FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
The FDNY recently announced a plan, to be instituted next summer, in which drivers involved in auto accidents and car fires will be charged for the necessity of an emergency response. Under the new plan, drivers will be charged on a spectrum as to the severity of the necessary response. For example, those who don’t require medical attention will be charged less; those with car fires will be charged more.
Although the city is undoubtedly looking to cut costs, the “crash tax” as it’s being called should also come as a relief to NYC taxpayers, who generally bear the cost of auto accidents. According to the FDNY, the plan affords an end to the financial burden that is nowadays carried by the taxpayer by directly billing those involved in the accident.
Predictably, some NYC residents expressed their none-too-happy sentiments over the new policy of direct billing, but it seems to me that this is definitely a step in the right direction. The FDNY is taking measures to reduce the city’s debt and to take pressure off of its taxpayers.
- Comment (19)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Libertarianism comes to NYC!
Most people in Manhattan don't own cars. So why should they subsidize the mishaps of those who do?
May '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
If NYC is like Illinois with compulsory insurance laws, wouldn't that be covered by the insurance?
Nov '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Swell. So, let's say an illegal alien crashes into someone... then what happens?
Nov '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
I'm not sure how this places NYC on the right track. Seems the city would have more effective means to balance their budget. They could close the rubber rooms where they house suspended teachers who should be fired. They could manage the existing police force more effectively - cop:citizen ratio seems very high compared to other U.S. cities. Seems to me that this charge would be a deterrent to reporting issues and if so it stands to create a larger issue.
May '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
I'm sure every cent of the money saved will be returned to taxpayers.
Jul '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
First, the newly hired "libertarian" public union member in charge of assessing the bill makes his analysis.
Then, the newly hired government bureaucrat in charge of sending the bill, sends it.
Next, the new addition to the collections/outstanding claims department follows up on it.
Then...
Jul '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Palaeologus
First, the newly hired "libertarian" public union member in charge of assessing the bill makes his analysis.
Then, the newly hired government bureaucrat in charge of sending the bill, sends it.
Next, the new addition to the collections/outstanding claims department follows up on it.
Then... · Dec 12 at 6:13pm
Then Frank Rich writes a column blasting the city for its heartlessness towards the one-legged lesbian minority mother of seven whose Escalade burst into flames while she was on her way to a conference with her welfare caseworker.
Jul '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
What a ground breaking concept. Pay for what You get.
I wonder if perhaps they could try this idea for healthcare.... housing..... food....?
Edited on Dec 12, 2010 at 6:29pmRe: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Were this so, why wouldn't there be competing services? The government charges any price it wants? Why couldn't I instruct OnStar to call Jimmy's Emergency Service to handle my transportation to hospital rather than FDNY?
It's not libertarian when the government keeps a monopoly. I think FDNY may have opened a can of worms.
Oct '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Just let us know when you see any reduction in your ransom payment to NYC.
Nov '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
I'm all for Pay to Play when it comes to things like state parks and museums. Not so much the emergency services. It's nuts. Of course, NYC is free to do what she likes...
Dec '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
My town, Sacramento, was going to do something similar but for non-residents.
What bugs me is that the only real cost to the city is gas for the police or firemen to travel. Oh, and maybe some retardant or such. It's not like we aren't already paying for these guys to sit on their butts or sleep the night away at a high rate of pay.
This is sickening. We ought to be firing police and firemen.
Aug '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
You said the magic word. This sounds like the sort of thing that cries out for insurance. After all, there's no fundamental difference among the expense of having to repair your car, the cost of medical care, and the cost of the police or fire services.
Nov '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
With its nation-leading murder rate and barren tax coffers, I read St. Louis was going to do something similar--charge murder victims for the cost of the autopsy.
Jun '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Great points raised. But I am disturbed by this: "It's not like we aren't already paying for these guys to sit on their butts or sleep the night away at a high rate of pay."
Perhaps the police force could be utilized more effectively, but cops have incredibly dangerous jobs. Firemen sleeping? Remember 9/11? Allowing sleep time if no calls come in actually enables more efficient and cost effective staffing of fire houses.
Nov '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
I agree with Sticker Shock. If someday they put on display all of the examples of reckless, out of control, big government, I doubt anyone would agree the fire department should be included. There is no doubt that the average firehouse could be run more efficiently, that is simply true of any enterprise. I for one am happy to pay for the emergency services, even though I don't regularly use them. Actually I do, come to think about it. The ambulance has been called to my house twice in the last year. But forget that.
Jul '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Well, we warned you to practice your juggling act with rubber balls before moving right to chainsaws! :)
May '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Wait a minute. Isn't "responding to emergencies" the very reason we have fire departments? It wasn't always so.
Originally, fire companies were owned by insurance companies and they put out fires for their customers. But soon cities realized that fire protection was something that ought to be socialized.
So, now that it's socialized, they want us to pay double?
Aug '10
Re: FDNY Institutes "Crash Tax"
Insuring against such random stuff is just as heartwarming as trying to punish it. It's as if they would try to somehow increase the pressure or stress by gauging just how much damage you did to your property. Think a ticket for having your house burn down will be more in Arizona ( hot ) or Alaska ( cold ) ?
Edited on Dec 13, 2010 at 6:17pm