ny10570

Mind as well keep this thread fresh. While this is good news, we'll probably be doing this dance again next spring....or even in the winter if some of these funds don't materialize.
Stay tuned....

Some clarifications. First, the city doesn't give a rats behind who runs the ambulances. Neither does the city council. The fire department would like to run the entire system, but that is a very expensive proposition. The only people actively pursuing an all FDNY EMS system is Local 2507. EMS DOES NOT TURN A PROFIT IN NYC. Not for the FD and not for the hospitals. The only people making money are the commercial operators, and their 911 profits are razor thin. Senior Care only began going after 911 when their growth in the transport sector stagnated. By becoming a hospitals 911 provider they also become the primary transport provider.
No matter what anyone working for FDNY*EMS says the dept has no desire to suddenly take over EMS. They don't have the equipment, budget, or staffing to make it happen. The usage fee that is to be assessed upon all of the hospitals was not designed to chase them out of the system. If it was, then why not charge something astronomical like $1 million per unit rather than the thousands per unit they settled upon? Because they wanted to get as much money without any added responsibility. This was a measure to close a budget gap. If you think chasing voluntary units out of the system helps that, please see above.
The dept has no ability to unilaterally take over EMS. They tried to kick transcare out of the system years ago, but lost badly in court. The hospitals have a contract with the city and as long as they uphold their end of the deal they keep their units.
EMS is currently "overstaffed". We were approved to hire above head count for two reasons. The first is the financial house of cards many Brooklyn and Queens hospitals are currently dealing with. Several hospitals are very close to bankruptcy proceedings or outright failure. There have been informal conversations about shuttering EMS operations and what that means to hospitals and their bottom line. The second reason for being flush with members is the revolving door that is EMS. For the past 6 years except for a few pauses we've been hiring constantly. Part of that has been the expansion of the system but a lot is also in response to a hiring binge and system expansion 25 years ago. We have a large number of members coming up on retirement. We also have members frequently leaving for other careers. The biggest destination in the coming years is going be to fire where we will see several hundred current members go.
Since St Vincents closed NY Downtown has been chomping at the bit to pick up more tours. They added an overnight coverage to one of their ALS and another 24 hour BLS. The rumored addition of a Rescue unit to lower Manhattan is not to prevent another unit from operating. Their operation is funded by federal grant money and at this point is still a rumor. The dept is not preventing anyone from running more units. Bronx Lebanon added an ALS and I believe there were two new voluntary units in Brooklyn last year.
I would expect EMT hiring to continue at its current pace. Another 60 EMTs were pulled from the streets to go to paramedic training starting today and there has been more and more BLS overtime available recently.

Some clarifications. First, the city doesn't give a rats behind who runs the ambulances. Neither does the city council. The fire department would like to run the entire system, but that is a very expensive proposition. The only people actively pursuing an all FDNY EMS system is Local 2507. EMS DOES NOT TURN A PROFIT IN NYC. Not for the FD and not for the hospitals. The only people making money are the commercial operators, and their 911 profits are razor thin. Senior Care only began going after 911 when their growth in the transport sector stagnated. By becoming a hospitals 911 provider they also become the primary transport provider.
No matter what anyone working for FDNY*EMS says the dept has no desire to suddenly take over EMS. They don't have the equipment, budget, or staffing to make it happen. The usage fee that is to be assessed upon all of the hospitals was not designed to chase them out of the system. If it was, then why not charge something astronomical like $1 million per unit rather than the thousands per unit they settled upon? Because they wanted to get as much money without any added responsibility. This was a measure to close a budget gap. If you think chasing voluntary units out of the system helps that, please see above.
The dept has no ability to unilaterally take over EMS. They tried to kick transcare out of the system years ago, but lost badly in court. The hospitals have a contract with the city and as long as they uphold their end of the deal they keep their units.
EMS is currently "overstaffed". We were approved to hire above head count for two reasons. The first is the financial house of cards many Brooklyn and Queens hospitals are currently dealing with. Several hospitals are very close to bankruptcy proceedings or outright failure. There have been informal conversations about shuttering EMS operations and what that means to hospitals and their bottom line. The second reason for being flush with members is the revolving door that is EMS. For the past 6 years except for a few pauses we've been hiring constantly. Part of that has been the expansion of the system but a lot is also in response to a hiring binge and system expansion 25 years ago. We have a large number of members coming up on retirement. We also have members frequently leaving for other careers. The biggest destination in the coming years is going be to fire where we will see several hundred current members go.
Since St Vincents closed NY Downtown has been chomping at the bit to pick up more tours. They added an overnight coverage to one of their ALS and another 24 hour BLS. The rumored addition of a Rescue unit to lower Manhattan is not to prevent another unit from operating. Their operation is funded by federal grant money and at this point is still a rumor. The dept is not preventing anyone from running more units. Bronx Lebanon added an ALS and I believe there were two new voluntary units in Brooklyn last year.
I would expect EMT hiring to continue at its current pace. Another 60 EMTs were pulled from the streets to go to paramedic training starting today and there has been more and more BLS overtime available recently.

