Socialist Fire Prevention & Stupid Freaking People

I just noticed that several of my left-leaning friends from Law School have joined a group that mocks the conservative complaints against Obamacare by complaining that our fire departments are supported by tax payer money and that they are essentially socialized. I appreciate good parody and, as far as it goes, this is adequately funny. Nevertheless, for the sake of argument (like I need a reason to argue), let me explain a few things that seem to escape the lefties in America.

1. Unlike the new Obamacare and future socialized medicine, fire departments are not run from a federal level. They are supported and funded by local or state governments. This is extremely important because one of the biggest complaints that constitutional conservatives like myself have is that there is absolutely no constitutional basis for much of what is in the health care bill. For example, the individual mandate to purchase health insurance. If a state wants to socialize medicine, let them. I may argue against it for public policy reasons, but if I really don't like it, I can leave that state and move to a different one without a similar health care scheme. Fire departments are somewhat socialist in that everyone pays regardless of how often they use it, but they are NOT federal.

2. Fire departments are emergency responders. Note that fire insurance is not socialized. Thus, while the fire department may arrive to help put your home fire out (thus saving all neighboring homes from being burned down), the fire department will NOT replace your house, pay you your damages, or provide future assurances that this does not happen again. Medicine is not like that at all. If people want to socialize ambulance services for life endangerment, we can discuss that, but we are talking about all illnesses and injuries being covered by an insurance scheme, whether there is an emergency or not. The argument for "socializing" fire departments is that in the case of a fire, there is no time to call private fire departments and get an estimate. If a home is on fire, the fire department will respond for the safety and protection of the community and neighborhood. The person whose home burns down still has to replace their own home and suffer the losses, even if the fault for the fire was not their own.

3. Medicine is not a public good. Die-hard libertarians (which I am quickly becoming) would argue that there are almost no public goods, not even roads or police services. I have no problem with some public goods, particularly police and fire.

Fire insurance is still a private good. When I buy a home, I purchase fire insurance. This is to protect myself as well as the mortgage holder from loss in case of a fire. If I have a bigger home or live in a more dangerous area for fire (SoCal as compared to Minnesota), I will pay MORE for insurance. We do not make those who live in more safe areas pay more to subsidize those who live in more dangerous areas.

But emergency fire response is not a private, individual good, but one of public necessity. The fire department is there so that, if there is a fire, the fire can be contained and prevented from spreading. The fire departments always start by preventing the fire from spreading and then focus on putting the burning building out. Like with the police, the fire department is not a personal services organization preventing me from paying more. Their job is to protect me from others (whether the other be a criminal or a neighbor's burning house). With medical care, however, my neighbor's heart attack poses no direct threat to my safety and liberty. Now, I can choose to help them out for moral, ethical, or civil reasons, but with a lack of threat to others, it is not justified to legally force others to pay the medical bill. Every time a police officer arrests a criminal or stops my neighbor's house from burning, I am protected and thus can pay for it through taxes.

If people want socialized health care, they should argue that it is better. Don't (vainly) attempt to belittle those who call it socialized health care with horrible analogies. Many, if not most Democrats today are socialists. I don't mean that as an insult. They believe that much in our society is unfair and that the government ought to use its force of law to make life more fair for everyone. If you believe that, fine. You can argue whatever you want, but if I don't want that and would prefer the government to allow me to harm myself and act foolishly, should I so choose, I will argue that as well. We can then allow the people to vote on which they would prefer.