The search for the missing hikers will cost $800,000...
By sbeauty
@sbeauty (5865)
United States
December 20, 2006 7:40am CST
On Good Morning American this morning they said that the taxpayers will be paying at least $800,000 for the search of missing Mt. Hood climbers. Do you think it's fair to make taxpayers pay when the situation resulted from free-will actions on a part of the hikers? For instance, is it right for me, who has never climbed a mountain and never will, to have to help pay for trying to rescue people who chose to make the climb? What do you think?
6 people like this
55 responses
@sbeauty (5865)
• United States
20 Dec 06
I kind of feel this way, too. I would hate to think that they were just left to die, but I also feel like all that money could be used for a lot of other humanitarian purposes, such as feeding the hungry and providing safe shelters for the homeless. Thanks for your response.
2 people like this
@GnosticGoddess (5626)
• United States
20 Dec 06
I agree. Unexpected things happen sometimes. That's why we pay taxes in case things like this happen. Like you said if it were my family up there I'd be like "My tax dollars are finally going for something good".
1 person likes this
@kawillow74 (1416)
• United States
21 Dec 06
I would say Lovingit said it all. It is a human life and we really don't no where all our tax money goes to begin with so it is worth it.
@helpful_ideas (1620)
• United States
20 Dec 06
Rescue efforts from voluntary efforts are currently the public burden. I am sure the hikers will end up paying part of the expense but not the entire amount. Just like when EMS is called for an auto accident. Should someone who doesn't drive be exempt from paying their share of taxes for that? Or if a plane crash occurs should people who never fly be exempt form paying fro those rescue efforts? After all in both those cases it was voluntary to fly the plane/drive the car. Plane crashes and auto accident rescue efforts plus the investigations afterward cost taxpayers FAR more than $800,000 every year.
Right now the system is not set up that way. This may be the vehicle for change to the system in the future if enough voters feel like they should not bear the cost for rescue efforts.
@helpful_ideas (1620)
• United States
20 Dec 06
Again though, the cost of $800,000 is not even a drop in the bucket compared to the rescue costs from other accidents occurring from voluntary actions such as driving and flying.
The question is not so much one of quantity of cost but the entire principle of paying for rescue from a voluntary action.
1 person likes this
@deargoodbye (761)
• United States
20 Dec 06
I read someonewhere that they can only charge $500 towards the families of the hikers. The rest is swallowed up by the taxpayers. $1500 doesn't seem like a drop in the hat right now.
Here is what I found on MSNBC.Com
Oregon law does not require victims to pay for rescue efforts unless they were negligent and failed to take basic steps to keep themselves safe, Kleinbaum said. And in those cases, costs are limited to $500 per person. Other costs are absorbed by the state and local agencies involved.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16281005/
2 people like this
@caribe (2465)
• United States
20 Dec 06
That is one of those questions that is difficult to answer. They put themselves in harms way, yet the humane thing to do is to try to help them. I think people should be more responsible before thay decide to take such a risky climb. Unfortunately, they are not thinking that something like that might happen. They are thinking only of the adrenaline rush of accomplishment.
@sabrinam (1203)
• United States
21 Dec 06
I think they've exhausted all efforts they could've made, this morning they called the search off, yes it's terribly sad, they have family here in North Texas that are devastated, but who let them go, who in their right mind would go in these conditions!?
1 person likes this
@sbeauty (5865)
• United States
20 Dec 06
I thought this was an extremely hard question because of the moral issues. However, I was kind of feeling the way you do, too. $800,000 could be used to help a LOT of people. People should know prior to going on something this risky that it will be their families who will foot the bill if a rescue is necessary. Maybe that would make them think twice before risking themselves. Thanks for your response and Merry Christmas.
1 person likes this
@mkirby624 (1598)
• United States
20 Dec 06
The problem is not that we are paying to rescue people; the problem lies in that we are paying to rescue people who are lost because of a choice they made and we are not paying a lot to find children who are missing and didn't asked to be kidnapped.
1 person likes this
@Krisss (1231)
• Australia
21 Dec 06
how much is your life worth? Your parents? Your child? Its part of being in a caring society that we look after others whos lifes are in peril. Well at least you would hope their lives are worth it to everyone. You need to think more about the gozillion dollars your government is spending bombing another country back to the stone age.
@vbembot (747)
• Philippines
21 Dec 06
it is the government's responsibility to safe lives of their citizen or even anybody of any race. That is what taxes are for, we subsidize the expenses of the government and one of the expense item is rescue and rehabilitation. You just take the shoes of the family of the victim. I think you will move heaven and earth just to save the life of your relative or member of your family. so lets not complain the huge expense that the government will be spending just to save one life....
1 person likes this
@pammitch (465)
• Canada
20 Dec 06
I think it is not fair that tax payers have to pay for the search. I feel sorry for the families and all but it was the climbers descission. How about we make tax payers pay 800,000 to helping starving children in other countries
@texasclassygal (5305)
• United States
20 Dec 06
Boy, that is a lot of money, I can understand the costs but I don't think taxpayers should be responsible I think the families should be responsible for some of the monies spent and the determination of how long they search
1 person likes this
@ilahi_mansoor (147)
• India
21 Dec 06
i agree with you on this one it is hard to put value on a human life and if it was my kids i would be for it, so i guess its not fair to say im not for it because its not my family so i guess i also dont really know how to answer this either. i could go either way i guessok bye.
@Foxxee (3651)
• United States
21 Dec 06
They are making tax payers pay? I don't agree with that at all. I mean shouldn't that be only if we want to help pay? Don't they have like a fundraising program to help with stuff like that? What about the families of the people? I mean it is a sad thing what happened. But they should ask for help, not just take.
@ais_nedla (162)
• United States
20 Dec 06
im sorry but these guys are thrill seekers. they know the consequences of these expeditions. but if that happends to my loved ones, i would want them found at any cost.
@vlcreations (2)
• United States
21 Dec 06
If we can spend billions of dollars on a no win war in Irag surely we can spend less than a million on our fellow citizens regardless of how stupid or ill prepared they are for a situation such as mountain climbing.
1 person likes this
@Lydia1901 (16351)
• United States
29 Dec 06
I think that's a little bit insane. They should put that money into other use, like helping the needy not a missing person who decided to go mountain climbing and got lost.
@pinoytypist (280)
• Philippines
21 Dec 06
its ok for me. as long as the money is used in good will then that will not be a problem. the tax we're paying are allocated for different reasons. and this is just one of them.
@MrNiceGuy (4141)
• United States
20 Dec 06
You know, I've been thinking about this for a while. I heard that in some situations people that do extreme things and foolishly get lost nad have to be rescued actually pay for it. If its just someone innocently getting lost in the woods, then fine. If they are doing something really extreme and reckless, they should have to get themselves out of trouble or pay for it. Isn't that how the rest of daily life works?
@sbeauty (5865)
• United States
29 Dec 06
Yes, most of us have to pay our own way out of everything we do. For instance, if someone overeats and becomes morbidly obese, who is going to foot the bill to help them lose weight? If someone chooses to drive on icy roads and has a major accident, who pays for the increased insurance rates that will come as a result? If you climb a ladder in your backyard and fall off, who's going to pay your bills until you're back on your feet.
You're right. People that do reckless things should pay for whatever consequences happen because of their decision.
@abhi_br (2)
• India
21 Dec 06
well it surely isnt right to make taxpayers pay for something they are not involved in. may be they can revolt against such instances
