If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KHOU Houston)   Texas city plans to start automatically charging people who are in car accidents a 'crash tax' to cover the cost of first-responders at the scene. "Don't we pay them to do that already?"   (khou.com) divider line 81
    More: Asinine, Texas  
•       •       •

4002 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Feb 2013 at 8:26 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



81 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-19 06:58:42 AM
If the state and the cities really want to make a lot of money, they should slap a "Stupid Tax" on politicians. The State's coffers would look like Scrooge McDuck's money vault.
 
2013-02-19 08:09:08 AM
Calling it an "accident tax" is what's stupid. It's really more of an "accident fine" that's slapped on the idiot who caused the accident in the first place. Which should happen anyway, and what's stupid about it now is that it doesn't. You cause an accident because you're irresponsible, non-attentive, or just a plain bad driver, you should face penalties that go beyond civil suits and angry insurance companies. You do it again, you should lose your license for good.
 
2013-02-19 08:29:41 AM
Sander said the bills will be sent directly to insurance companies, and he doesn't want drivers to be worried.

Good luck with all that, Sander. They'll probably just refuse to sell insurance to people in your town now.
 
2013-02-19 08:31:12 AM
The "crash tax" sounds like an accident waiting to happen.
 
2013-02-19 08:31:45 AM
This is why conservatives will not ever trust programs from the federal government, because local governments are so damned screwy or corrupt that it translates to ALL government.

/People may claim to like their good-old-boy county government, but they love in fear of its idiocy.
 
2013-02-19 08:32:26 AM
Derp in the heart of Texas.
 
2013-02-19 08:33:00 AM
This has been going on for a long time in other cities. It is particularly hard on people who get a bill from the city for recovering the remains of a relative from a wreck (often sent to the dead person). It's generally thanks to politicians who cut EMS budgets in favor of other programs then point out that EMS needs more money.
 
GBB
2013-02-19 08:33:32 AM
If they are charging this "tax" because they can't afford to pay their first responders.  Then they need to cut back on their first responders.  Document all this in the budget and when it comes time to vote for an increase in property or sales taxes to pay for first responders, bust out the stats.  If your citizenry doesn't want to pay for first responders, don't give them first responders.  It's the will of the people.
 
2013-02-19 08:34:00 AM
You get charged if you have to be transported in the ambulance, why shouldn't you be charged for the Jaws of Life crew to get you out? Non-residents especially?
 
2013-02-19 08:34:06 AM

Deep Contact: The "crash tax" sounds like an accident waiting to happen.


Wait til some state politician gets drunk and wraps his pickup truck around a telephone pole and realizes the cost...
 
2013-02-19 08:34:15 AM
This shiat is going too far.

I swear, it's like we get pleasure out of kicking someone while they're down in this country. It keeps getting worse and worse.
 
2013-02-19 08:34:16 AM
They already do that around here. But instead of calling it a tax they give both drivers, no matter who was at fault, a ticket for the accident and a ticket for driving to fast for conditions, no matter what the conditions were. I had a friend who got rear ended while he was stopped and waiting to make a left turn and he got a ticket for the accident and a ticket for driving to fast for conditions.
 
GBB
2013-02-19 08:34:59 AM

drhansenej: Derp in the heart herp of Texas.

 
2013-02-19 08:35:17 AM

BigSlowTarget: (often sent to the dead person


I mean via the insurance company of course. You can damn well bet that bill is going to get forwarded so you see it.
 
2013-02-19 08:36:04 AM
We pay them whether they have to show up at at a crash or not, charging more is nonsense.  Before you disagree, fire them all and only pay them when they are needed, no need to keep them on standby 24/7.
 
2013-02-19 08:36:15 AM
(If you drive a car ), I'll tax the street,
(If you try to sit ), I'll tax your seat,
(If you get too cold ), I'll tax the heat,
(If you take a walk ), I'll tax your feet.
Taxman.

Don't ask me what I want it for
If you don't want to pay some more...
 
GBB
2013-02-19 08:36:41 AM

doczoidberg: This shiat is going too far.

I swear, it's like we get pleasure out of kicking someone while they're down in this country. It keeps getting worse and worse.


Well, it is the best time to kick someone.   And steal their wallet and shoes.
 
