“Consumer advocates lament that the programs mean the rich can get better fire protection.
“Do we like the idea of a two-tier system for wealthy individuals and people with less means? No,” said Amy Bach, executive director of United Policyholders, a national insurance-focused consumer nonprofit based in California.
“But do we want to see their approaches work? Yes,” she added.”
Let me translate,
“Ignoramuses lament that people are allowed to PAY for useful services.
“Do we like the fact that some people have more money than others? No,” said a clueless spokesperson for a non-profit, “because we don’t understand the meaning of ‘for-profit.’
But do we want to see their approaches work? Yes,” she added, “but only if everyone has very expensive homes.“”
This is what Amy Bach is complaining about:
A- Some people PAID for a service on the open market they thought beneficial to them.
B- The sellers delivered the service as contracted.
C- This arrangement resulted in 1) saving houses from conflagration, 2) reducing costs otherwise to be born by the seller of the service.
Anybody can start a business offering the same service, if they so desire. How can these fools be called consumer advocates unless they do start such a business? AND give the service away, presumably using slave labor and other peoples’ money.