I suggest we all write our congressman and either ban purple lights or tax them heavily. If it's dumb, our legislators will surely put it into law.
OOPS...I take that back...I'm getting old.
Congress might take it the wrong way and ban funerals altogether.

Everyone is so quick to blame teachers, but in EVERY STATE. Whether they be right to work or union states, they have the same problems. Charter schools are successful by limiting class size and/or selecting students. NYC's select admission high schools do phenomenally on a national level. These rubber room teachers and pension abuses pale in comparison to the losses as a result of CityTime, PSAC I and II, NYCWIN, and trasit communications. Then there are social initiatives like bicycle lanes, his million trees goal, and street scapes that while nice can wait until better financial environments.
These failures go back to Guliani. When before 9/11 and wall street was booming the pensions had big surpluses. These practices continued through the current administration. The employees don't have the option of withholding our contributions. The city did and now they're crying that they have to make up for their short sighted financial planning.

Firemedic beat me to the punch, but I gotta spout off.
I was initially very uncomfortable with the mandate that people buy product. Ignoring the FACTS that this mandate was initially a republican alternative to the single payer universal healthcare system championed by Clinton and was successfully implemented in Mass by Romney is just silly, but somehow the right and its blowhards have pulled it off. I say successfully in reference to Mass because it has lowered the per capita cost of healthcare for the entire state and has begun to shift spending from treatment to prevention. By all estimates the program is going to save the state money. The left and right just can't agree on how much.
I am no longer uncomfortable with the mandate because there are enough precedents of congress having the power to regulate our lives. If you want to go old school George Washington along with several original framers of the constitution passed legislation mandating health insurance for mariners and another bill requiring all able bodied men purchase and maintain a rifle and other necessary equipment in case they were to be called upon to serve in the militia. More recently congress can even tell you how much wheat you can grow on your property for personal use.
You're absolutely right, there has been little improvement in the home of the average american. That is going to be Obama's biggest hurdle to re-election. What numbers do you want? How about GDP?? From the first quarter 2008 through till the end of 2009 our economy shrunk in every quarter except 1 where we posted 1.3% growth. Since then, we've been positive every quarter and managed an average growth of 2.4%. Not the historical average of 3.25% but on par with the rest of the world. More specific to the average joe, lets see unemployment rates. Here, we hit a high of 10% back in 2009 and have slowly cranked that down to 8.2%. Almost every indicator of economic health took a massive dump in 2008 and they have all improved since then.
Some like to argue that any idiot could have managed the same gains because things were so bad they could only go up. No one can honestly say Obama's policies and theories have been given a fair and unhindered shot at righting the economy. He has been hindered at every turn by an obstinate congress that picks arbitrary fights (ie: debt ceiling) just to fight them. Things absolutely could have been worse. Who we can thank for that we won't really know until long after this election when all these moves have fully played out.
Hopefully through reading my posts you've recognized I'm more than willing to give credit to Republicans and criticize Democrats. In this case, Bush is very much responsible for much of the conditions that enabled the collapse. Clinton had his hand in there too, but Bush compounded problems and failed to act on earlier signs of trouble. Bush also set the tone for solution with his bank bailouts. I believe he had the right idea, but a very poor implementation that turned a lifeline into a windfall. Liberals are still blaming him because we are still crawling out of the hole generated by an economic meltdown and two unfunded wars.
Obama absolutely promised a lot more than he delivered. But as I and firemedic have pointed to before, Obama cannot do it on his own. Congress has to help. At the same time Obama burned a lot of opportunities to get other things done by sticking to healthcare reform. He also was forced to bail on some promises when the realities of the job met his hopes and dreams. A perfect example being Guantanamo. Rather than force through a campaign promise because he promised it, he took the hit and left the base in operation.
Its always depressing finding more people ignorant enough to hate someone because of a name or religion. I've seen first hand death in the name of many religions perpetrated by people from every variety of nation. Look at human history and none can escape a vile and murderous past. Yet you're so superior that you can pass judgement upon a person simply based upon their name? It is truly disgusting.
I have no doubt that obamacare if upheld by the supreme court will have a positive impact. I have seen what happens to people with no or insufficient insurance. I see the way the system waits until someone is completely crippled and removed from productive society before stepping in. Preventing health problems and treating them early is far more cost effective than managing all of the complications that lie down the road. It is not only cheaper but it maintains their ability to contribute to society. To continue to earn money and pay into the system. Health insurance only hurts when you don't need it.