2013-02-19 08:37:27 AM

Pocket Ninja: Calling it an "accident tax" is what's stupid. It's really more of an "accident fine" that's slapped on the idiot who caused the accident in the first place. Which should happen anyway, and what's stupid about it now is that it doesn't. You cause an accident because you're irresponsible, non-attentive, or just a plain bad driver, you should face penalties that go beyond civil suits and angry insurance companies. You do it again, you should lose your license for good.


but the insurance companies don't get angry, they get raise your ratey. i had one minor fender bender and one occasion to have to call the insurance company when a tree (from someones else's property) caused damage to our home. the fender bender saw my rates raised for 3 years. the tree incident response was for the insurance carrier to raise our rates, and to raise the house damage deductible to $20K. it seems to me they never lose a dime, they crank up the rates to make back every cent they pay out. i think the only time insurance is a blessing is when one screws up big time, for hundreds of thousands of dollars, and Premium Boy writes out those checks.
in NJ we have no-fault auto insurance. so everyone involved gets screwed regardless of whether they were the ding-a-ling or not.
 
2013-02-19 08:38:48 AM
Note to self: Have wreck in Sugar Land, not Missouri City.
 
2013-02-19 08:38:49 AM

Pocket Ninja: You cause an accident because you're irresponsible, non-attentive, or just a plain bad driver, you should face penalties that go beyond civil suits and angry insurance companies. You do it again, you should lose your license for good.


You do understand auto insurance premiums but you don't seem to, dumbass.
 
2013-02-19 08:39:33 AM
What's next, charging people for their police interogations?
cineleet.com
 
2013-02-19 08:40:34 AM
Dallas already does this, I rear ended someone around thanksgiving and they sent me a bill for the fire truck around $600. Gave it to the insurance company...but seriously what the hell are we paying taxes for. Also, if you get into an accident in Texas you get a ticket for "failure to control your vehicle".
 
2013-02-19 08:41:56 AM
I'm a 911 dispatcher in a fairly rural area, and we operate on the "when in doubt, send them out" principle.  I can't imagine how people would freak out if they thought they were getting charged for a response to a minor/no injury accident.  Of course, around here if your elderly/obese relative falls and is uninjured, we'll still send EMS (and sometimes fire) to help you get them back to bed or their chair.

For no fee.
 
2013-02-19 08:44:28 AM
But Texas has low state income tax!  See?  It is a utopia!  Oh wiat, they have a high rate of 'fines' and 'fees' and 'value added' to nearly every state service and this is another example of that?  Oh my, it seems that works out quite well for the wealthy who don't even notice, considering they are saving big $$$ on income tax while clobbering the poor schlub who gets into an accident while rushing to his second job.  That is working out well, go Texas!  And fark you guys who are complaining, you sound poor.  Go go Texas!
 
2013-02-19 08:46:55 AM
Isn't somebody usually ticketed during an accident anyway?
 
2013-02-19 08:48:11 AM

Pocket Ninja: Calling it an "accident tax" is what's stupid. It's really more of an "accident fine" that's slapped on the idiot who caused the accident in the first place. Which should happen anyway, and what's stupid about it now is that it doesn't. You cause an accident because you're irresponsible, non-attentive, or just a plain bad driver, you should face penalties that go beyond civil suits and angry insurance companies. You do it again, you should lose your license for good.


Not bad, not bad.
 
2013-02-19 08:48:22 AM

doczoidberg: This shiat is going too far.

I swear, it's like we get pleasure out of kicking someone while they're down in this country. It keeps getting worse and worse.



Exactly.  We already pay plenty of taxes for this "pleasure" and adding to it is bullsh*t.

Also, after disasters like Hurrican Katrina and Hurricane Sandy, everybody's always asking for donations, but we've already paid taxes for the government to "manage" crises such as these and it is evident they can't do that either.
 
2013-02-19 08:50:41 AM

ongbok: They already do that around here. But instead of calling it a tax they give both drivers, no matter who was at fault, a ticket for the accident and a ticket for driving to fast for conditions, no matter what the conditions were. I had a friend who got rear ended while he was stopped and waiting to make a left turn and he got a ticket for the accident and a ticket for driving to fast for conditions.


I hope your friend contacted the local papers / news.  They usually love reporting on stupid stuff like that from the in-town government.
 
2013-02-19 08:50:46 AM
Better get used to more and more of these sorts of "taxes," people.

