Actually kind of interesting, in an extremely geeky way. As you'd expect of the Journal of Libertarian Studies, Ms. Andersen makes a valiant attempt to make a case for privatization of fire fighting, but to her credit she didn't go overboard trying to force it when it proved to be a difficult fit.

She seemed to sniff a bit when describing how the need to interface with other municipal services such as water and telegraph made the environment "unattractive" for private enterprise. Nice try, but tilt your head the other way, and you see it as a solid indication that firefighting is also a natural municipal function just like the functions upon which it depends.

The most basic and unassailable rationale is, essentially, the argument of the commons: You have to put out the fire next door if it's threatening your own property; and fires spread, in flagrant disregard of who's subscribed to firefighting services and who hasn't. You can't impose a political philosophy on Mother Nature.

So, then, I agree with Buck and the organizers of the Flamer movement that firefighting is an absolutely perfect parodic standin for health insurance reform as a necessity of public health, for the purposes of revealing the destructive insanity of the opposition to reform.

Thanks for posting that link, Tom.