The "liberal" vision of firefighting.

[Sallow]

I think that emergency service personnel are exempt from that rule Quantum.

Remember New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina? They weren't allowed to strike, so about 1/3 of them walked off the job.

Apparently, it extends to paramedics in NYC now......

New York officials are investigating two emergency medical practitioners [EMT] after they allegedly refused to help a pregnant woman who collapsed while they were taking a break, the New York Post has reported.

According to witnesses, when the Fire Department paramedics were approached for help during their coffee break, they suggested the staff call 911.

They left when they were asked to help Eutisha Revee Rennix, an employee at the downtown Brooklyn coffee shop Au Bon Pain.

It is believed that 25-year-old Rennix had suffered a seizure and was struggling to breathe.

An ambulance was called by her fellow employees, and she was taken to hospital but later died along with her unborn baby girl.

In response to the incident the Fire Department of New York suspended the medical practitioners involved, without pay while investigations continue, spokesman Steve Ritea said.

"Our people tend to spring into action whether they're on duty, off duty, whatever they're doing," said Robert Ungar, spokesman for the Uniformed EMTS and Paramedics, FDNY, explaining that Emergency medical practitioners consider themselves to be on call 24 hours a day.

The local EMTs have a "very strong bond with the people of New York City that they serve," he said. "They view themselves as always being on duty."

The union is awaiting the results of the investigation, "If there was unprofessional conduct by these EMTs, the union does not condone any type of conduct which in any way can harm members of the public," he said.

Furious at the incident, Mayor Michael Bloomberg reportedly blasted the two EMTs, "It was unconscionable, [an] outrage, pick some adjectives and stick it in," and then called for a return to common decency.

"The Fire Department, including EMS, is responsible for life-saving, and their first responsibility is to do that," the mayor said. "But even if they weren't part of the Fire Department sworn to protect all of us, just normal human beings, drop your coffee and go help somebody if they're dying. C'mon."
Rennix leaves behind a toddler son and grieving family.

Pregnant woman dies after paramedics 'refuse to help' - Yahoo!7

I work in that area..and knew that woman. She was morbidly obese, but extremely nice. Such a sad story.

 

[Sallow]

Democrats think it is great to be like Europe. Taxes, Unions, Strikes, Riots, Death.

FIREMEN'S STRIKE: I would not wish what happened to me on anyone else in the world; DON'T MAKE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN, SAYS MUM WHO LOST FOUR CHILDREN IN LAST FIREMEN'S STRIKE.

As a result Denise Brazier, aged 12, Suzanne Brazier, 10, and their half-sister and brother - Lisa Bowen, seven and Tony Bowen, five - all died.

Europe, well most if it, is quite a nice place. Paris is beautiful, Italy is stunning and Germany is the bomb..especially at Oktoberfest. England has some great countryside and very charming pubs. Croatia and Bosnia are beautiful too, you might want to try Split and Dubrovnik.

 

[Revere]

California is nice, too, but it's collapsing just like Europe.

 

[KissMy]

Democrats think it is great to be like Europe. Taxes, Unions, Strikes, Riots, Death.

FIREMEN'S STRIKE: I would not wish what happened to me on anyone else in the world; DON'T MAKE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN, SAYS MUM WHO LOST FOUR CHILDREN IN LAST FIREMEN'S STRIKE.

As a result Denise Brazier, aged 12, Suzanne Brazier, 10, and their half-sister and brother - Lisa Bowen, seven and Tony Bowen, five - all died.

Europe, well most if it, is quite a nice place. Paris is beautiful, Italy is stunning and Germany is the bomb..especially at Oktoberfest. England has some great countryside and very charming pubs. Croatia and Bosnia are beautiful too, you might want to try Split and Dubrovnik.

This is so great. Can we be just like France? Nanny state government is simply wonderful. Socialist Governments Over-Spends, Create Dependants & Taxes Very Well !

French protest austerity plan & nearly bring country to a standstill.

Scattered fuel shortages rattled drivers and businesses across France on Saturday, as tens of thousands marched for the fifth time in a month to protest President Nicolas Sarkozy's plan to raise the retirement age to 62.