Firemedic beat me to the punch, but I gotta spout off.
I was initially very uncomfortable with the mandate that people buy product. Ignoring the FACTS that this mandate was initially a republican alternative to the single payer universal healthcare system championed by Clinton and was successfully implemented in Mass by Romney is just silly, but somehow the right and its blowhards have pulled it off. I say successfully in reference to Mass because it has lowered the per capita cost of healthcare for the entire state and has begun to shift spending from treatment to prevention. By all estimates the program is going to save the state money. The left and right just can't agree on how much.
I am no longer uncomfortable with the mandate because there are enough precedents of congress having the power to regulate our lives. If you want to go old school George Washington along with several original framers of the constitution passed legislation mandating health insurance for mariners and another bill requiring all able bodied men purchase and maintain a rifle and other necessary equipment in case they were to be called upon to serve in the militia. More recently congress can even tell you how much wheat you can grow on your property for personal use.
You're absolutely right, there has been little improvement in the home of the average american. That is going to be Obama's biggest hurdle to re-election. What numbers do you want? How about GDP?? From the first quarter 2008 through till the end of 2009 our economy shrunk in every quarter except 1 where we posted 1.3% growth. Since then, we've been positive every quarter and managed an average growth of 2.4%. Not the historical average of 3.25% but on par with the rest of the world. More specific to the average joe, lets see unemployment rates. Here, we hit a high of 10% back in 2009 and have slowly cranked that down to 8.2%. Almost every indicator of economic health took a massive dump in 2008 and they have all improved since then.
Some like to argue that any idiot could have managed the same gains because things were so bad they could only go up. No one can honestly say Obama's policies and theories have been given a fair and unhindered shot at righting the economy. He has been hindered at every turn by an obstinate congress that picks arbitrary fights (ie: debt ceiling) just to fight them. Things absolutely could have been worse. Who we can thank for that we won't really know until long after this election when all these moves have fully played out.
Hopefully through reading my posts you've recognized I'm more than willing to give credit to Republicans and criticize Democrats. In this case, Bush is very much responsible for much of the conditions that enabled the collapse. Clinton had his hand in there too, but Bush compounded problems and failed to act on earlier signs of trouble. Bush also set the tone for solution with his bank bailouts. I believe he had the right idea, but a very poor implementation that turned a lifeline into a windfall. Liberals are still blaming him because we are still crawling out of the hole generated by an economic meltdown and two unfunded wars.
Obama absolutely promised a lot more than he delivered. But as I and firemedic have pointed to before, Obama cannot do it on his own. Congress has to help. At the same time Obama burned a lot of opportunities to get other things done by sticking to healthcare reform. He also was forced to bail on some promises when the realities of the job met his hopes and dreams. A perfect example being Guantanamo. Rather than force through a campaign promise because he promised it, he took the hit and left the base in operation.
Its always depressing finding more people ignorant enough to hate someone because of a name or religion. I've seen first hand death in the name of many religions perpetrated by people from every variety of nation. Look at human history and none can escape a vile and murderous past. Yet you're so superior that you can pass judgement upon a person simply based upon their name? It is truly disgusting.
I have no doubt that obamacare if upheld by the supreme court will have a positive impact. I have seen what happens to people with no or insufficient insurance. I see the way the system waits until someone is completely crippled and removed from productive society before stepping in. Preventing health problems and treating them early is far more cost effective than managing all of the complications that lie down the road. It is not only cheaper but it maintains their ability to contribute to society. To continue to earn money and pay into the system. Health insurance only hurts when you don't need it.

