I’m the last person to defend PE companies. I saw first hand what they were like when I was responsible for integrating acquisitions software. But there seems to be a lot more at play. Taxpayers too cheap to fund infrastructure. The article calls out fundraising drives needed to keep equipment up and running and training.
Why are firefighters volunteers anyway instead of getting paid?
Why should any company create software that they can’t do at a profit - ie rewriting software for a new federal standard?
Every problem is downstream of people wanting government services and not wanting to pay for them.
> Why are firefighters volunteers anyway instead of getting paid?
In urban/suburban areas, you need firefighters based on number of population, more or less, which isn't too bad to pay for, more people means a little bit from everyone adds up.
For rural areas, you need figherfighters based on area. If you had the right per capita fire equipment and personnel, they'd be spread so thin they may as well not exist. Volunteerism at least gets you affordable personnel, but you still need to fundraise for equipment and operational expenses.
Edit: also, the call volume is very low. Your properly staffed fire department would be nearly always idle. With volunteers on call, they can just go about thei usual things, and if a call comes in, they can respond from where they are.
I lived near a volunteer station in a New Jersey town where it is routine to use a siren (same as used for tornadoes in other parts of the country) to alert the volunteers to check in. It went off frequently every day.
I can't speak for the department near you, but in many departments, particularly towns/more rural areas, the fire department/fire station responds to both medical and fire calls. It very well may be the majority of responses were medical in nature. For example, 70% of NYFD call volume is medical [1].
Most fire department dispatches are for medical events (i.e., they're also doing paramedic work). On average, fire departments get about the same false-alarm fire dispatches and real-alarm dispatches.
Every city and county belongs to a state with a broader tax base. Every state is a part of the richest country in the world. I’m sure you see where I’m getting at here.
The equipment is already paid for with grants. Most people don't see a justifiable reason to have full-time services when the number of incidents is low.
But yet we find money for the largest military in the world - and much of that goes to military equipment and bases that military leaders say they don’t need and for tax cuts.
How much money do you think it would take to fund the shortfall for every rural fire department?
Deficits are a policy choice, not an inevitability. The budget was balanced at the turn of the century but Republicans under G. W. Bush decided that meant they could cut taxes, especially for the rich. They did that again for both Trump terms, before COVID. Unlike the financial crisis or pandemic, there was no emergency driving those decisions and the massive debt increases were entirely voluntary.
For what it's worth, volunteer firefighters are very widespread in many -- most? -- European countries. It's not an artifact of cutthroat capitalism. In France, 83% of firefighters are volunteers. In Germany, 97%. They don't need to fundraise for equipment, though, the government pays for it, in true socialist fashion.
Yeah, 60% of the engines in the UK have what it calls "On-Call Firefighters". These aren't full timers, they usually have a "real" job but when their phone says they're needed they go fight fires. They're trained basically the same, but their main income is from that "real" job.
On the other hand, fire hazard continues to reduce, which means that to an ever greater extent the full time crews can deliver what's needed even in semi-rural communities like where I grew up. Their current plan is close the station nearest to me (which was "On-call" staffed) permanently.
> Yeah, 60% of the engines in the UK have what it calls "On-Call Firefighters". These aren't full timers, they usually have a "real" job but when their phone says they're needed they go fight fires.
My old physics teacher was one of them. Very chill guy, that was outside of the classroom a non-negligable amount of time (though often for different reasons), but still way one of the best teachers I had.
(It was always fun when he wrote "minimum" on the board. Everyone wrote in cursive, but his writing literally just made it look like lines going up and down)
Right?! I'm with you. And if rural America doesn't want socialism let them pay their far share for true fire protection costs and increased insurance premiums.
I am arguing that in the US as a nation, no firefighter should have to “volunteer” that’s where the state and federal government should step in.
I’m more okay with taking my tax dollars as a person who makes a good living to help rural areas and I would vote for a politician to help them before they would.
So is universal healthcare, free college education and a safety net.
Are firefighters in Switzerland doing bake sells to pay for maintenance on their equipment like the people in the cities in the article or does the government do it?
What are you talking about? Johnsons Creek has a population of 80,000 people making it larger than 98% of US cities. I live in a town of less than 10,000 surrounded by a county larger than Rhode Island that has huge forest fires at least every decade since the end of the ice age. And we are the heavy populated county in our area.
I am saying that we shouldn’t be okay with living in a country where people live in the middle of nowhere should have to do bake sales to make sure that their one fire truck remains up and running while John’s Creek can afford to pay their firefighters $80K a year and don’t have to do that
When we have state and federal government. Would you be okay with a volunteer police force?
> Why are firefighters volunteers anyway instead of getting paid?
Government structure and basic economics. Fire depts are mainly funded by local taxes (property, sales) so low-risk rural places can't afford a fully staffed fire dept
>Why should any company create software that they can’t do at a profit - ie rewriting software for a new federal standard?
Where was it stated that any of these acquired companies were unprofitable? It's heavily implied that these PE firms are simply maximizing profit through anti-competitive behavior
Again why is that? Teachers are funded by local and state taxes and (did?) get federal grants.
The article mentioned that these same firefighters are having to do fundraisers for equipment maintenance
I’m honing in for the software that what they cancelled would have to be completely rewritten to comply with new federal standards.
