- cross-posted to:
- 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- cross-posted to:
- 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
cross-posted from: https://kbin.earth/m/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone/t/818591
town that always catches on fire rule
You must log in or register to comment.
Its technically funding when you get prisoners to fight the fires.
What’s funny is that the NAZIs also prioritized the police over their fire departments hierarchically. Of course they did that so that when synagogues were burned down the cops could stop the fire departments from putting out the fire.
This is a whole new level of NAZI.
And the OP post is another form of propaganda and misinformation. The fires started in LA county a place the mayor has no control over. They have since then moved into the city of LA. Also, the LA fire department had a surplus of 20 million, so they took 17 million of that surplus and put it elsewhere. It wasn’t dedunded at all.
The police force did get an increase in funding and that should be discussed. They are basically a gang and didn’t need that extra funding and should be defunded but the fire department didn’t get funding pulled.
This is absolutely syncing right up with MAGA misinformation. I heard today that the 17 million was for a special purchase in the previous budget and wasn’t part of the regular fire department budget. Also, the racists and sexists are decrying DEI, apparently because the chief is a woman. Police funding and what it supports is a separate issue, as you point out.
Retired firefighter/paramedic here. It’s simple: Fire departments don’t normally generate revenue. It’s a money-sink and local governments don’t like that. The first things financially cut when I worked for a city of 170,000 were always services that didn’t make money. That’s just how it works.
Why police departments need heavy armor and assault accoutrements is beyond me, though. I mean, all that shit didn’t help whatsoever in most mass-shootings.
Yes, And?
Of course it’s a sink. With that reasoning, taxes are sinks for citizens. The entire oiintis that you get something back for it .
They need to understand it’s a service, not a business. Sure, a fire department doesn’t make money but, neither does a city that burns to the ground.
As a society, we have simply got to get past the notion that everything that exists needs to be monetized to be deemed worthy of existence.
They don’t think that way. “It does not generate revenue, therefore it cannot be allowed to exist.” This philosophy is so deeply ingrained into the American psyche that it is inescapable.
Story time: American colleague and Canadian colleague are talking. Canadian says that university costs only 5000 CAD in tuition. American nearly falls out of his chair and yells, “BUT HOW DO THEY MAKE MONEY??”
And bear in mind that he was one of the most educated and successful people I have ever met, and yet he found it so difficult to fathom that a university could exist without making money. Now with that in mind, imagine convincing a large group of average people to fund public services.
This is why the USA is the way that it is.
You don’t even need to go that far. From a financial perspective, a fire department is a hedge bet against fire. It doesn’t exist to generate revenue, but it limit losses.
Not unlike fire insurance, except insurance only protects against the validation of property while a fire fighting team protects the real assets.
The government isn’t a business, for fuck’s sake! Some services like police, fire, health are necessary, but don’t generate revenue! Also, even the most profitable corporations on the planet still have IT, Management, and HR departments that don’t technically make money.
It’s a money-sink and local governments don’t like that. The first things financially cut when I worked for a city of 170,000 were always services that didn’t make money. That’s just how it works.
The whole point of government is to collect taxes to pay for stuff that isn’t revenue generating to spread out the costs!
Seriously, this. Government is supposed to fund services, not profitable businesses
But that’s socialism, noooooo \s
I saw Rebel Ridge on Netflix, could very well be that police departments generate revenue through Civil Forfeiture.
(It’s a fictional thriller, not a documentary, but very much based on modern realities)
Molly’s Game also includes Civil Forfeiture. I wouldn’t call it a major part of the plot, but it’s definitely there and described as bullshit.
Did somebody say John Oliver story that enrages me how fucked up America is as a country?
Tickets. Police departments have quotas because that’s their main revenue source, civil forfeiture is just the icing on the cake.
When the hills of Los Angeles are burning…
Is this true? Lots of disinformation flying around about the fire dept in LA. I haven’t gotten around to fact checking for myself.
The immediate narrative of “they cut the budget” is not quite true. The budget was done while the city was negotiating with the main union, so they didn’t have exact numbers for additional wages and benefits, and the normal process is to leave them off entirely until the contract is done. That showed cuts on paper. They then finished the deal and ended up with a 6.5% total increase.
HOWEVER, the broader point is that while the LAPD budget is being augmented to bring on hundreds of new officers and hire civilian support positions, the Fire department’s budget is stagnating, and the budget specifically eliminated 79 civilian support positions and lowered the overtime budget for firefighters. The chief pointed out it’s about the same size as it was 50 years ago. So, she basically took the media moment to get some attention on the need for more resources, and it turned out she was very right.
The overal LAFD budget after the restored funds is around $895M. For comparison, the police budget got a 7.5% increase in city funding, and its ~$2B city budget is augmented by state and federal funds for about another ~$1.2B. I’m sure the fire department gets something, particularly when a massive emergency actually happens, but I couldn’t find any readily available numbers for any ongoing support from state or federal.