Well, I finally have to give you credit. Your posts are typically ill-informed, incomplete, and in most cases, just plagiarized. But, now your a self-admitted bigot. And on top of it, your incensed that more of us aren't as bigoted. Classic.

Firemedic beat me to the punch, but I gotta spout off.
I was initially very uncomfortable with the mandate that people buy product. Ignoring the FACTS that this mandate was initially a republican alternative to the single payer universal healthcare system championed by Clinton and was successfully implemented in Mass by Romney is just silly, but somehow the right and its blowhards have pulled it off. I say successfully in reference to Mass because it has lowered the per capita cost of healthcare for the entire state and has begun to shift spending from treatment to prevention. By all estimates the program is going to save the state money. The left and right just can't agree on how much.
I am no longer uncomfortable with the mandate because there are enough precedents of congress having the power to regulate our lives. If you want to go old school George Washington along with several original framers of the constitution passed legislation mandating health insurance for mariners and another bill requiring all able bodied men purchase and maintain a rifle and other necessary equipment in case they were to be called upon to serve in the militia. More recently congress can even tell you how much wheat you can grow on your property for personal use.
You're absolutely right, there has been little improvement in the home of the average american. That is going to be Obama's biggest hurdle to re-election. What numbers do you want? How about GDP?? From the first quarter 2008 through till the end of 2009 our economy shrunk in every quarter except 1 where we posted 1.3% growth. Since then, we've been positive every quarter and managed an average growth of 2.4%. Not the historical average of 3.25% but on par with the rest of the world. More specific to the average joe, lets see unemployment rates. Here, we hit a high of 10% back in 2009 and have slowly cranked that down to 8.2%. Almost every indicator of economic health took a massive dump in 2008 and they have all improved since then.
Some like to argue that any idiot could have managed the same gains because things were so bad they could only go up. No one can honestly say Obama's policies and theories have been given a fair and unhindered shot at righting the economy. He has been hindered at every turn by an obstinate congress that picks arbitrary fights (ie: debt ceiling) just to fight them. Things absolutely could have been worse. Who we can thank for that we won't really know until long after this election when all these moves have fully played out.
Hopefully through reading my posts you've recognized I'm more than willing to give credit to Republicans and criticize Democrats. In this case, Bush is very much responsible for much of the conditions that enabled the collapse. Clinton had his hand in there too, but Bush compounded problems and failed to act on earlier signs of trouble. Bush also set the tone for solution with his bank bailouts. I believe he had the right idea, but a very poor implementation that turned a lifeline into a windfall. Liberals are still blaming him because we are still crawling out of the hole generated by an economic meltdown and two unfunded wars.
Obama absolutely promised a lot more than he delivered. But as I and firemedic have pointed to before, Obama cannot do it on his own. Congress has to help. At the same time Obama burned a lot of opportunities to get other things done by sticking to healthcare reform. He also was forced to bail on some promises when the realities of the job met his hopes and dreams. A perfect example being Guantanamo. Rather than force through a campaign promise because he promised it, he took the hit and left the base in operation.
Its always depressing finding more people ignorant enough to hate someone because of a name or religion. I've seen first hand death in the name of many religions perpetrated by people from every variety of nation. Look at human history and none can escape a vile and murderous past. Yet you're so superior that you can pass judgement upon a person simply based upon their name? It is truly disgusting.
I have no doubt that obamacare if upheld by the supreme court will have a positive impact. I have seen what happens to people with no or insufficient insurance. I see the way the system waits until someone is completely crippled and removed from productive society before stepping in. Preventing health problems and treating them early is far more cost effective than managing all of the complications that lie down the road. It is not only cheaper but it maintains their ability to contribute to society. To continue to earn money and pay into the system. Health insurance only hurts when you don't need it.

