Fire Service Failure

In response to: http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/utopia-unraveled

“Unsurprisingly, I tend to hear it from younger people who think they shouldn’t have to be a part of the bigger picture. It’s the same argument that John Kyl used when he complained during the markup sessions that he shouldn’t have to pay for maternity care since he would never be pregnant.”

Nobody should be forced to join a group they don’t want to join, especially if joining that group means they have to pay dues.

The fact that I exist on the same planet as Kenyans does not give Kenyans the right to my property.  The fact that I’m on the same continent as other humans does not give those humans the right, in any way, to my property.  If they want to ask me for it, I may or may not give it.  If we’re really as interconnected as the author seems to think, then those who do NOT cooperate and help their neighbors will be up shit creek when times get tough and they need to rely on the kindness of their neighbors.

This part bothers me:

” Accept that there will be some in the community who are unable to take care of themselves and should therefore have a safety net — a net that only government can provide. “

All government mandates are funded through force – the taking of the property of others.  Almost no government program is funded voluntarily – I reserve judgement on mail delivery, as I understand that particular program is paid for by stamp dues, so simply by not ever buying stamps one can stop supporting the usps.

What the author is saying, whether she means to or not, is that there are some people who can only be helped by forcing other people at gunpoint to give to them.  This smacks of laziness to me.  Just legalize mugging for people who are poor and then we’re set.  If you’ve got less wealth than someone, you’re entitled to use violence against them to make up the difference.  How does that sound?  Total equality.  If you take too much, they’re allowed to mug you back.

This is the laziest solution to inequality I can imagine.  How about we talk about what REALLY constitutes a compassionate community? Lets talk about people who actually know and care for each other and will support each other.  That’s the type of community we want to build, and you cannot create a community like that through the use of force and coercion.  It just won’t happen.   So put away the sticks and guns.  You’re not justified in forcing anyone to pay anything for any reason.  If you can come to an agreement on things, then fantastic!

I want to further point out that this failure of the system was NOT a free market failure.  It was a government funded, government-run fire department, which operated on a government mandate under government non-compete clauses.  That is, those private individuals were not permitted to hire any other fire protection services.  They were legally mandated to use that particular fire department or none other.

Private enterprise, as the author notes in her analogy to AAA, is much more charitable and willing to make accommodation - it’s profitable to do so!  Another  example I’d like to cite is somewhat more relevant.  Homeowners insured by AIG during the san diego fires had fire protection paid for as part of their (admittedly high) insurance dues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/28/us/28idaho.html?_r=1&hp

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=akG9v3rOnWsE

These for-profit firefighters put out fires on neighboring  properties as well as on the insured properties – it makes sense to get the fire under control as quickly as possible to reduce the possible insurance payouts, and it’s also excellent marketing.  This is not some pie-in-the-sky libertarian wet dream – it actually happened.

“They accept that basic services are part of a successful, thriving community, and everyone should be protected by them. Water. Electricity. Police. Fire. Health. Caring for the poor.”

I agree that in a successful, thriving community, everyone would be protected by those services, but the way to create a successful, thriving community is not to FORCE those well off to subsidize their not-so-fortunate neighbors.  That will ultimately only breed resentment, frustration and infighting.  These are not hallmarks of a successful, thriving community.  The goal should be to make those well off WANT to support their less fortunate neighbors.  This is harder.  There is no pat answer for all communities.  There is no one-size-fits-all solution.  The general process (I think) is one of education and intercommunication.

“Utopias are perfection. Humans are imperfect creatures. The best we can do is understand that, and collectively protect ourselves as a community. United. Tomorrow morning I want to look in the mirror just like I did today and know that I have done as much as I can do as an individual and as a citizen to make this place I live in better not only for me, but for someone else. If my neighbor’s home doesn’t burn down, mine won’t either.”

You cannot force someone to unite with you.  You can show them the advantages of the union, and if they choose to join, then great!

“I’m willing to pay a tax for that. How about you?”

I’m willing to spend my time, money and energy in helping to build a good community.  I’m unwilling to use force to compel others to pay for anything I want.  I hope they’ll see the mutual advantage so we can get things done together well, but if they don’t, well, that’s their prerogative and I’ll somehow get by without them.