, that firefighters etc. should have to pay out of their own pocket for all of the expenses involved in their volunteer, or paid, contributions to their community.

So we are really in agreement, cutting funds to firefighters that results in them having to buy their own equipment is not a good thing. Thanks for clearing that up.

So we are really in agreement, cutting funds to firefighters that results in them having to buy their own equipment is not a good thing.

Agreed, it is not a good thing. But when the funds are not there, something has to give. And when a state encounters a record setting wildfire season such as Texas has this year, it is not surprising that they are overwhelmed, with or without the budget cut mentioned in the OP.

IMO, it would be much more productive to present ideas on how to improve the situation, rather than making it a political football to discredit a governor who was trying to be responsible, rather than spending money he knew he did not have.

jf1acai wrote:

So we are really in agreement, cutting funds to firefighters that results in them having to buy their own equipment is not a good thing.

Agreed, it is not a good thing. But when the funds are not there, something has to give. And when a state encounters a record setting wildfire season such as Texas has this year, it is not surprising that they are overwhelmed, with or without the budget cut mentioned in the OP.

IMO, it would be much more productive to present ideas on how to improve the situation, rather than making it a political football to discredit a governor who was trying to be responsible, rather than spending money he knew he did not have.

That's the point, it's all about priorities. And those who would bash the federal government, then turn to the federal government when times are tough. Those who would cut spending on government programs, then use those government programs when the state runs out of money. I hear over and over again how the Federal government can't do anything right, but when the going gets tough it's the federal government that comes to the rescue.....and still people complain that they didn't come fast enough. Some people are just never happy.

Hey knuckleheads, the state of Texas has never provided funds for local fire departments. The local fire departments are funded by local taxing districts....of course, you would never know that because you drink the libtard kool-aid.

The state of Texas, unlike Colorado, has NO income state taxes; therefore most funding for general public services is generated by the local districts which is based upon property values. Knock knock, property values are down nationwide or static ...therefore cuts are evident.

All equipment and apparatus purchase by districts and no funds are provided by the state.

The state of Texas has no jurisdiction of local fire departments districts.

Let's talk insurance.

Do you have insurance for your house and property? If your local fire department is not up to standard, you are rated lower for fire protection.

What does this mean? Your insurance goes up.

I'd rather make sure my local fire department has what it needs to fight fires and keep my insurance rate down.

I'd rather make sure my local fire department has what it needs to fight fires and keep my insurance rate down.

Agreed.

Do you pursue that through citizen, local, and then state government involvement, or do you expect the Federal government to provide it?

That I think is the real point of contention here.

As a former Houston suburban volunteer fire fighter and officer, I speak from my experiences as a firefighter who personally ran 250 calls per year, we had top of the line equipment and training. There is absolutely no way to protect and prepare of every unknown catastrophic occurrence. Federal, state, and local governments would have to triple the tax base to have the plans in place for a catastropic game plan - taxpayers would go broke. There is balance between an excellent insurance rating and over taxing the tax base.

The Four Mile fire was the most expensive fire in Colorado history. I doubt the federal, state, and local governments could have done anything to different unless they could have used the Al Gore Global wArning hot wind controls.

The citizens could have done more. They could built fire stations at every corner and man them with water drop helicopters. They could have spent billions; however, they were willing ti assume the risk of type of fire protection they had.