Frequent strikes in the last few weeks have hobbled French trains and airports, closed schools and docks, and left garbage piling up in the southern port of Marseille.

But now the airline industry is getting worried, after all of France's 12 fuel-producing refineries went on strike and many depots were being blocked by protesters. Police were called in to force three crucial fuel depots to reopen Friday, including one outside Marseille.

As fearful drivers headed to the pumps, Finance Minister Christine Lagarde urged the nation not to panic. "Today, there is no reason, no reason ... to panic,"

 

[Charles_Main]

... everyone has a right to strike, even if it means a house, or five, burns down, or someone ends up dead.

NO THEY DON'T. If it involves PUBLIC SAFETY it should be ILLEGAL to strike.

If your strike causes someone to die it should be MURDER.

I was agreeing with you until this last line. That is not how us REAL CONSERVATIVES feel. We are very anti union & we care about public safety over working conditions. If you don't like your working conditions QUIT!!!

Why if you have a personal disagreement with your employment conditions should it affect me or anyone else?

You know that a strike is just everyone temporarily "quitting" at once, right?

Organized Labor is part of a free market. I thought REAL CONSERVATIVES were all about the free market.

Organized Labor Is not an example of the Free market. It is an attempt to tame and control the Free market.

 

[Sallow]

Liberal vision of Firefighting:

Put out the DAMN FIRE.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I agree that they're not the same situation. But the OP looked to compare them - so I obliged.

My major issue with this is that I think firefighters should function like doctors - put the fire out first, then worry about the money. Same with police. If you're going to make a fuss about firefighters going on strike, you should make just as much fuss about the stupidity of firefighters watching a house burn down because the homeowner didn't pay what amounts to "protection", in the mafia sense.

You seem to be missing the point.

In Tennessee the firefighters did not put out the fire because the fee was not paid in advance. As I posted in a thread discussing that situation, I think the whole thing sucks, and if I had been a firefighter there I would have ignored the orders not to put out the fire. Nonetheless, the city is justified in not using their resources to put out fires if they choose to do that.

In the OP I posted the firefighters refused to put out fires that were already covered. The National Guard even had to show up to defend the firefighters who refused to obey the union and tried to put out fires, because the union condoned violence in order to extort more money from the city. You are correct that there is no comparison, yet the reason they do not compare has absolutely nothing to do with the point you are trying to make.

The real difference between them is that you seem to think that firefighting resources are free. Either that, or you think that a tax base is some type of bottomless pit, so that anyone who needs a service is justified in demanding it.

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

... everyone has a right to strike, even if it means a house, or five, burns down, or someone ends up dead.

NO THEY DON'T. If it involves PUBLIC SAFETY it should be ILLEGAL to strike.

If your strike causes someone to die it should be MURDER.

I was agreeing with you until this last line. That is not how us REAL CONSERVATIVES feel. We are very anti union & we care about public safety over working conditions. If you don't like your working conditions QUIT!!!

Why if you have a personal disagreement with your employment conditions should it affect me or anyone else?

Really?

A right to work implies a right not to work. Are firefighters slaves that have no right to demand better working conditions, no right to not be forced to work for a month straight, or the right to have basic equipment needed to keep people safe? Not being a conservative, I think that they do have these rights. How do you justify making someone into a slave just because he is willing to put out a fire, or serve as a police officer?

 

[Charles_Main]

... everyone has a right to strike, even if it means a house, or five, burns down, or someone ends up dead.

NO THEY DON'T. If it involves PUBLIC SAFETY it should be ILLEGAL to strike.

If your strike causes someone to die it should be MURDER.

I was agreeing with you until this last line. That is not how us REAL CONSERVATIVES feel. We are very anti union & we care about public safety over working conditions. If you don't like your working conditions QUIT!!!

Why if you have a personal disagreement with your employment conditions should it affect me or anyone else?

Really?

A right to work implies a right not to work. Are firefighters slaves that have no right to demand better working conditions, no right to not be forced to work for a month straight, or the right to have basic equipment needed to keep people safe? Not being a conservative, I think that they do have these rights. How do you justify making someone into a slave just because he is willing to put out a fire, or serve as a police officer?

