U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
Old 11-15-2018, 11:56 AM
Location: la la land
27,549 posts, read 11,577,585 times
Reputation: 19477


Originally Posted by Electrician4you View Post
Is this a discussion on wealthy and how bad they are or a discussion n can you afford to have a privatized company do some job you hire for.
Sorry but welcome to the real world. Contrary to what the champions for the poor say, itís not evil to be rich. Obviously some people have a talent for making money.
NOBODY forces sieone to be or stay poor. Choices you make keep you in whatever station in life you end up in.
Yes. If you can afford to pay to have a private firm do what you need I have no issues with that. As far as the tax payer funded first responder services no there should be no difference, and I donít think our firefighters care. They will try and save the houses they can. Or minimize the damage. I know a lot of first responders due to the line of work Iím in and none would pick and choose what structure to save and what to let burn.
I guarantee you that a guy who owns a 60 million dollar ansion is paying astronomical property taxes. Yet he has to buy a private company to save his house.
From what I understand they want to give vouchers if you want your kid in a private school the voucher would cover some of the cost. Private schools are way better managed than public scho.
I'm not beating up on the wealthy I'm asking a question - where does their 'right' to have better access to services end, is it without limit? If so, does that include vital services like ER care?

And regarding vouchers, the problem is that we all pay for private school vouchers, but they almost never benefit the middle class because they don't cover the entire cost of private school tuition. Nevada unsuccessfully tried to implement private school vouchers. The voucher would cover up to $5,000 of private school tuition, the average private school tuition at the time was $9,500 so in order to send your kid to school you would need to come up with $4,500 a year for each of your kids. That's pretty tough in a state with a median hourly wage of $16.79. It was obvious that the program was designed to give people who could already afford private school tuition a big wet kiss and that's why it was never implemented, people saw through it for what it was.

Old 11-15-2018, 12:16 PM
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, originally from SF Bay Area
28,555 posts, read 51,032,628 times
Reputation: 29006
All of the city, state and local government services are paid for by limited tax dollars, and staffing is based on the "normal" need for those services. When there is a big protest that turns to riots, for example, local police will bring in help from other agencies, or even the National Guard to handle the increased workload. In the case of big fires, help has come from many other states, even Canada. Even so, there is nowhere near the number of firefighters needed to save the structures in the path of the fires. Their main goal is to save people, and to stop the spread. Some well-funded homeowners will hire private companies to save their house. At the same time, some poor homeowner may use pumps and their above-ground swimming pool water (as I saw on the news) to save his home and his blind mother.

Back in the big 1976-77 drought in California when I worked at a water district, and we had tiered drought rates to encourage conservation. There were people paying thousands of dollars in "excess use charges" for water to keep their extensive lawns and landscaping alive, or even hiring tank trucks to bring in water to top up their swimming pools. Meanwhile little old ladies on social security were saving their bathwater in buckets to keep a few houseplants alive.

It's just a matter of personal priorities, and resources, and nothing new, just perhaps more visible now with social media.
Old 11-15-2018, 12:32 PM
Location: Honolulu, HI
4,888 posts, read 1,229,552 times
Reputation: 6957
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Understood, but I don't think that elnina was saying they shouldn't be allowed to utilize private firefighters but rather she was pointing out the growing disparity between the 'haves and the have nots'. ere more and more of our nation's wealth is in the hands of fewer and fewer people.
Is hiring a “private” Uber driver or “private” instacart shopper also ramifications of a growing disparity?

Hell soon we may have apps where you can order a “private” chef or housekeeper for the day, if not already.

Guess what, folks provide services for money, breaking news. They’re called private CONTRACTORS and you don’t need to be wealthy to hire one .
Old 11-15-2018, 12:44 PM
Location: Midwest
3,809 posts, read 6,764,526 times
Reputation: 5899
Originally Posted by Electrician4you View Post
So what? We have mercenary armies and private security companies too. If someone has the money to hire a private fire fighting crew to save their house more power to them.

Thatís why rich people live in 60 million dollar mansions. Because they can.
Yeah, pretty much.

This false-panic "income disparity" whining is no different from Russian oligarchs or wealthy Red Chinese or any other wealthy people hiring what they can afford.

It's why wealthy politicians live in gated communities and not out among the grunts.

That's why rich actors who rail against guns also by some odd quirk seem to be able to get concealed carry permits in counties where it's almost impossible for the common schlub to do so, AND for them to hire armed muscle to protect them from hoi polloi while us po commoners must fend for ourselves.

RHIP is one way it's explained.
Old 11-15-2018, 12:45 PM
5,171 posts, read 663,458 times
Reputation: 13366
I think there should be a minimum standard for things required for basic survival (food, water, shelter, clothing, some medical and dental care, and basic town services) that even the poorest person is entitled to, but that everything above that standard is "you get what you pay for".

