Budget cuts lead to death (not a death panel either)

[bigbadberry3]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43233984/ns/us_news-life

Are budget cuts becoming an excuse to act inhumane? I do realize that going in unprepared puts rescuers at risk but still hard to swallow that no one could think of something to improvise.

[the a3k]

wow, i wouldve jumped in and grabbed him. who cares about policy BS. how can you watch someone die?

[bigbadberry3]

wow, i wouldve jumped in and grabbed him. who cares about policy BS. how can you watch someone die?

Yeah that's definitely the gut instinct but if you were ever a lifeguard or have some water training, it's extremely difficult to rescue someone who wants to be rescued. I can't believe no one came up with an idea to save this guy. Humanity is going in the wrong direction.

[stebo0728]

This makes for an interesting story. It reminds me of the "bridge jumpers" you see standing on crowded overpasses. I dont know about the rest of the country, but Georgia interstates basically shut completely down for hours while they fiddle with the moron. This story reminds me of that because they guy acted on his own accord, waded out there, and waited, like an idiot. Policy aside, if you were there, saw the entire event unfold, would you risk your own life? Maybe so, maybe I would too, I dont know because its difficult to predict your own reaction to a situation like that. But I think both saving him, and standing back and watching are both acceptable responses to the complete situation. Now if you were a jogger, wandered up and saw the guy thrashing around, I think instinct would dictate you jump in and try to save the guy. As far as policy goes, there's always going to be stupid policy as long as stupid people inhabit the earth. In times like these policy is the last consideration to make.

[AZhitman]

Sensational misleading headline is sensational (and misleading).

Wonder if the same people bleating about the responders' response are likely also lobbying for the legality of assisted suicide? (just an observation of potential hypocrisy)

Hard to say what one would have done, and I'd like to think I'd have the sack to jump in and try to rescue someone, but there's a lot more to consider than the article states (I'm a weak swimmer, and I'd likely drown - I've gotta wonder if I'd risk everything to save someone who wants to end their life of their own accord).

[AppleBonker]

Agreed ^

As a former competitive swimmer/lifeguard I can recognize the risk in this situation. It's not easy to rescue someone who does not want to be rescued (presumably). Lifeguard training doesn't even fully prepare one for a rescue (as most people drowning act instinctively in ways that danger the rescuer). I've heard many stories of victims being injured during the course of the rescue by the rescuer. When a drowning victim tries to use the rescuer as leverage to keep his/her head above water, the rescuer occasionally needs to fight back to subdue the victim. It happens. In this case, who knows what the outcome would've been.

However, had I been on the shore I would've likely entered the water and tried to help. Then again, that's just me and I have faith in my swimming/lifeguard abilities (though my lifeguard training has lapsed and I am no longer certified).

[IBCoupe]

I'll bleat for both, Greg: the firefighters should have been able to rescue him (whether he should have been rescued is another matter) and that the man should have the right to end his own life, should he choose.

Interim Alameda Fire Chief Mike D'Orazi said that due to 2009 budget cuts his crews did not have the training or cold-water gear to go into the water.

I don't think the headline was so misleading. Imagine it had been a child. Maybe they would have said "policy be damned," but maybe then we'd have had a dead child and a dead firefighter?

More precisely, [Associate Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.] rebuked a secretary’s query of "Don’t you hate to pay taxes?" with "No, young fellow, I like paying taxes, with them I buy civilization."

You want your firefighters to be able to perform water rescues? Buy them training and equipment that allows them to do it. We need to, as a society, learn to pay for exactly as much civilization as we want to have. It's situations like this that suggest that maybe the most adult thing to do isn't simply to cut "spending."

[AZhitman]

I'll go with that. I just don't think the first responders are to be crucified here. Let's lay the blame on those who denied them the training and equipment, if we're so inclined.

[IBCoupe]

Oh, I absolutely agree. That's what I took the headline to mean - "isn't it a shame that these guys didn't have the tools available to do the job they're supposed to?"

"Handcuffed by policy" was, in my mind, a reasonable and tragic explanation, not an excuse.

[AZhitman]

^ Yup.

Although, were "budget cuts" to blame for dude's death? I mean, he's suicidal. I'd say mental illness or psychosocial stressors resulted in his death - budget cuts just precluded heroic measures.

Not arguing your position, just nitpicking the "outrage".

[IBCoupe]

Not necessarily for the dude's death. I don't feel bad about that. I feel bad about our rescue workers not being able to do their jobs.

I saw this and thought of our discussions re: Ozzie and Taxes at Carlisle. Here's an interesting, marginally-related-to-this-thread graph, Greg, and if you'll look at the two countries at the bottom of the list, I think you'll see something pretty interesting:

[Cold_Zero]

This is what happens when people (en masse) loose their jobs or houses and and tax revenue drops radically. We can blame budgets all day long and I am sure that spending priorities are part to blame, but when tax revenue is down, services get cut. Where is the righteous indignation for the causes of the subprime lending (and the ensuing liquidity crisis) scandal?

