RaviOk, I've no idea if that is true. What I do know is that strict fire codes have reduced fires overall. Is that socialism, and if so,is it bad?
Yeah, we can't have fire resistant buildings without government because mortgage companies and insurance companies like buildings that ignite and burn like a Ronson lighter.
Socialism is based on the theory that people are too stupid to run their own lives, but their competent to give government dictatorial control over the lives.
were you paying attention when the media exposed Countrywide and others?
"If you had a pulse, we gave you a loan."
If you had a pulse we gave you a loan - Dateline NBC - The Hansen Files with Chris Hansen NBC News
Yeah, the got away with their scandalous lending practices by giving mortgages with below market interest rates to sleazy bags like Chistopher Dodd.
What does that have to do with private fire departments?
we can't have fire resistant buildings without government, because mortgage companies and insurance companies look to the bottom dollar and they could get away with making more money while letting Rome burn, they would.
They exist to make money, not make buildings safer. If a cost benefit analysis showed weakening regulations would increase profit -- there goes your ill-informed reasoning
That is pure and utter horseshit. When I worked construction, it wasn't government inspectors who showed up on the job site to make sure the fireproofing was installed correctly. It was agents from the Insurance company. The idea that a cost benefit analysis shows building less fire safe buildings increases profit ignores the fact of the huge losses the company would suffer if their building caught on fire. The lawsuits from the families of the killed and injured alone would probably be sufficient to put the company out of business.
You obviously don't know jack shit about risk analysis. Your claim is based on total ignorance of business and economics.
You're a typical ignorant blowhard liberal/socialist.