And just for “funsies,” when Fox News reported on the FD cuts, they compared not to police, but to the city “spending millions on the homeless,” which while true, also reflected a full 26% cut from $250M to $185M. Never change, Fox News. /s
I’ve heard the fire dept bill was passed separately, so if you just look at the normal spending bill, it will look like a cut.
Like if you upgrade to a new computer, observe that your old computer is gone, and conclude that you don’t have a computer and liberals must have stolen it, and get off my lawn while you’re at it
Ignore the other guy. It’s true. The fire chief pointed out several infrastructure deficiencies, meanwhile the Mayor cut the fire budget by over $17 million and raised the police budget.
Yep, see -
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-wildfires-los-angeles-fire-chief-budget-cuts/ (archived at https://archive.is/a4IxG)
https://theintercept.com/2025/01/08/la-police-budget-palisades-fires/ (archived at https://archive.is/a4IxG)
e; also, this -
… the budget picture is far from rosy. Chief Kristin M. Crowley of the Los Angeles Fire Department wrote a memo to the fire commission last month saying the overtime cut was creating “unprecedented operational challenges” — both in fulfilling everyday tasks like payroll processing and long-term planning for major emergencies like big wildfires or earthquakes.
She wrote that specialized programs, including air operations and disaster response, relied on staff working overtime hours and were at risk of becoming less effective. She added that the loss of civilian positions was also squeezing firefighters who had to backfill some of those responsibilities.
In November, Chief Crowley wrote a separate memo to the commission focusing on the bigger picture: a fire department that has not changed much in size since the 1960s despite the city’s population surging by more than a million people since then.
She wrote that the call volume rose by a factor of five between 1969 and 2023, but that the department had not been given the staffing and new fire stations it needs to respond effectively, and that response times were steadily increasing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/09/us/la-fire-department-budget-bass.html (archived at https://archive.is/xBCxj)
People are using the same NYT article to support both sides of this argument.
I’m not an NYT subscriber. What’s the deal here?
When the two sides did reach an agreement in November, that money was moved over to the fire department’s pot, according to Mr. Blumenfield’s office, meaning this year’s fire budget is actually $53 million more than last year.
Weird way to cut a budget
How long was it before the budget got reallocated? And how much had this been going on before?
It sounds like a big part of the issue is that they haven’t been able to do mitigation - controlled burns, etc. If the budget has been slashed for a long time, suddenly dumping some cash in later is going to have a limited effect.
The budget was increased by 53 million.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/09/us/la-fire-department-budget-bass.html
deleted by creator
No. Even if it was, this isn’t a thing you can beat by throwing bodies or money at. It was just too fast.
The argument I would allow is if that money had been spent by the world over the last 40 years to prevent climate change.
Fire mitigation is the issue, reducing its potential effects before it occurs since preventing it entirely is basically impossible. Without the budget, that stuff doesn’t happen, and that’s what leads to faster-spreading wildfires.
Good thing they had the budget
I see potential for a self fulfilling prophecy here:
Instead of putting funding into things that keep people from revolting put it in prepping “law” enforcement for they day they inevitably will.
(Autocorrect suggested flaw instead of law. Kinda works too, doesn’t it?)
“Flaw enforcement.”
I’m going to use that in a sentence.
I can’t imagine defund the fire brigade being a popular slogan with anyone really.
They don’t campaign on that, they campaign on “keeping taxes low” or bullshit like that
One time, I was on a car trip with a friend and we passed a yard sign advocating funding (or maybe supporting? It was a long time ago) the fire department. I said “who doesn’t support the fire department?” and she responded “I don’t know … Arsonists?”
So yeah, arsonists might want to see the fire department defunded.
Because it wasn’t defunded you fell for bullshit.
maybe with arsonists?
I’m always curious about post like these. Are you suggesting that the firefighters failed here? That if there are more firefighters this fire wouldn’t have happened? What would more firefighters have done? Could they block the high winds? Are they able to Make It Rain more?
more firefighters means more area of coverage.
it’s not their fault, the opposite actually.
it’s the ineptitude of the administration that failed to account for real risks to the lives and success of the citizens they were elected to protect.
they failed at their duty to identify an annually occurring symptom of a globally changing environment as high risk and instead opted to support a violent regime that continues to attack the citizens they, again, we’re elected to protect.
Lmao so much nonsense over $17 mil. Isn’t the LAFDs budget close to $1,000,000,000? California alone has more invested in forest fire firefighting than most countries. Here is some numbers provided by the state, https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/01/08/california-forest-management-hotter-drier-climate/
Based on what I’m reading another $1.5 billion has been added to the firefighting budget.
A mayors office is not suited to perform firefighting. They play a very small role. Nonsense.
