• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Don't Crash In Petaluma

Daks said:
For me it's more about just watching a house burn and not offering any alternative than the tax itself.

Not exactly the moral time or place to teach a lesson.

They could bill them the full cost of everything for the duration of the emergency. Water, labor, gas, etc.
So many more alternatives that are likely more profitable than leaving someone homeless and destitute.
Click to expand...

So if their wallet is in the house then they are out of luck? And what if they pay for everything and they still can't save the house? Now they're homeless and still owe like 10 grand for the firemen? Doesn't make much sense.

No sorry, this isn't the same. Giving them the chance to pay after the fact is like you getting into a car accident and then being offered the chance to buy insurance. They know when they have the chance to pay for the service what will happen when their house catches fire. If you're gonna turn down the service you better have a water tank and a fire hose.

The petaluma thing is totally dfferent.
 
Why is it that everyone here feels entitled to free service when they haven't actually done anything to support those services in the first place?

Especially those who have moved out of state because they don't like the business or political climate of California.
 
I guess we'd like to think that what we pay to support the emergency services in our town that ends up getting spent on visitors evens out with what other towns spend on services for us.

We get about 16 million visitors a year in SF, not to mention commuters from neighboring counties. One could argue that the money they spend here makes it worthwhile to provide public safety infrastructure sufficient (ish) to cover that nonresident population. Or we could just start charging anyone from Petaluma who has a crash here but then, really, only private billing firms win.
 
boney said:
Why is it that everyone here feels entitled to free service when they haven't actually done anything to support those services in the first place?
Click to expand...

Federal taxes, state taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, mandatory insurance, etc. If I can quit paying taxes, of ALL kinds, I promise not to ask for any 'free' services. :party
 
nbean16 said:
So if their wallet is in the house then they are out of luck? And what if they pay for everything and they still can't save the house? Now they're homeless and still owe like 10 grand for the firemen? Doesn't make much sense.

No sorry, this isn't the same. Giving them the chance to pay after the fact is like you getting into a car accident and then being offered the chance to buy insurance. They know when they have the chance to pay for the service what will happen when their house catches fire. If you're gonna turn down the service you better have a water tank and a fire hose.

The petaluma thing is totally dfferent.
Click to expand...
At the post you quoted's point, it wasn't about the Petaluma thing at all. The situation initially reminded me of it. They certainly aren't the same aside from emergency services requiring some form of extra payment to cover people not paying taxes in that area.


Me? I think it's kind of silly that the highest paid public employees of most of the states in America are sports coaches but people need to pay extra if they crash in the wrong town. I'm all for paying my dues but I don't always like where those dues go.
 
Stormdragon said:
Federal taxes, state taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, mandatory insurance, etc. If I can quit paying taxes, of ALL kinds, I promise not to ask for any 'free' services. :party
Click to expand...

66% of Petaluma's tax revenue comes from within the city limits. Maybe they're only charging you 33% of the cost of coming out to save you.
 
boney said:
66% of Petaluma's tax revenue comes from within the city limits. Maybe they're only charging you 33% of the cost of coming out to save you.
Click to expand...

I really don't care where their revenue comes from. Maybe they're just lousy at getting federal funds. Maybe they waste money like the state office my buddy works at does. I DO care where my revenue goes though. Nickle and dimeing the average citizen got tired twenty years ago.
 
EjGlows said:
Exactly why many of us preach U/UI insurance. As much as you can get.:thumbup
Click to expand...

Does U/UI cover medical or property or both in California. Many states allow the insurance company to not cover either property or medical under U/UI.
 
Daks said:
At the post you quoted's point, it wasn't about the Petaluma thing at all. The situation initially reminded me of it. They certainly aren't the same aside from emergency services requiring some form of extra payment to cover people not paying taxes in that area.


Me? I think it's kind of silly that the highest paid public employees of most of the states in America are sports coaches but people need to pay extra if they crash in the wrong town. I'm all for paying my dues but I don't always like where those dues go.
Click to expand...

Dont get me wrong, the petaluma thing is bs.
 
boney said:
That sounds a lot like San Francisco to me.
Click to expand...

Deucer said:
Sunday meter enforcement really flipped the switch for me in SF. I recently bout a place in the city and I was considering units without parking. Thank Jeebus I found a place that has deeded parking. I would be so screwed without a garage.
Click to expand...

I got dinged for that. I had no idea they started this Sunday crap. But I still checked the meters of 5 cars on the street with me and all were expired so I figured all was good and didn't feed the meter. I went to have a nice anniversary dinner with my girl only to come out and find a ticket on the window of her car. The freakin' ticket was $72!!!! Damn near the same cost of our freaking meal!! No notices anywhere (like a sign or sticker on the meters) that Sunday meters were now being enforced to those of us that don't listen to the main stream attention hound news.

I already disliked going to SF and only did so for special occasions after some other B.S. from that city. Prior to that I was bringing in $100-500/wk of revenue to their businesses but this parking ticket was the final straw for me. I will no longer go into S.F. for any reason.

Hell, I used to stop at a couple of restaurants in Petaluma, but apparently that has to stop now as well.

Stormdragon said:
I really don't care where their revenue comes from. Maybe they're just lousy at getting federal funds. Maybe they waste money like the state office my buddy works at does. I DO care where my revenue goes though. Nickle and dimeing the average citizen got tired twenty years ago.
Click to expand...

Yup, it's the nickel and diming people to death that's getting seriously old. Since 2003 I've owned a small and struggling business. Every year I would manage to increase the revenue and every year some new "tax" would managed to be almost 100% of the revenue increase. Finally after 5 years of poverty level wages with no salary increase I had to look for full time employment.
 
Last edited:
The article states that the intent of the [stupid] policy is to collect money from people who don't pay property taxes in Petaluma yet use emergency services. Any chance they're really sticking it to Petaluma renters? I bet not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top