Skip to main content

View Diary: Why am I supposed to support the Cranicks? (275 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  because? fire s-p-r-e-a-d-s? (4+ / 0-)

    o.
    m.

    g.

    Meg will run CA like a business. Which business? BP? Massey Coal? Tyco?

    by stagemom on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 10:26:31 AM PDT

    •  That's not really a good (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      martydd, Alice Olson

      answer to what has become a philosophical, rather than practical question.

      Yes, we know if an apartment building or house with near neighbors catches on fire, it needs to be extinguished for the sake of those neighbors.

      But the thought experiment concerns the lone house, separated by miles from any other property and with no danger of the fire spreading.

      I say the fire still needs to be extinguished, with retroactive fee and fines.  

      Seems like a regime that real people might come up with.

      From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

      by satrap on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 10:31:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Fires always have a danger of spreading (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DaleA, BachFan, SilentBrook, laker

        particularly in rural areas where lack of houses probably means lots of woods or farm land which are quite combustible and turn a small containable fire into a large, costly and uncontainable fire. So the fire spreads answer is quite reasonable.

        The further question though is why that locality did not organize a better response to the hazard of fire. Everyone and all circumstances are susceptible to fire. Why does the county or town or whatever appropriate government agency not have a more all encompassing answer for fire management? It's not about this one family but about their community.

        In the old days everyone in town lined up with buckets, women, children, men, and worked to save their neighbors. As things progressed and fire equipment became available communities figured out to afford what they could in mutual protection. In some places formal, professional, tax paid, fire departments came into existence. In others volunteer fire departments came into existence. In many, if not all, localities mortgage lenders require insurance that covers fire and on application forms ask the question of what sort of fire department is in the area, how far you are from the nearest fire plug, etc. Mortgage loans are in part dependent on the answers to those questions because lenders want to ensure the safety of their property. Insurers also ask such questions are consult charts that have the answers. Why this community does not have a better answer for fire protection is the real question they need to be asking themselves.

        "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

        by Andrew C White on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 10:43:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Fires spread more rapidly wherever (0+ / 0-)

          there's combustible materials.  Has nothing to do with being rural or urban.

          I live in a rural area.

          We have fires here all the time; we burn, with a permit, combustibles.  There aren't massive fires in the general area because beyond the fires (with permits) themselves, there is very little else that is combustible in the immediate area.

          We have a fire hydrant across the street, and pay taxes for fire service.

          So far the only time I've seen fire fighters in the neighbourhood is when they've had to rescue horses that have bolted or ended up in a ditch.

          Don't be generalizing about rural areas if you don't have the correct information.

          "A Canadian is merely an unarmed American with health care." John Wing

          by marigold on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 12:38:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Huh? (0+ / 0-)

            I live in a rural that doesn't have fire hydrants. I wasn't saying that rural areas are more fire prone simply refuting the previously stated idea that just because an area is rural fires don't spread. geez louise.

            "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

            by Andrew C White on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 01:30:16 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  why yes it IS a good answer! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SilentBrook, IndieGuy

        historically, that is why people put out fires:  to stop them from spreading. folks would pitch in to help.  the pay-to-play scheme was run by insurance companies, not the municipality in the cities of old and b/c it actually hurt the rich property owners whose properties suffered b/c they were NEXT to properties that weren't covered, a new system was created. so that's why municipal fire depts charge a municipal fee.  it is NOT insurance.  
        from wikipedia

        the United States did not have government-run fire departments until around the time of the American Civil War. Prior to this time, private fire brigades competed with one another to be the first to respond to a fire because insurance companies paid brigades to save buildings.  Underwriters also employed their own Salvage Corps in some cities.

        it is my understanding that the neighbor had his checkbook out to pay so that they'd stop it before it came onto his property.  they waited until it jumped, and then they put it out.  the neighbor now has smoke damage which is AWFUL.
        that is why this one needed to be put out:  to stop it from spreading.
        that is the right, moral, just, lawful, common-sense thing to do.
        period.

        Meg will run CA like a business. Which business? BP? Massey Coal? Tyco?

        by stagemom on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 10:44:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Try living in Colorado. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        stagemom, SilentBrook

        It's extremely practical here, not just philosophical.

      •  Nobody ever gets hurt (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        stagemom, SilentBrook

        by a "thought experiment."

      •  It spread to his next door neighbor's house, (0+ / 0-)

        but even if you were right and no one lived nearby, burning woods or farm land would have also been an issue.

        •  Farmland, per se doesn't burn. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          neroden

          The neighbour's house wasn't on fire; he had a field of long dry grasses.  That's why the FD came out.

          "A Canadian is merely an unarmed American with health care." John Wing

          by marigold on Thu Oct 07, 2010 at 12:39:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (154)
  • Community (59)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • Baltimore (38)
  • Bernie Sanders (33)
  • Culture (29)
  • Elections (29)
  • Economy (28)
  • Law (25)
  • Texas (23)
  • 2016 (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Environment (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • Education (18)
  • Hillary Clinton (18)
  • Racism (17)
  • Media (17)
  • Politics (17)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site