Public services are not expected to be 'economically viable' on their own. Moreover, whether there are enough people to support service is also a purely administrative and political issue.
You're not addressing my point, either, which is that there is a big difference between getting a crap service because you're hard to reach (which does happen including here in Europe) and having no right to call for help in the first place.
Again, I am not criticising, I am just thinking that there are different, separate issues here.
> Public services are not expected to be 'economically viable' on their own.
They inherently are. If these neighborhoods have fire coverage equivalent to that of a metropolis, but they would be paid for via taxation at the rate of $50K per year per household, that's not economically viable.
Public services are socialised. This means that every single person is not expected to pay as much in tax as necessary to pay for all the services they use. The aim is only that this be the case on average.
So in general people who live is more isolated houses end up being effectively subsidised by everyone else.
In your example the 'problem' stems from a tax base that is too narrow because of administrative and political choices.
In any case, that is NOT the point of my previous comments.
You're not addressing my point, either, which is that there is a big difference between getting a crap service because you're hard to reach (which does happen including here in Europe) and having no right to call for help in the first place.
Again, I am not criticising, I am just thinking that there are different, separate issues here.