To me, the freedom of being able to sail as I please, would be worth more,
than the value of a possible rescue by a expensive rescue service.
So the idea of making it voluntary to subscribe to advanced and expensive
rescue service really appeals to me.

I do realise, that if I were swimming around in the middle of the ocean
after the boat sunk, I might take a different view, but in that situation I
would probably also try to pray.

Peter S/Y Anicula

"Peter Wiley" skrev i en meddelelse
. ..

You're a complete idiot. You have no idea how big Australia's SAR zone
is. Some of it is so far away that the Navy has to take a fleet oiler
with them, or charter a deep ocean fishing boat. The fuel costs alone
exceed any collection of individuals' contributions.

As I said, if EPIRB's were restricted to people with insurance against
rescue costs and the rest of us took our chances, problem solved.

PDW

In article , Simple Simon
wrote:

And, now we come to the crux of the matter - money.

Don't any of you realize that rescue services were traditionally
supported and are still supported in some places (England, for
example) by donations and workers who actually volunteer.
It is sad that the rescue service in most places nowadays has
become a commercial enterprise that can write its own paycheck.
Who pays but the taxpayer but, as usual, the taxpayer has no
say in how his money is spent.

In the meantime rescue services grow and grow with more
highly trained people on the staff and more expensive
hardware. Rescue services become a self-fulfilling prophesy
and a bloated bureaucracy with the ability to pass silly
laws requiring inspections of yachts before they are
allowed to navigate. Ask yourself what kind of a business
is in the business of limiting their business? Answer - none!

What's hidden away is all this rescue business is to start
something and then grow it but grow it in a more profitable
way. There can be just as many rescuers on the staff and
just as much expensive hardware waiting around to rescue
two or three boats a season as opposed to two or three
dozen boats a year. However an extra layer of inspectors
and enforcers can be added to bloat the payroll even more
and no cuts in the rescuers themselves need ever be made.

Payroll gets larger, equipment expenses get larger. Next
comes taxes being raised or fees being imposed and then
more bureaucracy is hired because nobody wants to speak
up against a noble pursuit such a saving lives. Where does
it stop? Answer: it doesn't stop. Think about it and just
say no to rescuers unless they work on donations with
volunteers like traditional rescue services.

S.Simon


"The_navigator©" wrote in message
...
Have you ANY idea what a rescue operation in the Southern Ocean costs?

Cheers MC

Donal wrote:

Donals Dilemma wrote in message
...


Umm it's a country that prefers to spent its taxpayers money on
hospitals and education NOT huge resources to rush to the aid of
idiots who set to sea in unseaworthy boats and with little or no
skills.



Are you SOOO politically correct that you are unable to see that
checking
everybody's boat would cost far more than the occasional rescue?

What kind of world do we live in?



Regards


Donal
--