this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
813 points (98.9% liked)
People Twitter
5493 readers
1818 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I didn't know private firefighters are even a thing.
In the land of the free, the goal is to privatize everything.
Land of the ~~free~~ fee
That is one of the ways Marcus Crassus got rich in Rome.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Licinius_Crassus
He did pay for his greed. When he failed in his campaign in Parthia, the parthians put him to death by pouring molten gold down his throat.
Guillotines are out. Molten gold cleanses are IN.
It's completely natural and organic too
It's technically anorganic.
Cyberpunk Dystopian before Cyberpunk was even a genre
🎶same as it ever was, same as it ever was...🎶
Caesarpunk? Circensespunk? Idk what to call it, but I want cyberpunk-but-ancient-Rome to exist as a genre
Sandalpunk
I feel like the modern version would be putting out the fire no matter what because it might spread to surrounding properties and then charging you for it anyway and putting a lien on the property if you can't pay.
I kinda figured the Cyberpunk in Cyberpunk Dystopia refers to a counter cultural movement within those societies.
So get at least a little money but lose the property, or let the property burn down out of spite so nobody gets it. You'd still own the land it's on, right? Decisions, decisions...
I guess it depends on if you have enough resources to rebuild or not. I don't think insurance existed back then.
The first option is bad but at least some of your stuff is saved. It depends on if anything was irreplaceable, but then you got to pay this ass clown rent.
The second one is when no one wins, but if you have resources then just rebuild. If you have nothing then sell a plot of land for cheap, but still have nothing from the fire.
Yeah, saving your stuff from the building is a pretty big motivator since he's only buying the property, not everything in it. I'm sure he got a lot of takers.
he did become the richest man in rome off it, so it would seem so.
He did end up with molten gold down his throat that all his riches couldn't prevent. Not directly as a result of this bullshittery unfortunately.
I've never heard of them in the modern day, but I know that's how fire brigades started in the UK
Correct, it's also the birth of insurance. People would pay a subscription style fee to the fire brigade so their house would be protected in case of a fire.
It's something satirised in The Colour of Magic, the first Discworld novel.
Precisely.
There'd be fire markers on the outer walls to indicate which fire protection company covered that building and whichever firefighter turned up would bill that fire protection company who'd then bill the customer/customer's insurance company.
Edit: typo, damn these supposedly opposable thumbs!
I think you meant fire maRkers
Interesting. I had heard privateers were the inventors of insurance. Perhaps what I read was inventors of health insurance.
There was a Roman who was rich because of private fire fighters, Crassus. Being the richest person in Rome's history, it will no doubt come as a shock when history shows he was instrumental in turning the Republic into the Roman Empire.
The cycle continues. Democracy will die because the rich hoard the power and money speaks loudest when it is accepted speech.
I've never seen one in the US, and upon further research, they don't really exist.
All that being said, if you're rich, you're more likely to have a firebreak created for you by landscapers. The city also creates firebreaks surrounding neighborhoods like the palisades.
There are private fire departments. They are owned by companies that own industrial facilities with high fire risk, that need immediate response, such as oil refineries, chemical plants, and and factories.
But you're right that there aren't private fire companies to serve anyone on demand. There are no manned fire trucks in LA waiting for a high enough bidder to respond to the fire.
That's fire insurance, but yeah, pretty much the same thing. I have my cert in personal lines. We provided that everywhere but where it was needed. FEMA would step in. We have a risk pool. If the number of claims/ emergencies outweighs the risk pool, there's nothing we can do. There's no money, no resources, and no people.
My family owns a ranch in SoCal. Don't even start man lmao
There are private firefighting companies, and in this fire any efforts they could add would have been welcomed, since the strong winds prevented nighttime air assault. But unless they had water-tank vehicles they would have been subject to the same problem of hydrants running dry from insufficient supply. Their best bet would be to pump from swimming pools. The multiple real Fire Departments would have been fine with being able to send their personnel elsewhere. I say "would have" because I just don't know if any were working there. I wouldn't be surprised if they were, though.
They absolutely do exist
They are. The ones I know mostly contract with states or federal governments to do wildland fire fighting but I've read about private firefighters operating in neighborhoods in California a few years ago.
Montana's new senator (Sheehy) made his money with a private aerial firefighting company.
I suppose oil well firefighters like Red Adair and similar specialized companies could be counted as private firefighters.
Private emergency services are always a thing, which is why defunding emergency services is always a bad idea -yes, even cops - because the people in charge can usually pay for their own. They don't GAF when you're no longer safe, because they can be.
defunding**