Who's going to pay for it?

[jcwade]

If you almost drown getting caught in a rip tide and get taken to the hospital in an ambulance, you get a bill for the ambulance. This happened to my son.

If you burn down a forest, you get charged for the cost of fighting the fire. Granted, you may never have the money to pay, but it still happens.

If you pay to go to the bottom of the sea and something goes wrong that requires a multi-nation search effort, does your estate have to cover the cost of the search?

Should it?

[911 Rod]

This comes up all the time around here with ice fishing. They threaten that they will start charging people for a rescue, but they never do.

[Chocaholic]

Don’t forget mountain climbers. It could be argued that your taxes cover the cost. It would be a bad argument, but there it is.

[LWJ]

Funny. My coffee group asked the same question this am.

[Noah930]

Hugh.

[Zeke]

IDK why this has to drag on. 3 threads now and this question is part of the other two.

Most places have volunteer search and rescue folks. The fire dept is involved many times and many of them are volunteer and supported by donations.

Obviously that far out in the sea with several nations assisting as well as some commercial vessels, it has to fall on who owns what. I think this circumstance got complicated just in that way, so how the hell are you going to distribute costs even if you would?

A drop in the bucket given our involvement around the world. That's all that can be said about that or it is PARF.

A good example is the 12 boys trapped in underground cave in Thailand. Several nations participated. I believe England and Australia were prominent in the rescue. That mission lasted 18 days.

[Jeff Hail]

If a certain entity in its official capacity of sluggishness and wasteful practice is involved nobody actually pays for anything but some get paid.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by Zeke

That's all that can be said about that or it is PARF......

Originally Posted by Jeff Hail

If the Government is involved nobody actually pays for anything but some get paid.

Gubmit-bashing is not PARF. At least, not here anyway.

Government already provides similar services. Government does not bill people when the fire department is needed. Or police. First responders (Dial 911) are free unless someone needs to be transported. Government could expand those services to include ambulance when people need to be transported, but think of the lost revenues to the businesses which do that work.

Most first world countries have universal health care, so this is role-of-government-in emergencies question is basically an American question only.

I'd guess the folks who tried to rescue the submarine were doing so for a non-commercial purpose. Same with the boys stuck in the Thai cave.

AFAIK I have not said anything out of bounds for this forum, since government's role is not a "politics" topic.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by Jeff Hail

If the Government is involved nobody actually pays for anything but some get paid.

Actually, now that I think about it, the difference to which Jeff points can be said to be a question about exposure to lawsuits. Private companies can file lawsuits to recover expenses but governments are not going to do that. So the question of government role in these rescue operations includes one of civil liability in court. Hm.

[Jeff Hail]

Its fixed.

[john70t]

Originally Posted by Noah930

Hugh.

Hugh paid for a nice lunch with Kach and myself in A2 a decade plus ago and even mentioned the possibility of us being nearer to the set.
Of course Hugh is gonna pay for it.

But he ain't paying the next time he's around this area...yeah I'm talkin to you Hugh [wavey].

[KNS]

As noted a above, entities like the Coast Guard don't charge for their search and rescue efforts.

I will say that Arizona's DPS (Dept of Public Safety) has a stupid motorist law which I agree with. If, for example, you drive into a flooded creek bed that's clearly been marked as "Do Not Cross" to try and get to the other side and you get washed away - the state will send you a bill for rescuing you.

[Superman]

You live in the wrong place, Jeff. Wrong state, and wrong country. You might be happier not living in a first world country. They are characterized by entities of sluggishness and wasteful practices. This is what defines them.

[1990C4S]

I wonder what the actual out of pocket cost for the military is. Are the planes used sitting idle otherwise? What's the added cost of sending ships to a different location? They are out there anyway. For sure the sonar equipment is out of pocket, as are a lot of the search and rescue vessels/aircraft. I assume all military are paid $X per year, regardless of what they do?

This seems like a good place for 'adventurers' to post a bond. If you need to be rescued, the bond pays for those costs. Unfortunately, I think they were in international waters, so not laws from either Canada or USA apply.

[flatbutt]

From WaPo...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/23/titan-search-cost/

[The Synergizer]

We are all paying, all the time.
Our taxes fund the coast guard and other services.

These searches, rescues, and recoveries, in my opinion are part of what these men and women are there for - in addition to all their other duties. They also give a chance to learn and try new equipment and techniques.

I've never agreed with the billing of someone that accidentally starts a fire either, unless it's arson, or they did something in violation of fire restrictions. If it's arson, the culprit won't have any money anyway......

[wdfifteen]

The US coast guard says they never charge for a search and rescue and they won't charge this time. There were some private ships operating out there and also the Canadialand Coast Guard. I don't know about them.

[Alan A]

If they charged I - personally - would be asking why I’m paying taxes that fund them.

But I have the same issue with the local ‘volunteer’ fire department. There’s not inconsequential line on the tax levy, they employ full time firefighters but still claim it’s all volunteer and ask for $ on a regular basis. Drop the volunteer and raise taxes or drop the tax and ask for $.

Either works. The double dipping doesn’t.

[wilnj]

Originally Posted by Alan A

If they charged I - personally - would be asking why I’m paying taxes that fund them.

But I have the same issue with the local ‘volunteer’ fire department. There’s not inconsequential line on the tax levy, they employ full time firefighters but still claim it’s all volunteer and ask for $ on a regular basis. Drop the volunteer and raise taxes or drop the tax and ask for $.

Either works. The double dipping doesn’t.

If it’s anything like our town, we have one paid EMS crew for day shift M-F. To ensure quick response when people might be working.

Our firefighters are all volunteers but well equipped. With 6 fire districts plus adjacent towns, i assume they’re confident they can provide sufficient coverage without a paid squad.

We have a good mix of single family, commercial and mid-rise residential and office. Plus we have 2 major interstates that they’re responsible for. As I type this I hear them rolling out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wilnj]

Duplicate