Would everyone be happier if this was funded by YC hoping the company would be acquired by a larger company and then you see a post about “Our Amazing Journey” when it’s discontinued?
What are your feelings about being on call as a software developer because software incidents don’t often happen at night? Would you expect to be paid for it? Or at least a higher than $0 salary?
I grew up in South GA and my family still lives there. I got the hell out of dodge the week after graduating from college in 1996.
I said in another reply, I’m all for the state and the federal government helping rural America where their own tax base isn’t strong enough. I’m also for universal health care that would help rural areas far more than me. I wouldn’t complain about my taxes paying for it.
It’s rural America that keeps voting for local, state, and federal politicians that put them in this place.
> It’s rural America that keeps voting for local, state, and federal politicians that put them in this place.
In my experience, not everyone's primary policy goal is to ensure that as much taxpayer money as possible gets redistributed in their favor.
Of course, this isn't to say that the problem you described (of people wanting government services but not wanting to pay for it) does not exist, but I find that to be applicable broadly, not just to rural America.
Agree, I live in (fairly) rural area and most of the people out here don't want much more from the government but maybe roads to drive on, and to be left alone.
Counter-point: I live in a kinda rural area and the people out here want the government to enforce their religious, cultural, and misinformed beliefs on everyone else everywhere else, this is typically a higher priority than roads or public safety.
Are you saying they are going to refuse Trump’s bailouts for farmers?
Are you saying they don’t want hospitals near by because that means they would have to accept government help? I’m sure even providing basic infrastructure is coming from funding from sources outside of their community
I don't know any real farmers. Have a few neighbors with small herds of cows but that's not their only or even primary source of income. I try not to talk politics much.
People live out here knowing full well that the nearest hospital is 30 minutes away and if they need to call an ambulance it's probably going to be at least 15-30 minutes, maybe longer, before it shows up.
It's kind of how I feel about Social Security. I'm not going to refuse it, especially since I have paid into it my entire working life. But I'd rather it didn't exist, and I know it isn't sustainable.
That isn’t true either. Worse case if nothing changes, there would need to be a 20% cut in benefits. I am 51 and have modeled that in my retirement projections
Their choice is between two private clubs who both cut services when in power, and are both taking huge amounts of money from private equity.
The Democrats spent the beginning of the 2016 cycle all pretending to be for universal health care (literally the only reason why Buttigieg and Harris got on stage), then spent the rest of the cycle dishonestly campaigning against it while fixing a primary. As soon as Bernie lost, health insurance and healthcare stocks had their highest stock price bump in history.
I agree with your opinions on government funding, I just find it gross when it's used as an excuse to put the blame on the powerless. The powerless are not powerless because they choose to be, they're powerless because they are restrained by the powerful. Not only is the information they receive about the world restricted and their educations propagandistic, but if they voted for what the powerful didn't want, their vote would be ignored.
On the other hand, you've been convinced to blame the powerless for the crimes of the powerful, so I don't know how you're any less of a sucker. I guess you're wealthier than they are, so maybe you're a support system for the people doing the suckering.
edit: I had to add the last, because this type of argument is something I consistently hear from people who are paid to do the exploiting. If you're a thief, you figure out a way to blame the people you steal from.
Yes because in 2020 when middle of the road Biden barely eked out a win against Trump, I’m sure Bernie would have won.
Bernie’s ideas were way too left field for me and I consider myself to be a bleeding heart capitalist pig - ie let companies make money, tax them and use the money to provide a safety net. Also take away the idea of your insurance being tied to your employment
We have paid police, because we want law and order. We have paid dump/collection center workers, because you need a place to take trash. We have paid teachers and school staff, because we want a good education for our kids. We have paid road maintenance workers, because it's really helpful to have properly maintaind roads. We have paid librarians, because libraries are one of the core community centers in the area. We have paid animal control workers because rabies is scary. We pay for ambulance service because sometimes you need medical attention asap.
And we have volunteer fire fighters, because stopping fires, in a rural, wildfire prone area is, what? Optional? Just a side gig? Something you do just for fun?
A big part of the confusion people have is that "volunteer" fire departments often include pay. It's not a full-time job, but they at least get paid for their calls. That's not always true, though, and it's weird. It's an artifact of history that our different layers of government have divvied up basic services amongst themselves in a way that leaves fire fighting as a local concern that may or may not involve paid professionals, while the sheriff and local police will be paid professionals, the roads will be maintained, and the school will have teachers, and principals, and custodians, and people running the cafeteria, and so on.
Why do we not have "volunteer police force"? Because we treat it as a full-time position for career police officers. It's weird that this one, very critical service uses "volunteers," while most of the others are full-time, paid positions, and I find it confusing and weird, despite having grown up in rural NC, just outside a town of under a thousand, and now live at the other end of rural NC, outside the limits of a different town of under thousand people.
I’ve always thought volunteer firefighters are one of the coolest parts of American life. Neighbors stepping up to protect each other and their communities, even putting themselves in danger sometimes. That kind of teamwork and courage is what really makes a country strong.
Why are firefighters volunteers anyway instead of getting paid?
Why should any company create software that they can’t do at a profit - ie rewriting software for a new federal standard?
Every problem is downstream of people wanting government services and not wanting to pay for them.