States Consider Charging for Risky Behavior

Short form: some people do monumentally stupid things (kayaking in floods, frex), and then need rescuing. Since the economy is not exactly stellar, states are looking at ways to fund rescue services. Well… how about charging for their services, when their services are required to save someone who exhibited poor judgement?

This is not only a good idea for this particular government function, but for *most* government functions. Some functions cover everybody equally… the military, weather services, etc. Others, such as rescue, policing, food stamps, welfare, etc. take funds from some and distribute it unequally to others. Why should those who consume out of proportion, and do so not due to bad luck but due to bad judgement, not be required to pay back the society they’ve helped impoverish?

Of course, there are other opinions:

Rep. Ellison: ‘There’s Plenty of Money, It’s Just The Government Doesn’t Have It’

The other approach to dealing with cash-strapped governments is to simply soak the taxpayers. Sure, that’s worked well.