It's not the government being corrupt, it's the governments being squeezed so hard with their revenues that they have no choice but to start nickle and diming people in order to keep their books.

When all the populace does is try to cut taxes no matter the cost, what happens when there isn't enough taxation to run the government?
 
2013-02-19 08:52:11 AM
Why stop there?  How about a rubbing necking tax.  A curious bystander tax.  At to the bystander an "OMG" tax for everytime one of them says "OMG".  A fartiing tax would be nice too.  The tax will be assesed on a sliding scale that is based on the results of a Stink Meter and Decibal reader.  What the heck, we could go on forever.
 
2013-02-19 08:52:59 AM
Probably has something to do with illegals not carrying insurance on their cars.

/DNRTFA
 
2013-02-19 08:58:01 AM

kyrana: I'm a 911 dispatcher in a fairly rural area, and we operate on the "when in doubt, send them out" principle.  I can't imagine how people would freak out if they thought they were getting charged for a response to a minor/no injury accident.  Of course, around here if your elderly/obese relative falls and is uninjured, we'll still send EMS (and sometimes fire) to help you get them back to bed or their chair.

For no fee.

...yet

Just wait until your local budget gets tight
 
2013-02-19 09:01:51 AM

5Nickels: We pay them whether they have to show up at at a crash or not, charging more is nonsense.  Before you disagree, fire them all and only pay them when they are needed, no need to keep them on standby 24/7.


Volunteer organizations cover more jurisdictions in the U.S. than do paid departments.  What would be the financial impact of firing them?  As we continue down the path away from self reliance and continue to escalate minor inconveniences into major catastrophe's the time required to volunteer continues to grow significantly.  The taxes levied for volunteer departments is used strictly for buildings, equipment and maintenance.  What happens when you take that away?
 
2013-02-19 09:04:28 AM
Yay for terrible ideas.
 
2013-02-19 09:06:44 AM
So, all of this for $50k a year?
Can't wait to see what happens when a city councilman gets into an accident and the other driver gets really screwed even though a) their car was parked b) they weren't in their car and c) the city councilman has a BAC of .22

Or you know, when someone tied to the city government keeps getting into accidents that are always someone else's fault... sure will be profitable.
 
2013-02-19 09:07:18 AM
So is this a bill everybody thing, or only the bozo that caused the accident?  Cause I can see a lot of insurance companies putting these 'bills' straight into the circular file...

Also they only hope to get $50k, how about, what maybe, $2.00 per house(?) and you don't have pay to outsource* the collection of this accident tax.

*They must not have anyone in their tax department capable of collecting a new tax.
 
2013-02-19 09:07:49 AM

5Nickels: We pay them whether they have to show up at at a crash or not, charging more is nonsense.  Before you disagree, fire them all and only pay them when they are needed, no need to keep them on standby 24/7.


that's ... not smart. how will they know they're needed if they're not on standby? if you get into an accident, are you supposed to interrupt them while they're taking their kids to swim class, have them drop everything, drive over to the hospital, switch out to an ambulance, then drive over to you?

what if you only paid chefs when they are needed? go to a restaurant, order a meal, wait for the chef to drive over from Queens, wash up, take everything out of the stock freezer, then start preparing things.
 
2013-02-19 09:08:50 AM
This won't increase the hit-n-run chances. Nope, not at all. I mean a poor person gets into a fender bender. Now his car is smacked up and he gets the privilege of lining the county coffers on top of that.
 
2013-02-19 09:09:21 AM
Gotta love being a firefighter. The only job where they pay you to eat, sleep and be fat 90% of the time.
 
2013-02-19 09:13:41 AM
Your son's been murdered?  That will be $50,000 to start an investigation of said murder.
 
2013-02-19 09:14:04 AM
Switch it to a fine for the person who caused the accident and I am 100% ok with this.   Small fender benders end up costing the city millions of dollars a year in first responders, and more importantly, lost time due to traffic congestion and excess wear on the streets.   Also,  most 'accidents' are entirely preventable.  It's not like that car you hit magically teleported in front of you at a full stop   The vast majority of the time it's due to some idjit driving like an idjit.

And seriously, even Ayn Rand understood that this sort of thing (emergency police response) is one of the key roles of government.
 
