> Why shouldnt fire fighting be for-profit Because fires pose an undue risk to entire regions, not individuals. Because the pricing mechanism is excessively u

> Why shouldnt fire fighting be for-profit Because fires pose an undue risk to entire regions, not individuals. Because the pricing mechanism is excessively unfair to individuals. Because no one's life should be at risk because they don't have access to financial resources. Individuals should be (and are, generally) free to start for-profit fire fighting businesses, but these should not seek to displace existing infrastructure. > Why do you believe non-profit means it has to be provided by government? That wasn't said or implied in the parent post, but the government _is_ our collective resource. By the people, for the people. It is we, the people, whose lives and property are put in danger by fires. The most effective way of grouping people's interest collectively in history has been through governance. Non-profit fire fighting may be viable, but it's better that we collectively work to keep our collection safe. > Why do you believe profit is bad? It depends entirely on the context. When people's lives are at stake profits incentivize cruel and unusual behavior from those incentivized to reap the reward.