jhalickman11: I disagree with this "the desirability of eliminating fire departments"
jhalickman11: more likely the "desirability of eliminating government funded fire departments"
Daniel McKinley: what's the difference
Daniel McKinley: god you're retarded
jhalickman11: private fire depts
Daniel McKinley: okay ... you know that system has been tried before and was widely considered a disaster
jhalickman11: how so
Daniel McKinley: it encouraged extreme gouging and arson
Daniel McKinley: to name two deleterious consequences
Daniel McKinley: it's the way fire departments worked in the early 19th century 
jhalickman11: how so
Daniel McKinley: what do you mean, how so?
Daniel McKinley: i just told you
Daniel McKinley: the people running private fire departments would set fires
Daniel McKinley: and, would also extort people whose houses were burning
jhalickman11: that is based on the idea that they get paid by the fire they have put out
Daniel McKinley: how do you advocate that they be paid
Daniel McKinley: you're going to say insurance
Daniel McKinley: and if you don't have insurance fuck you
Daniel McKinley: well here's why that doesn't work
Daniel McKinley: in a city, fires are not isolated
Daniel McKinley: so fires need to be put out
Daniel McKinley: so you either need to mandate that people have insurance, which is exactly the same thing as a tax
Daniel McKinley: that funds the fire department
Daniel McKinley: or allow some people to get away with not paying and depend on others that pay
Daniel McKinley: or let fires spread to other buildings of people that are paying in the interest of punishing the people that do not
jhalickman11: you don't need insurance you may want to subscribe 
Daniel McKinley: how is a fire department subscription not the exact same thing as insurance
jhalickman11: or it may make sense for the insurance companies to all get together and support the fire depts
Daniel McKinley: so again, you have the problem where people can elect not to pay that
jhalickman11: I am not saying that I know how it will be structured, if I did then comunism would work
jhalickman11: true
jhalickman11: they can ellect not to pay insurance
jhalickman11: but then if there shit burns down there fucked
Daniel McKinley: as are many of their neighbors
Daniel McKinley: have you heard of the great chicago fire?
jhalickman11: not if there neighbors have insurance
jhalickman11: I am saying that the fire dept does not descriminate
jhalickman11: it operates as it does noe
jhalickman11: now
Daniel McKinley: and how do you fund that fairly without a tax
jhalickman11: but is supported by the insurance companies, because it is in there interest not to have the houses burn down
Daniel McKinley: and tell me again how it's more fair that people can get fire coverage and elect not to  pay insurance than it is to tax everyone and fund the fire department?
Daniel McKinley: you really have not thought this libertarianism thing through
jhalickman11: well just because the fire dept comes to my house when it is burning down does not mean there is no dammage
jhalickman11: there is probably going to me tons of dammage
Daniel McKinley: huh?
Daniel McKinley: that's an argument for not smoking
jhalickman11: my house is on fire
jhalickman11: and the fire dept gets there and puts it out
jhalickman11: my shit is probably fucked
jhalickman11: so if I dont have insurance I am screwed
Daniel McKinley: so someone opens up a cheaper renter's insurance that doesn't pay the fire department
Daniel McKinley: because there are no laws stopping them from doing that
Daniel McKinley: and the rational people buy that
Daniel McKinley: it's cheaper and still gets you fire coverage because your neighbor pays for you
jhalickman11: well then everyone is going to buy that
jhalickman11: and the insurance companies will loose money
Daniel McKinley: and how is the fire department funded again?
jhalickman11: and then will cancel that plan
Daniel McKinley: so everybody's house burns down
Daniel McKinley: and this solves the problem more efficiently than government
Daniel McKinley: perfect!
jhalickman11: this is operating on the assumption that it is cheaper for the insurance companies to fund a fire dept then pay to replace everything you own
Daniel McKinley: that is not necessarily the case
jhalickman11: and if it is not then it would be in the best interest for the fire dept to become more efficent
Daniel McKinley: especially if there are no laws controlling the insurance company's appraisal of your belongings
Daniel McKinley: the fundamental problem with your position is that it assumes that people never cheat or do anything evil
jhalickman11: well libertarians are not in favor or removing laws
jhalickman11: quite the opposite
Daniel McKinley: yes i'm aware that ron paul wants to ban gay marriage
jhalickman11: I mean the EPA is a prime example, they replaced property right laws with a large government agency 
jhalickman11: well that is a difference of oppinion
jhalickman11: but enough of this, we could argue it for days
Daniel McKinley: you realize that the property rights laws were completely inadequate to solve the problem that the EPA addresses
Daniel McKinley: hence the EPA
jhalickman11: how so 
Daniel McKinley: property rights laws led to a breakdown in relations with your homeland in the mid 80's due to acid rain
jhalickman11: and the EPA solved that?
Daniel McKinley: yes in fact it did
Daniel McKinley: you don't hear canadians bitching about acid rain anymore, do you?
Daniel McKinley: you know batshit insane right wing crank richard nixon created the EPA, right?
Daniel McKinley: there was a time when this was not even remotely controversial