Firemedic beat me to the punch, but I gotta spout off.
I was initially very uncomfortable with the mandate that people buy product. Ignoring the FACTS that this mandate was initially a republican alternative to the single payer universal healthcare system championed by Clinton and was successfully implemented in Mass by Romney is just silly, but somehow the right and its blowhards have pulled it off. I say successfully in reference to Mass because it has lowered the per capita cost of healthcare for the entire state and has begun to shift spending from treatment to prevention. By all estimates the program is going to save the state money. The left and right just can't agree on how much.
I am no longer uncomfortable with the mandate because there are enough precedents of congress having the power to regulate our lives. If you want to go old school George Washington along with several original framers of the constitution passed legislation mandating health insurance for mariners and another bill requiring all able bodied men purchase and maintain a rifle and other necessary equipment in case they were to be called upon to serve in the militia. More recently congress can even tell you how much wheat you can grow on your property for personal use.
You're absolutely right, there has been little improvement in the home of the average american. That is going to be Obama's biggest hurdle to re-election. What numbers do you want? How about GDP?? From the first quarter 2008 through till the end of 2009 our economy shrunk in every quarter except 1 where we posted 1.3% growth. Since then, we've been positive every quarter and managed an average growth of 2.4%. Not the historical average of 3.25% but on par with the rest of the world. More specific to the average joe, lets see unemployment rates. Here, we hit a high of 10% back in 2009 and have slowly cranked that down to 8.2%. Almost every indicator of economic health took a massive dump in 2008 and they have all improved since then.
Some like to argue that any idiot could have managed the same gains because things were so bad they could only go up. No one can honestly say Obama's policies and theories have been given a fair and unhindered shot at righting the economy. He has been hindered at every turn by an obstinate congress that picks arbitrary fights (ie: debt ceiling) just to fight them. Things absolutely could have been worse. Who we can thank for that we won't really know until long after this election when all these moves have fully played out.
Hopefully through reading my posts you've recognized I'm more than willing to give credit to Republicans and criticize Democrats. In this case, Bush is very much responsible for much of the conditions that enabled the collapse. Clinton had his hand in there too, but Bush compounded problems and failed to act on earlier signs of trouble. Bush also set the tone for solution with his bank bailouts. I believe he had the right idea, but a very poor implementation that turned a lifeline into a windfall. Liberals are still blaming him because we are still crawling out of the hole generated by an economic meltdown and two unfunded wars.
Obama absolutely promised a lot more than he delivered. But as I and firemedic have pointed to before, Obama cannot do it on his own. Congress has to help. At the same time Obama burned a lot of opportunities to get other things done by sticking to healthcare reform. He also was forced to bail on some promises when the realities of the job met his hopes and dreams. A perfect example being Guantanamo. Rather than force through a campaign promise because he promised it, he took the hit and left the base in operation.
Its always depressing finding more people ignorant enough to hate someone because of a name or religion. I've seen first hand death in the name of many religions perpetrated by people from every variety of nation. Look at human history and none can escape a vile and murderous past. Yet you're so superior that you can pass judgement upon a person simply based upon their name? It is truly disgusting.
I have no doubt that obamacare if upheld by the supreme court will have a positive impact. I have seen what happens to people with no or insufficient insurance. I see the way the system waits until someone is completely crippled and removed from productive society before stepping in. Preventing health problems and treating them early is far more cost effective than managing all of the complications that lie down the road. It is not only cheaper but it maintains their ability to contribute to society. To continue to earn money and pay into the system. Health insurance only hurts when you don't need it.

I'm pretty sure the "Patient Protection and Affordability Care Act" (aka "Obamacare") has already been passed since the GOP are hellbent on repealing it. I can't say for sure what impact it will have on the "quality of our current healthcare", but I do know it's improved the quality of healthcare for many of the uninsured/underinsured in the Country. But, by all means let's throw out all these people like the weekly trash. I mean after all it has to be their fault that their job doesn't pay enough to afford coverage.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/off-duty-nypd-wounded-bronx-shootout-article-1.1101509
Now here is a great story. Returning from work the officer is confronted by a group throwing bottles. A 3rd party showed up and opened fire on the group and officer. During the ensuing exchange the officer was struck twice. Once in the back and once in the leg. Despite his injuries, for which he was admitted to hospital, the officer shot the shooter and collared the initial instigator. Way to go officer.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/off-duty-nypd-wounded-bronx-shootout-article-1.1101509
Now here is a great story. Returning from work the officer is confronted by a group throwing bottles. A 3rd party showed up and opened fire on the group and officer. During the ensuing exchange the officer was struck twice. Once in the back and once in the leg. Despite his injuries, for which he was admitted to hospital, the officer shot the shooter and collared the initial instigator. Way to go officer.