In my opinion, MOST people are only motivated to be more responsible about the choices they make is if there is a pay-off and/or they suffer because they do NOT make good choices. It is the old "cost vs. benefit" idea. If someone can quit a job they hate and still get enough to live on through one type of assistance of another, it it worth it? Well, if they can survive but they would have to live in a some kind of bare minimum homeless shelter, then they would probably choose to continue to work -- but if they can quit and still live in their own apartment and watch TV all day and continue eating the food they like -- well, then, maybe quitting a hated job would be worth it to some people. And I think this can also be applied to dropping out of school and having a minimum wage job vs. going to college and/or acquiring the skills necessary for a job that pays very well. If someone is content to not continue their education and "just get by", they have the right to make that choice, but if they want the finer things in life, then they will almost always need to make some sacrifices -- and in my opinion, those sacrifices should be rewarded with having a more affluent (and probably better) life than someone who hasn't made those sacrifices.

Now, of course, I am thinking of the AVERAGE poor person and the AVERAGE rich person in those scenarios, and, OF COURSE, I realize that there are many poor people who didn't do anything wrong, just as there are many rich people who made one bad choice after another, but they were just lucky (usually by being born to wealthy parents or having more than their "fair share" of brains and/or talent).

The point is that, as has so often been said, life is NOT fair and no amount of policies or laws or do-gooders will make it fair -- and that is because people are NOT equal in ambition, drive, talent, personality, intelligence, genetics, their childhood environment (including the kind of parenting and early schooling they received), and/or whatever other qualities separate the haves from the have-nots. In my opinion, people should do the best they can with what they have, and if they choose to not do that, then they should live with the consequences

Last edited by katharsis; 11-15-2018 at 01:08 PM..
Old 11-15-2018, 12:50 PM
Location: Honolulu, HI
4,888 posts, read 1,229,552 times
Reputation: 6957
Originally Posted by Electrician4you View Post
So what? We have mercenary armies and private security companies too. If someone has the money to hire a private fire fighting crew to save their house more power to them.

That’s why rich people live in 60 million dollar mansions. Because they can.
Agreed, you can’t take the money with you when you’re dead. Might as well use it while you can.

Out of all the reasons to hate the rich, choosing to save their own investments instead of crying about it like other celebrities who lost their home isn’t one of them.

And as already pointed out, there are private contractors anyone can hire at any time to get something done. This resource isn’t only available to the wealthy.
Old 11-15-2018, 01:44 PM
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan
24,870 posts, read 59,936,472 times
Reputation: 27192
Originally Posted by KaraG View Post
I don't look down on our public teachers, fire fighters or police officers and I believe their work quality is probably higher than any private school teacher or security personnel.

I believe people pay for private schools to get their children/grandchildren away from the rest of the children that may come from poorer or immigrant families, those who score lower on standardized tests or cause more troubles in the school. It's a way they can self-segregate. And that's okay.

I have no problem with people hiring private companies instead of using public services. Helps the rest of us utilize the experience and expertise of the public employees.

It's all about freedom of choice.
People pay for private schools to get the best possible (or in some cases at least a decent) education for their children. I do not think it has anything to do with getting their kids away form kids of any particular economic background. It may have that effect, but the goal is simply get my kids the best education practical. If your local schools do not have anyone who can speak English there and they are turning out 90% illiterate fifth graders - you might want to think about paying for private school. It is not about getting away form other kids but about not having your kids years behind where they need to be to have a shot at the opportunities offered by our social/economic system.
Old 11-15-2018, 02:27 PM
Location: San Diego CA
3,916 posts, read 2,944,447 times
Reputation: 6220
Originally Posted by elnina View Post
As multiple devastating wildfires raged across California, a private firefighting crew reportedly helped save Kanye West and Kim Kardashianís home in Calabasas. The successful defense of the $60 million mansion is the most prominent example of a trend thatís begun to receive national attention: for-hire firefighters protecting homes, usually on the payroll of an insurance company with a lot at risk.

Firefighters are consistently ranked the most beloved public servants because they treat everyone equally.
But if we allow firefighting to become a two-tiered system (with one tier for the elite and another tier for everyone else), then that threatens the democratic-republican ideal of everyone contributing their fair share for the greater needs of the commonwealth.

For some - including many firefighters from municipalities - protection from a deadly wildfire isn't something that some neighbors should be able to buy when others canít.

Is this a story of the ramifications of economic disparity in this country?


Well. I'm quite familiar with high value insurance companies like Pure and AIG that cater to the high end real estate market in Southern California. Their insureds pay six figure annual insurance premiums. And in some cases they do have private fire fighting services as part of the premium package.

The majority of these people aren't involved in the entertainment industry. Most of them are business people whose education, work ethic and job skills combined over the years to make them successful. They have the money and do what it takes to protect their assets and property.
Old 11-15-2018, 02:28 PM
504 posts, read 199,519 times
Reputation: 1020
Originally Posted by sheena12 View Post
A $60 million dollar home is no more important to it's owners than a $60,000 home is to it's owners.
I consider it a non-issue. Most likely the 60 mil home will be nowhere near the 60k home.
Old 11-15-2018, 05:16 PM
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
2,104 posts, read 697,017 times
Reputation: 2267
Makes as much sense to be upset at this as it is to be mad about private schools. How dare people pay for fire protection when they should be forced to use taxpayer funded sources. Liberalism is a mental disease...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top