7 ms·

Where are they getting the water and what roads do they use to service these people? Seems unfortunate in times of lack of supply of fireman that this is toler

Where are they getting the water and what roads do they use to service these people? Seems unfortunate in times of lack of supply of fireman that this is tolerated. I’m fairly certain that fire retarding private lawns is not the most efficient use of resources considering the circumstances at the moment.

kortilla 7y ago
These are private firemen. If they weren’t hired they would be off doing something else for money. It’s like complaining about people hiring private security guards when there is a police shortage. Read the article, they aren’t fire retarding private lawns. They are doing preventative work that keeps the fire far away. If it hits the lawn, it’s too late. More firefighters are better, regardless of which areas are being contained with higher priority. If they were taking away fire fighters from the publicly funded groups or volunteers, then there would be something to bitch about.
- enriquto 7y ago
  > It’s like complaining about people hiring private security guards when there is a police shortage. What do you mean with that comparison? This would be quite a legitimate reason for complaining!
  - big_chungus 7y ago
    Right, but should you really be blaming the people who hire the extra private policemen, or the people who decide not to hire more public ones? It seems as though it's more effective to push for more public policemen. The same applies to firemen: it's more productive to push for more public firemen than to blame the people who hire private ones due to a shortage thereof.
    - enriquto 7y ago
      Both are to blame. I'm not much of a statist, but if there's something that clearly must be assured by the government by means of taxation it is the police force and the firemen. If there's not enough police or firefighters, taxes must be raised or diverted from elsewhere. Morally, I think that the people who push for private security and firefighters are doing a net damage to society.
      - big_chungus 7y ago
        I see how hiring policemen and firefighters is not a positive, but don't see how it's a negative. In other words, a state-provided service is not always perfectly on-time, but if I want to hire some private service with super-fast response time for my twenty million dollar beach-front property, why not? How does me hiring a private fireman _harm_ someone else? If anything, might it not reduce the load on public infrastructure?
        enriquto 7y ago
        I said "pushing for private services" not actually hiring one. Of course, if it is only you who does that, then it is completely irrelevant, neither positive nor negative. Likewise, if you decide to throw all your garbage on a forest, it is neither positive nor negative. If it is only you who does that, it can be argued that its net effect is negligible, neither positive nor negative. Maybe a bit of purely aesthetic disgust for somebody who happens to walk by while you are throwing it. But that is all. If anything, it may reduce a little bit the load on public garbage collection.
- cco 7y ago
  This is mostly a zero sum game in the immediate term, and mostly zero sum in the longer term since there is a fairly limited pool of people available to fight fires. If you have the skills to be a fireman but a private individual pays you above market rate to fight their own personal fires then you will remove yourself from the pool of people fighting fires for the public and into a private pool. Will 20 such private firemen be a problem? No, but 2,000? That would absolutely have an impact on available firefighters for the public.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    Is there really a shortage of firefighters? Or is there a shortage of firefighters willing to work for the rates public service offers? How high are those rates anyway? Because given how much public servants are typically paid worldwide, I can easily imagine that the private firefighting company isn't competing with public firefighting jobs, but with all the other jobs a would-be firefighter can get that pay better than fighting fires.
  - smm2000 7y ago
    It can be zero sum game short term (<1 months) but medium term (6 months) it's definitely not zero sum game. Pool of applicants that can be firemen includes all able-bodied males (and potentially female) 18-50 which is 10 million pool in California alone. Good pay will attract out of state candidates too. I would expect training to take less than 6 months or so. Considering fires happen every year, California can have as many firemen as it wants (and willing to pay for) by the time next summer fire season starts.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
eloff 7y ago
You've got the wrong way of looking at this. The government is unwilling to hire these people, so they're available to private individuals. If the government were winning to fork out tax dollars for private firefighters, there's nothing stopping them from doing so. The great thing about capitalism, for better or worse, but mostly better is that you or any one other person does not get to decide what constitutes efficient use of resources. Everyone decides that for themself based on self interest and the market ends up magically having this sort of collective intelligence that allocates far better than any alternative system ever has.
- supercanuck 7y ago
  > The government is unwilling to hire these people, so they're available to private individuals. Show me the evidence this is happening.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - austhrow743 7y ago
    Your very own comment said "lack of supply of fireman". Are you implying that there are open fireman positions that no one is applying for? If so your market is incredibly different from the one I know. Here in Australia a job as a fireman is very hard to get.
    - supercanuck 7y ago
      There are open positions. Whether qualified applicants are applying, I don’t know. https://mobile.twitter.com/CALFIRE_Careers https://mobile.twitter.com/CALFIRE_Careers
    - turk73 7y ago
      The job of fireman is also extremely hard to get in the US, too, because there is 100% nepotism. You have to be related to a fireman to become a fireman. You can become a volunteer or part-time paid fireman in some areas, but the full time roles require connections. I have lived in three states, it's been the same in each state. The US South is the worst as far as nepotism goes. If you're not from a southern state, it is very difficult to practice law there as well. There are tight controls on all kinds of things that you wouldn't expect. I really don't wish to create a firestorm on here, but your odds of becoming a billionaire in the US are not very good unless you are well aligned with certain factions. Which factions those are I will not say because I will just get accused and the conversation will die. Be that as it may, it does not change the reality that any random individual can't just work hard and attain great wealth, moderate wealth yes, great wealth, no.
gtfratteus 7y ago
The same roads that you use to drive to the liquor store every day before posting this inane drivel.