[IBCoupe]

Where is the righteous indignation for the causes of the subprime lending (and the ensuing liquidity crisis) scandal?

The dirty hippies ran out of unemployment checks, and can no longer afford to waste precious resources on futile demonstrations of protest.

[Cold_Zero]

The revolution will not be televised.

[AZhitman]

The dirty hippies ran out of unemployment checks, and can no longer afford to waste precious resources on futile demonstrations of protest.

Thank God for that...

The tax table doesn't surprise me. I'm a recent convert. Tax away, I'm ready. I'll still press for cuts to entitlements, military and foreign aid.

[bigbadberry3]

Not necessarily for the dude's death. I don't feel bad about that. I feel bad about our rescue workers not being able to do their jobs.

I saw this and thought of our discussions re: Ozzie and Taxes at Carlisle. Here's an interesting, marginally-related-to-this-thread graph, Greg, and if you'll look at the two countries at the bottom of the list, I think you'll see something pretty interesting:

How are the higher tax rate countries doing financially?

[HashiriyaS14]

How are the higher tax rate countries doing financially?

Pretty decently.

If you look, all the big-debt offenders (Spain, Ireland, Greece) are towards the bottom of the list.

Sweden, Norway, and Finland all have debt/GDP levels below that of the US or the nations I listed above. Doesn't appear to impact growth rates also, as the Scandinavian "socialist" nations are all growing more quickly than the debt-addled USA, Greece, Spain, and Ireland.

Funny how that works. When you tax and pay for things upfront...you end up with less debt, and you can instead spend money on infrastructure and education that will keep your nation competitive. Who'd have guessed?

[stebo0728]

The dirty hippies ran out of unemployment checks, and can no longer afford to waste precious resources on futile demonstrations of protest.

Thank God for that...

The tax table doesn't surprise me. I'm a recent convert. Tax away, I'm ready. I'll still press for cuts to entitlements, military and foreign aid.

You might be right here, but I'd like to see IB's table supplemented with a bit more information, say, what percentage of each of those nations population that rides tax free, and see where we stand there. We have 52% of our folks here off the tax books, and that to me seems irresponsible. If we have a revenue problem that requires more taxation, should it really be levied against the ones already paying the lions share?

[IBCoupe]

That's a lie. That measures total government collection at all levels. You're talking about federal income taxes only. The federal income tax is quite progressive, yes, but that's in part because the rest of the system isn't.

[Cold_Zero]

A few observations.
This study measure Government spending for 2009. Most of the EU bailouts that you all are thinking about are much more recent than the Irish and Iceland bailouts. Werent most of our TARP bailouts prior to 2009?
Also, I dont think that you can proclaim that the United States has low taxes based on one years data. While I wouldnt necessarily disagree with the notion that we have a lower tax rate than say, Northern Europe, I just dont think that comparing government expenditures verse GDP solves the matter. Also, why is China not on the list?

[Cold_Zero]

If you look, all the big-debt offenders (Spain, Ireland, Greece) are towards the bottom of the list.

And all of the countries prominently bailing them out are in the middle of the list, Germany and the UK.

[bigbadberry3]

If you look, all the big-debt offenders (Spain, Ireland, Greece) are towards the bottom of the list.

And all of the countries prominently bailing them out are in the middle of the list, Germany and the UK.

Which nations are not bailing themselves might be easier to count :P

[JustinStrife]

It also helps out those European nations that they don't have to spend anywhere near as much on their militaries as say America does. Easier to afford their social programs then.

[IBCoupe]

Not sure that we have to, either.

[AZhitman]

^ Yep.

[szh]

Funny how that works. When you tax and pay for things upfront...you end up with less debt, and you can instead spend money on infrastructure and education that will keep your nation competitive. Who'd have guessed?

Agreed. But another way to accomplish that is to only spend what you make - therefore when the intake is less, cut spending.

That is what ordinary people ... and companies ... and states ... have to do.

Z

[IBCoupe]

Funny how that works. When you tax and pay for things upfront...you end up with less debt, and you can instead spend money on infrastructure and education that will keep your nation competitive. Who'd have guessed?

Agreed. But another way to accomplish that is to only spend what you make - therefore when the intake is less, cut spending.

That is what ordinary people ... and companies ... and states ... have to do.

Z

Sure, but we happen to like the programs Republicans are dead-set on de-funding.

[szh]

And some of us dislike the programs that Democrats are dead-set on funding.

Z

[IBCoupe]

Not enough of you, according to the polls.

[szh]

Perhaps ...

Z