On 25-8-2009 22:53, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:33:48 +0200, andrel wrote:
> 
>> On 25-8-2009 22:16, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:01:49 +0200, andrel wrote:
>>>
>>>> Every house here belongs to a town (or village if you like). Don't
>>>> tell me even that is different in the US.
>>> It is.  We have street addresses called "rural routes" - the post
>>> office is located in the nearest town, but the house is not actually in
>>> the town.
>> To be slighly more precise: are there houses that are outside the
>> juridical borders of a city?
>> Of course we have houses outside of town here, but the juridical areas
>> of the towns in the Netherlands cover the whole country.
> 
> Of course all homes are in an area where law is applied (a judicial 
> boundary).  But in some cases, that boundary is very, very large, and 
> public services don't cover the entire area.

Ok, that is clear then. I am not going to roll back the tread to see 
where the misunderstanding arose.
> 
>>> Sorry if you don't believe me, but that doesn't make what I'm saying
>>> false.
>> I have no problem to believe you, but what you seem to say does not
>> match how we do things here, so I want to know if we are talking about
>> the same thing.
> 
> We are talking about the same thing.  But the population density in the 
> western US as a whole is very sparse compared to most European countries; 
> I can understand why it's difficult to wrap one's mind around the idea 
> that there isn't a fire truck "just around the corner" from any major 
> area.

Actually it isn't. Lots of places that are not densely populated here in 
europe.

Post a reply to this message