Firefighters watched a house burn down

[LightningCrash]

I think this pretty much sums it up. Pay the fee or suffer the consequences. It's a pretty simple concept.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

Why did he call that particular Fire Department? Why not call every Fire Department he could think of? I mean if you're going to mooch then you might as well go big. Then he could blame like 5 or 6 Fire Departments for not responding.

 

[RidgeHunter]

For only $75 they could have had a soaking wet, charred skeleton of a trailer house instead of a dry, charred skeleton of a trailer house.

 

[Bootleggn]

For only $75 they could have had a soaking wet, charred skeleton of a trailer house instead of a dry, charred skeleton of a trailer house.

Winning!

 

[HMFIC]

For only $75 they could have had a soaking wet, charred skeleton of a trailer house instead of a dry, charred skeleton of a trailer house.

You're on fire today Ridge... wait... uh no pun intended.

 

[grizzly97]

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

Okay Spoc. lol

Negative, the needs of one person don't outweigh the needs of another. It's called equality.

 

[Blinocac200sx]

I'm not against being compassionate, and if they had gone ahead and put out the fire at their own discretion, I don't think it would be a sin. But at the same time, he had previously made it clear that he did not want their services. He had REFUSED to receive their services. This is not like a doctor walking up to someone choking and giving them the Heimlich. This is like someone telling the doctor specifically not to help him when he's in trouble, and then later pleading for his help, and even then, it's not a just analogy as no lives were in danger here.

 

[vvvvvvv]

Okay Spoc. lol

Negative, the needs of one person don't outweigh the needs of another. It's called equality.

So you diminish the needs of the many when they are grouped together in order to balance with the needs of the few (or one, in this case) and call that "equality"?

 

[LightningCrash]

Okay Spoc. lol

Negative, the needs of one person don't outweigh the needs of another. It's called equality.

Everybody else around there needs the fire department. If nobody paid their subscription, there would be no fire service there. Then everyone would be equal. All of their houses could burn down. Win/win!

 

[grizzly97]

So you diminish the needs of the many when they are grouped together in order to balance with the needs of the few (or one, in this case) and call that "equality"?

Lol. Didn't take long for that.

All I'm saying is every persons needs, no matter how big or small, are equal to the needs of another. No one person is more important than another. Granted, modern society places "importance levels" on people with their position/job or social status.

That and I felt like stiring up some s***. lol

 

[grizzly97]

Everybody else around there needs the fire department. If nobody paid their subscription, there would be no fire service there. Then everyone would be equal. All of their houses could burn down. Win/win!

See my response to Veggie.