So exactly what you’re saying then. There’s a specific number of firefighters if employed this fire would not have happened. What’s that number? How would they have specifically stop this fire? The current firefighters failed because there wasn’t enough of them? Right? That’s what you’re getting it.
Good god, this is the most blatant sea-lioning I’ve seen in ages!
Uh, maybe they could have called in another of our own fire fighting planes instead of of relying on Canada for an extra one? Better training, better contingency plans, installation of fire breaks, more input into city infrastructure like fire water ponds here and there to supply water? What the hell are you trying to get at when there are numerous things they could have done with more funding both in the past and at this very moment?
What training stops this fire? What amount of fire department budget allows them to redo all the zoning in the wealthy part of Los Angeles? Really I find that maybe the most absurd part of your comment. Yeah I’m sure they’ll have real sway over the nimbys. You think this budget cut is the reason they don’t have an entire another plane and the crew to run it? And one single plane would have been the difference?
What I’m getting at is this is all fucking nonsense. No a 17 million cut to the firefighter budget is not why this fire happened. This is climate change. This is dryer windier conditions leading to fire. It doesn’t take $17 million dollars to fix that. It takes massive societal change. You people are always looking for quick easy answers to everything and it’s just absurd.
well does police being founded stop a crime from happening? does haveing a car mechanic around prevent your car from breaking down? its the same with firefighters. they do prevent these events to an extend. regular car check ups keep the engine going, police presents keeps areas safer and firefighters overviewing critical situations helps detect and extinguis fires early.
But all of those jobs have also a reactionary nature. sure its best to never need fire fighters, but you cant undercut it. because founding them after the fire is too late. Cutting their budget shows low insight and thats what the post makes fun of.
Since when does police being funded stop crime from happening? That’s what your entire argument hinges on?
well id suggest you read it again if that was your only take from the comment. also does, or does not, police reduce crime at a big festival, or at a demonstration or any other gathering of people? Do police regulating traffic reduce traffic accidents by enforcing traffic laws?
Ever heard of gang ruled areas? those can exist because of underfounded police. id say those have higher crime than police controlled cities.
Also again, not at all the essense of my comment, but rather a supporting point.
No, I reject your entire premise. If you want to sit here and tell me throwing money at cops prevents crime you’re going to have to prove it. Cuz the entire history of this nation rather begs to differ.
I hate when people are intentionally obtuse. More money is more possibilities for action in our capitalistic society. I’m only listing examples, and I’m not going to plan out and budget LA’s firefighting response for you in a Lemmy comment. The whole point is that when you take someone’s money away, they have less opportunity to do things. Which translates to more widespread losses due to fire–and that’s all there is to it. Can’t believe I have to explain that to you.
No, you’re not going to list LA firefighting measures because there are none that can stop this. Forest fires happen, it’s not the fire department’s fault that they happen. No amount of firefighters makes it not dry and windy. Trying to blame the firefighters for this is fucking absurd. They didn’t fail here Society failed here.
Anything to avoid blaming the people that actually cause the problem.
“Funding agencies doesn’t make them more effective.”
Whatever you want to believe, man. Also, who’s blaming firefighters? When did we start talking about firefighters instead of agency funding?
Their budget is over 800 million dollars. You don’t think they’re funded? That 2% was enough to Cripple them? If that 2% was enough to stop forest fires how come they were forest fires last year when they had it?
As for who’s blaming firefighters. You are. This post is. That’s the whole point of these talking points. To blame firefighters and the LA fire department for this forest fire. Because if fire fighters are the problem then big polluters aren’t. Did you not get that? You’re saying that the current firefighters failed and only more firefighters would have stopped it. Which is a Bonkers mindset but that’s the logic you’re promoting here.
Maybe buy better and efficient equipments to fight fire, training on those equipments. Instead of tanks for the police.
What equipment would have stopped this fire? This fire was caused because the firefighters didn’t have proper equipment?
Stopping the fire is not the main goal. Preventing the fire to spread more is. Fire will go out by itself if you deny it fuel.
Controlled burns were defunded at federal and local levels.
Funnily, thats the exact plot of the Show im currently watching
Makes sense if the writers live in LA and they have to live with this situation
Even more funnily it’s bullshit. People lie on the Internet
What is your deal?
Increasingly sick of people amplifying bullshit mostly
okay but can you see what it looks like to us? like do you think by spamming the same comments up and down the thread and then never engaging in a meaningful way you can somehow out amplify that bullshit with your own bullshit?
Truth ain’t bullshit and thee bullshitters don’t stop unless they’re told.
okay, but do you see? how do you think you are coming off here?
Turns out the firefighters where actually starting the previous fires to legitimize their need for a higher budget.
Good job Mayor!
At least the police can be trusted to follow the laws they enforce. The chief promised this himself.
