Comment by michaelsshaw
3 days ago
>If people don't care enough about a park to fund it, then that space may be of better use to something else.
No, public parks are awesome. They should remain free.
>They are a loss leader aimed to make more money elsewhere.
You're starting to get it. We pay for public services with our taxes, and in exchange, we get free stuff back that benefits society.
>If people don't want to fund such things people in those programs should make or buy their own food ans housing.
Oh my fucking god. This is seriously the most asinine sentence I have ever read. Bar none. It's honestly difficult to respond to something like this. I'm at a loss for words.
I genuinely don't give a single fuck if you, or anyone else, don't want to fund food stamps. We absolutely should continue funding it. The entire point of those projects is that the recipients specifically CANNOT afford to do these things on their own. You're advocating for further oppression of the downtrodden; it's difficult to understand how one comes to this position.
>They should remain free.
The money for maintaining them has to come from somewhere. They already are not free.
I have corrected the typo in that sentence.
If that's how you see it, literally everything costs money at some point in the line. So I guess nothing is free. But we have a word for it, so let's give it an actual use.
You enter at no cost (with exceptions, of course). That's free. They should continue to be open and free; a world without parks, without use of public funds for public good, isn't a good one. Profits be damned, I want my parks.