2013-02-19 09:17:57 AM

aesirx: 5Nickels: We pay them whether they have to show up at at a crash or not, charging more is nonsense.  Before you disagree, fire them all and only pay them when they are needed, no need to keep them on standby 24/7.

that's ... not smart. how will they know they're needed if they're not on standby? if you get into an accident, are you supposed to interrupt them while they're taking their kids to swim class, have them drop everything, drive over to the hospital, switch out to an ambulance, then drive over to you?

what if you only paid chefs when they are needed? go to a restaurant, order a meal, wait for the chef to drive over from Queens, wash up, take everything out of the stock freezer, then start preparing things.


Its called the "VOLUNTEER Fire Department" for a reason... and the VFDs are the only ones i can see charging fro this stuff... the municipal departments should already have all that taken care through taxes...
 
2013-02-19 09:18:51 AM
I'm an emt, it's not my day job because it pays less than $10 an hour and after taxes closer to minimum wage. So think about that next time you wreck your shiat.
 
2013-02-19 09:22:00 AM
Libertarian paradise.
 
2013-02-19 09:29:39 AM

indarwinsshadow: Gotta love being a firefighter. The only job where they pay you to eat, sleep and be fat 90% of the time.


Good luck finding many fat firemen.  Better chance of finding a skinny Farker
 
2013-02-19 09:30:18 AM
Oh and city service loses about $500 per Medicaid/Medicare run.
 
2013-02-19 09:31:04 AM

Uisce Beatha: kyrana: I'm a 911 dispatcher in a fairly rural area, and we operate on the "when in doubt, send them out" principle.  I can't imagine how people would freak out if they thought they were getting charged for a response to a minor/no injury accident.  Of course, around here if your elderly/obese relative falls and is uninjured, we'll still send EMS (and sometimes fire) to help you get them back to bed or their chair.

For no fee. ...yet

Just wait until your local budget gets tight


Our local budgets are tight - like I said, rural area.  Thankfully, we're no where near that point... yet.  We're no longer enjoying any city landscaping, other than grass mowing, and things like holiday decorations are being put up by volunteers rather than the municipal utility.  I don't think I want to be dispatching if/when I have to quote prices for services.  (Although honestly, if you're calling to request the police call your ex and tell them to stop calling you, I can see $50 being a reasonable fee....)  Fact of the matter is we're gonna go cut you out of your car, and take your bleeding body to the ER, whether you can pay or not.  It's been costing those of us who are fortunate enough to have insurance more to cover these people for years.  I don't think (blatantly) charging our insurance is a good answer.  Car accidents aren't nuisance calls, they are real, legitimate emergencies.
 
2013-02-19 09:32:44 AM

aesirx: that's ... not smart. how will they know they're needed if they're not on standby? if you get into an accident, are you supposed to interrupt them while they're taking their kids to swim class, have them drop everything, drive over to the hospital, switch out to an ambulance, then drive over to you?

what if you only paid chefs when they are needed? go to a restaurant, order a meal, wait for the chef to drive over from Queens, wash up, take everything out of the stock freezer, then start preparing things.


BostonEMT: Its called the "VOLUNTEER Fire Department" for a reason... and the VFDs are the only ones i can see charging fro this stuff... the municipal departments should already have all that taken care through taxes...


And that's what I was about to say, BostonEMT.

Members of the VFD typically drop what they're doing, rush to the station and get the trucks rolling to the scene. Not the most efficient model, but it's a hell of a lot better than nothing or waiting for someone from the city to get to you.
 
2013-02-19 09:38:48 AM
They could raise so much more revenue if they started enforcing the use of turn signals.
 
2013-02-19 09:49:14 AM

kyrana: I'm a 911 dispatcher in a fairly rural area, and we operate on the "when in doubt, send them out" principle.  I can't imagine how people would freak out if they thought they were getting charged for a response to a minor/no injury accident.  Of course, around here if your elderly/obese relative falls and is uninjured, we'll still send EMS (and sometimes fire) to help you get them back to bed or their chair.

For no fee.


That must be nice. Not how it works around here. Found that out the hard way. Had a guy pass out from an asthma attack in the street in front of my house. Called an ambulance for him, and made sure he was ok. About a week later I get a $500 ambulance bill for this guy. Apparently, they charge whoever calls, and it doesn't matter who the ambulance is for. That quickly taught me to mind my own business. Great world we live in.
 
Displayed 50 of 81 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report