cause it better not be tax payers money!
2007-09-06 05:57:57 · 9 answers · asked by TriSec 3 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Had it been you or I the search would have been called off by now.
2007-09-06 06:05:46 · answer #1 · answered by Fixguy 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Would you want taxpayers to pay to find YOU?
Just because he's weathly, why would that keep him from using the emergency personel like everyone else? Do we all (him included) not pay taxes for these services? Why would he (and I'm guessing he pays more in taxes in one year than you and I earn, combined) not be able to avail himself of these services that everyone else can? Just as I would expect a "celebrity" or weathly individual to be treated like us "regular" folks if they break the law, I think they should be treated equally fair in matters such as this.
Why don't we try to squeeze money out of the likes of say, Scott Peterson, who drained local resources looking for his wife, whom he knew was dead all along? THAT'S the kind of person who should pay out of their own pocket.
I'm just as "poor" as the next person, but I think someone like Mr. Fossett deserves the same treatment as any fellow human being.
2007-09-06 13:11:52 · answer #2 · answered by Toots 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. It is us taxpayers. Every time someone tries for a little burst of fame and glory with some stunt and it backfires, the government (with its endless supply of tax dollars) sends in search teams on land or sea.
To make it worse he did not even bother to file a flight plan (like us mere non-celebrities need to do) so they have no idea where to focus their search.
2007-09-06 13:08:00 · answer #3 · answered by Rich Z 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't understand why this search should be different from any other search. If your plane went down, would you expect to pay the rescuers? I know when I had a car accident and had to be pulled out of my car, I didn't pay the resucuers. If I were in a plane crash, I don't think anyone would charge me for the rescue. What's the difference?
2007-09-06 13:10:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Just because he's rich means the taxpayers shouldn't pay for it? You better get your head on straight.
2007-09-10 11:15:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, he would have to be dead to have an estate. So the answer is no!
2007-09-06 13:06:37 · answer #6 · answered by Wounded Duck 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'm pretty sure it's the tax payers...if found alive, i hope he at least reimburses them.
2007-09-06 13:01:24 · answer #7 · answered by Maria 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are missing do you want taxpayers money to find you?
2007-09-06 13:33:10 · answer #8 · answered by Ladybugs77 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you bet ye.
2007-09-06 22:50:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