Slave? Slaves can't quit.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

NO THEY DON'T. If it involves PUBLIC SAFETY it should be ILLEGAL to strike.

If your strike causes someone to die it should be MURDER.

I was agreeing with you until this last line. That is not how us REAL CONSERVATIVES feel. We are very anti union & we care about public safety over working conditions. If you don't like your working conditions QUIT!!!

Why if you have a personal disagreement with your employment conditions should it affect me or anyone else?

Really?

A right to work implies a right not to work. Are firefighters slaves that have no right to demand better working conditions, no right to not be forced to work for a month straight, or the right to have basic equipment needed to keep people safe? Not being a conservative, I think that they do have these rights. How do you justify making someone into a slave just because he is willing to put out a fire, or serve as a police officer?

Slave? Slaves can't quit.

They can't go on strike either.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

NO THEY DON'T. If it involves PUBLIC SAFETY it should be ILLEGAL to strike.

If your strike causes someone to die it should be MURDER.

I was agreeing with you until this last line. That is not how us REAL CONSERVATIVES feel. We are very anti union & we care about public safety over working conditions. If you don't like your working conditions QUIT!!!

Why if you have a personal disagreement with your employment conditions should it affect me or anyone else?

You know that a strike is just everyone temporarily "quitting" at once, right?

Organized Labor is part of a free market. I thought REAL CONSERVATIVES were all about the free market.

Organized Labor Is not an example of the Free market. It is an attempt to tame and control the Free market.

How so?

 

[Charles_Main]

You know that a strike is just everyone temporarily "quitting" at once, right?

Organized Labor is part of a free market. I thought REAL CONSERVATIVES were all about the free market.

Organized Labor Is not an example of the Free market. It is an attempt to tame and control the Free market.

How so?

Really? it's called collective Bargaining.

lol

Collective bargaining Results in Companies having to pay More than the Rate the Free Market justifies.

Not saying I am against it, I am just pointing out in the pure sense of it, that is not free markets.

 

[Greenbeard]

Collective bargaining Results in Companies having to pay More than the Rate the Free Market justifies.

Not saying I am against it, I am just pointing out in the pure sense of it, that is not free markets.

One could argue that the corporation itself is an aberration of a pure free market. At some point you have to stop assuming the cow is spherical.

 

[Revere]

Collective bargaining Results in Companies having to pay More than the Rate the Free Market justifies.

Not saying I am against it, I am just pointing out in the pure sense of it, that is not free markets.

One could argue that the corporation itself is an aberration of a pure free market. At some point you have to stop assuming the cow is spherical.

Are you free if you can't affiliate and aggregate your resources as you wish?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Organized Labor Is not an example of the Free market. It is an attempt to tame and control the Free market.

How so?

Really? it's called collective Bargaining.

lol

Collective bargaining Results in Companies having to pay More than the Rate the Free Market justifies.

Not saying I am against it, I am just pointing out in the pure sense of it, that is not free markets.

How are you defining "free market"?

 

[Greenbeard]

Are you free if you can't affiliate and aggregate your resources as you wish?

The "free" in free market doesn't necessarily mean "the opposite of in chains." It means undistorted by government policy. I'd be the very first to tell you that government policy can enhance freedom in the sense you're using the words (and undistorted "free markets" can, ironically, themselves sometimes endanger individual freedom).

My point is that unions and corporations are different sides of the same coin and the roles of both have been shaped by their (at various times successful) efforts to shape public policy to their benefit.

 

[MaggieMae]

Typical 'National Review' anti American worker propaganda, the review is a pro corporate enslavement policy think tank. Carried to an extreme, conservative republican 'freedom' rhetoric would get rid of all public services, so anyone reading this crap needs to look behind the curtain for the benefactors when the American worker is completely disenfranchised. It has always struck me as curious how republicans have managed to destroy American worker rights, starting with Reagan, and continuing to everything from minimum wage to refusing unemployment, to allowing business to buy the air waves. But it is the power of those air waves and the tools at the national review who hide the reality.


