3 ms·

Well that's if you believe > Which, of course, means that non pet owners are now subsidizing pet owners and the damage and wear and tear that pets cause But m

by ajkjk 5d ago

Well that's if you believe > Which, of course, means that non pet owners are now subsidizing pet owners and the damage and wear and tear that pets cause But most people don't think that all. And I notice that you ignored all the other fees also... Anyway there are moral arguments against junk fees other than "cost". Nobody actually wants to live in a world where service providers are constantly sneaking fees into things. It's just unjust and shitty. You and I both know that the only reason landlords include pet fees is because they get away with it, not because it's the only way to recoup losses or something like that.

ryandrake 5d ago
Some people are obsessed with free-riders and never happy until they know they're only narrowly paying for the smallest granular subset of things they use, and nothing that they are not personally using. This is why we have all these little fees for everything everywhere--to satisfy those people. This is why airlines are terrible now: they granularly charge for every little thing. "Why should I pay for meal service if I personally don't want to eat?" people are getting their way.