4 ms·
Because the benefit of the public restrooms would extend to all private buildings in the area, but the cost would fall entirely on whichever sucker decided to p
by foldingmoney 7y ago
Because the benefit of the public restrooms would extend to all private buildings in the area, but the cost would fall entirely on whichever sucker decided to pay for them -- and no one wants to be that sucker. That's why public funding is required to pay for public goods. This is basic economics.
- c22 7y agoI'd say the benefit would extend to all citizens in the area, since the area would no longer smell like urine. This could increase consumer traffic through the area and raise the economic value of the sucker's property.
- foldingmoney 7y agoYes, while also raising the value of every non-sucker's property, hence the problem.
- avs733 7y agoThis is one of the reasons things like building codes and zoning exist...to specify expectations of certain types of buildings. You are effectively referring to people who choose to participate in social society as 'suckers' which is fine in the abstract but...just is icky when you step and think about the ramifications like a empathetic human being.
- foldingmoney 7y agoNo, everyone can agree that they'd like to support the public good as long as the costs they incur are proportional to the benefits they get. This is why taxation and public spending exists, and most of us agree that this is a good thing and don't have a problem with paying our taxes. The fact that no one wants to be the sucker who everyone else freeloads off has nothing to do with lack of empathy.