"Disagreements about the optimal level of wealth inequality underlie policy debates ranging from taxation to welfare. We attempt to insert the desires of “regular” Americans into these debates, by asking a nationally representative online panel to estimate the current distribution of wealth in the United States and to “build a better America” by constructing distributions with their ideal level of inequality. First, respondents dramatically underestimated the current level of wealth inequality. Second, respondents constructed ideal wealth distributions that were far more equitable than even their erroneously low estimates of the actual distribution."

http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton ariely in press.pdf

My brother-in-law hands me his copy of National Review, which I do read. I find it is so full of either embellished information or glaring omissions. It's truly sad that even THIS once truly "fair and balanced" conservative publication has become nothing but a bitterly biased propaganda outlet. William F. Buckley, Jr., must turn in his grave every time a new issue comes out.

 

[MaggieMae]

Liberal vision of Firefighting:

Put out the DAMN FIRE.

Nuff said.

 

[MaggieMae]

I agree that they're not the same situation. But the OP looked to compare them - so I obliged.

My major issue with this is that I think firefighters should function like doctors - put the fire out first, then worry about the money. Same with police. If you're going to make a fuss about firefighters going on strike, you should make just as much fuss about the stupidity of firefighters watching a house burn down because the homeowner didn't pay what amounts to "protection", in the mafia sense.

You seem to be missing the point.

In Tennessee the firefighters did not put out the fire because the fee was not paid in advance. As I posted in a thread discussing that situation, I think the whole thing sucks, and if I had been a firefighter there I would have ignored the orders not to put out the fire. Nonetheless, the city is justified in not using their resources to put out fires if they choose to do that.

In the OP I posted the firefighters refused to put out fires that were already covered. The National Guard even had to show up to defend the firefighters who refused to obey the union and tried to put out fires, because the union condoned violence in order to extort more money from the city. You are correct that there is no comparison, yet the reason they do not compare has absolutely nothing to do with the point you are trying to make.

The real difference between them is that you seem to think that firefighting resources are free. Either that, or you think that a tax base is some type of bottomless pit, so that anyone who needs a service is justified in demanding it.

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Except when a con wants one, that is. Some of the ski areas in Vermont now send a bill for services if that person has skiied off a clearly marked trail and needs to be rescued. You wouldn't believe the outcry from all the fat cats living in their starter castles up on Killington Mountain the first time some idiot got a bill from the Ski Patrol for $500 after they had spent an afternoon getting him unpried from a big pine tree.

As a side note, Killington residents, 99% Republican flatlanders, attempted a few years ago to secede from the State of Vermont and restructure its boundaries so it could move to New Hampshire where there's no income tax.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I agree that they're not the same situation. But the OP looked to compare them - so I obliged.

My major issue with this is that I think firefighters should function like doctors - put the fire out first, then worry about the money. Same with police. If you're going to make a fuss about firefighters going on strike, you should make just as much fuss about the stupidity of firefighters watching a house burn down because the homeowner didn't pay what amounts to "protection", in the mafia sense.

You seem to be missing the point.

In Tennessee the firefighters did not put out the fire because the fee was not paid in advance. As I posted in a thread discussing that situation, I think the whole thing sucks, and if I had been a firefighter there I would have ignored the orders not to put out the fire. Nonetheless, the city is justified in not using their resources to put out fires if they choose to do that.

In the OP I posted the firefighters refused to put out fires that were already covered. The National Guard even had to show up to defend the firefighters who refused to obey the union and tried to put out fires, because the union condoned violence in order to extort more money from the city. You are correct that there is no comparison, yet the reason they do not compare has absolutely nothing to do with the point you are trying to make.

The real difference between them is that you seem to think that firefighting resources are free. Either that, or you think that a tax base is some type of bottomless pit, so that anyone who needs a service is justified in demanding it.

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Except when a con wants one, that is. Some of the ski areas in Vermont now send a bill for services if that person has skiied off a clearly marked trail and needs to be rescued. You wouldn't believe the outcry from all the fat cats living in their starter castles up on Killington Mountain the first time some idiot got a bill from the Ski Patrol for $500 after they had spent an afternoon getting him unpried from a big pine tree.

As a side note, Killington residents, 99% Republican flatlanders, attempted a few years ago to secede from the State of Vermont and restructure its boundaries so it could move to New Hampshire where there's no income tax.

How does a con, whatever you think that means, wanting it makes the lunch free?