compared to So 30 years ago, ambulance rides were covered by volunteers (who were doing it out of the goodness of their heart, and often begging for money by asking for donations to cover expenses) or by taxpayers (ie, your taxes pay for the services ahead of time, everyone pays the same, so the overall bill is less). I am failing to see the problem, only that the author is trying to pull at the emotional outrage of people for a service they are utilizing, often after they have already used it.
You ask for a service, expect to pay for it. I am sick of people expecting something for nothing. If you don't want the service, feel free to take a cab to where you want to go (oh wait, they expect you to pay for services too.... hmmmm). I might try to convince you to go to the ER in an ambulance if you are sick, but if you want to roll the dice, and think your life isn't worth the service you will be paying for, hey, that's your choice. But we provide a service, and whether you like it or not, we have expenses, and I don't work for free.
BTW, I am 100% against ambulance billing; I think all EMS should be tax payer funded, so if your taxes pay for my salaries, you shouldn't get a bill. but if your taxes aren't paying my salary (ie, you are a non-tax paying resident and you require EMS), than you should be expected to pay for the services that are being provided to you. It's also much easier to budget for stuff based on tax funds, than hoping you reach a goal of billing revenue.
It's like going to a fancy restaurant (based on someone's recommendation) because you are hungry, eating a good meal, enjoying a few drinks, and then when the bill comes, expressing outrage that you have to pay such a large bill. Sorry, you received a service (and maybe a product too), expect to pay for it!!!