kortilla 7y ago

These are private firemen. If they weren’t hired they would be off doing something else for money. It’s like complaining about people hiring private security guards when there is a police shortage. Read the article, they aren’t fire retarding private lawns. They are doing preventative work that keeps the fire far away. If it hits the lawn, it’s too late. More firefighters are better, regardless of which areas are being contained with higher priority. If they were taking away fire fighters from the publicly funded groups or volunteers, then there would be something to bitch about.

enriquto 7y ago
> It’s like complaining about people hiring private security guards when there is a police shortage. What do you mean with that comparison? This would be quite a legitimate reason for complaining!
- big_chungus 7y ago
  Right, but should you really be blaming the people who hire the extra private policemen, or the people who decide not to hire more public ones? It seems as though it's more effective to push for more public policemen. The same applies to firemen: it's more productive to push for more public firemen than to blame the people who hire private ones due to a shortage thereof.
  - enriquto 7y ago
    Both are to blame. I'm not much of a statist, but if there's something that clearly must be assured by the government by means of taxation it is the police force and the firemen. If there's not enough police or firefighters, taxes must be raised or diverted from elsewhere. Morally, I think that the people who push for private security and firefighters are doing a net damage to society.
    - big_chungus 7y ago
      I see how hiring policemen and firefighters is not a positive, but don't see how it's a negative. In other words, a state-provided service is not always perfectly on-time, but if I want to hire some private service with super-fast response time for my twenty million dollar beach-front property, why not? How does me hiring a private fireman _harm_ someone else? If anything, might it not reduce the load on public infrastructure?
      - enriquto 7y ago
        I said "pushing for private services" not actually hiring one. Of course, if it is only you who does that, then it is completely irrelevant, neither positive nor negative. Likewise, if you decide to throw all your garbage on a forest, it is neither positive nor negative. If it is only you who does that, it can be argued that its net effect is negligible, neither positive nor negative. Maybe a bit of purely aesthetic disgust for somebody who happens to walk by while you are throwing it. But that is all. If anything, it may reduce a little bit the load on public garbage collection.
cco 7y ago
This is mostly a zero sum game in the immediate term, and mostly zero sum in the longer term since there is a fairly limited pool of people available to fight fires. If you have the skills to be a fireman but a private individual pays you above market rate to fight their own personal fires then you will remove yourself from the pool of people fighting fires for the public and into a private pool. Will 20 such private firemen be a problem? No, but 2,000? That would absolutely have an impact on available firefighters for the public.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  Is there really a shortage of firefighters? Or is there a shortage of firefighters willing to work for the rates public service offers? How high are those rates anyway? Because given how much public servants are typically paid worldwide, I can easily imagine that the private firefighting company isn't competing with public firefighting jobs, but with all the other jobs a would-be firefighter can get that pay better than fighting fires.
- smm2000 7y ago
  It can be zero sum game short term (<1 months) but medium term (6 months) it's definitely not zero sum game. Pool of applicants that can be firemen includes all able-bodied males (and potentially female) 18-50 which is 10 million pool in California alone. Good pay will attract out of state candidates too. I would expect training to take less than 6 months or so. Considering fires happen every year, California can have as many firemen as it wants (and willing to pay for) by the time next summer fire season starts.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

eloff 7y ago

You've got the wrong way of looking at this. The government is unwilling to hire these people, so they're available to private individuals. If the government were winning to fork out tax dollars for private firefighters, there's nothing stopping them from doing so. The great thing about capitalism, for better or worse, but mostly better is that you or any one other person does not get to decide what constitutes efficient use of resources. Everyone decides that for themself based on self interest and the market ends up magically having this sort of collective intelligence that allocates far better than any alternative system ever has.

supercanuck 7y ago
> The government is unwilling to hire these people, so they're available to private individuals. Show me the evidence this is happening.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- austhrow743 7y ago
  Your very own comment said "lack of supply of fireman". Are you implying that there are open fireman positions that no one is applying for? If so your market is incredibly different from the one I know. Here in Australia a job as a fireman is very hard to get.
  - supercanuck 7y ago
    There are open positions. Whether qualified applicants are applying, I don’t know. https://mobile.twitter.com/CALFIRE_Careers https://mobile.twitter.com/CALFIRE_Careers
  - turk73 7y ago
    The job of fireman is also extremely hard to get in the US, too, because there is 100% nepotism. You have to be related to a fireman to become a fireman. You can become a volunteer or part-time paid fireman in some areas, but the full time roles require connections. I have lived in three states, it's been the same in each state. The US South is the worst as far as nepotism goes. If you're not from a southern state, it is very difficult to practice law there as well. There are tight controls on all kinds of things that you wouldn't expect. I really don't wish to create a firestorm on here, but your odds of becoming a billionaire in the US are not very good unless you are well aligned with certain factions. Which factions those are I will not say because I will just get accused and the conversation will die. Be that as it may, it does not change the reality that any random individual can't just work hard and attain great wealth, moderate wealth yes, great wealth, no.

gtfratteus 7y ago

The same roads that you use to drive to the liquor store every day before posting this inane drivel.