While 30 patients sounds overwhelming there is a big difference between 30 walking wounded and a much smaller incident with 10 critical. Severely injured patients tax your medical and firefighting resources. Triage and rapid trsnsport of your critical patients is vital to efficiently managing your scene. Even if you cant get 20 ambulances on the road there's a lot you can do on scene and FDs should not just bd relying on EMS to bail thfm out here. Unless you're assigning EMS on all of your structural alatms odds are you'll be waiting with the initial patients for EMS to arrive.

Statistically speaking, The odds are no more or less favorable right after an accident.

This whole situation boils down to this one sentence....

That's horrific. Its pretty common for a chute to not deploy 100%. Collapsed cells or a tangled line are easily fixed by a few tugs on your controls. Unadressed they could easily lead to an accelerated descent.

We're going to really do this thread again? The dept responds to ensure there is no life threat. If everyone is out of the structure and the fire will not spread it is allowed to burn. The homeowner knew the risk when they chose to not participate in funding the FD.
If they offer their full services regardless of whether or not they paid, why would anyone pay until they needed help. You're now punishing everyone that was responsible and paid their fair share.

We're going to really do this thread again? The dept responds to ensure there is no life threat. If everyone is out of the structure and the fire will not spread it is allowed to burn. The homeowner knew the risk when they chose to not participate in funding the FD.
If they offer their full services regardless of whether or not they paid, why would anyone pay until they needed help. You're now punishing everyone that was responsible and paid their fair share.

We're going to really do this thread again? The dept responds to ensure there is no life threat. If everyone is out of the structure and the fire will not spread it is allowed to burn. The homeowner knew the risk when they chose to not participate in funding the FD.
If they offer their full services regardless of whether or not they paid, why would anyone pay until they needed help. You're now punishing everyone that was responsible and paid their fair share.

While 30 patients sounds overwhelming there is a big difference between 30 walking wounded and a much smaller incident with 10 critical. Severely injured patients tax your medical and firefighting resources. Triage and rapid trsnsport of your critical patients is vital to efficiently managing your scene. Even if you cant get 20 ambulances on the road there's a lot you can do on scene and FDs should not just bd relying on EMS to bail thfm out here. Unless you're assigning EMS on all of your structural alatms odds are you'll be waiting with the initial patients for EMS to arrive.

We're going to really do this thread again? The dept responds to ensure there is no life threat. If everyone is out of the structure and the fire will not spread it is allowed to burn. The homeowner knew the risk when they chose to not participate in funding the FD.
If they offer their full services regardless of whether or not they paid, why would anyone pay until they needed help. You're now punishing everyone that was responsible and paid their fair share.

We're going to really do this thread again? The dept responds to ensure there is no life threat. If everyone is out of the structure and the fire will not spread it is allowed to burn. The homeowner knew the risk when they chose to not participate in funding the FD.
If they offer their full services regardless of whether or not they paid, why would anyone pay until they needed help. You're now punishing everyone that was responsible and paid their fair share.

We're going to really do this thread again? The dept responds to ensure there is no life threat. If everyone is out of the structure and the fire will not spread it is allowed to burn. The homeowner knew the risk when they chose to not participate in funding the FD.
If they offer their full services regardless of whether or not they paid, why would anyone pay until they needed help. You're now punishing everyone that was responsible and paid their fair share.

We're going to really do this thread again? The dept responds to ensure there is no life threat. If everyone is out of the structure and the fire will not spread it is allowed to burn. The homeowner knew the risk when they chose to not participate in funding the FD.
If they offer their full services regardless of whether or not they paid, why would anyone pay until they needed help. You're now punishing everyone that was responsible and paid their fair share.