4 ms·
> privatization of public spaces. You're misunderstanding the causality. These are private spaces. Just because lots of people show up doesn't make it public.
by imustbeevil 6y ago
> privatization of public spaces.
You're misunderstanding the causality. These are private spaces. Just because lots of people show up doesn't make it public. Yankee Stadium isn't a public utility.
You're asking to make these private spaces public. That's something you have to change in the existing laws. The first amendment has nothing to do with that.
I would also argue that the government creating its own public space would be the best because then there wouldn't be this perverse idea that anything anyone creates can be taken from them by the government whenever it becomes convenient.
- busterarm 6y agoYou don't _have_ to go to Yankee Stadium. Well over 95% of all web traffic consumes either Google Search, Google Chrome, Google Ads or uses an Android. You almost cannot avoid Google and still use the internet. Similarly, Facebook controls over 80% of Social Media traffic and you will find it difficult to meaningfully use your identity online to communicate. The FAANGs aren't the destination, they're the roadways to get to virtually all online content. They literally are the utility. Your argument is more like if Yankee Stadium got to choose who was allowed to get off the 6 train at their stop, and I think everyone would agree that would be bonkers.
- 6510 6y agoToll roads or no bandits! Hand over 30% protection money.
- 6510 6y agoI've been arguing since the 90's that governments around the world failed us terribly by not creating public spaces. I imagined all kinds of terrible implications, some came true others I couldn't have imagined. The simplest example is that we have businesses seeking consumers and people seeking products. You could boost the economy enormously by forcing both though a government funnel. (with reasonable exception)