3 ms·
A regular business could not issue the tickets SFO is issuing. A regular business would also be subject to additional antitrust and fair-business-practice const
by gojomo 13y ago
A regular business could not issue the tickets SFO is issuing. A regular business would also be subject to additional antitrust and fair-business-practice constraints.
So if you're suggesting the airport be privatized, and then offering services like any other "business entity… deciding what to do with its own property", I think that'd be a great plan.
But SFO is a public entity, using state power to enforce extra monopoly privileges. It doesn't get to just say "because we want to do it this way with 'our' property", even if it's silly. It's the city of San Francisco's property, and their actions should be serving the public interest.
An equitable regime of charging based on actual visit impact achieves that. On the other hand, enforcing the old formulas out of tradition is lazy and destructive - and suspiciously protective of SFO's longtime partners among the incumbent rental agencies.
- mikeash 13y agoA regular business could ban these people from their property, then get the police to enforce the ban. Ticketing seems, if anything, more gentle.
- zanny 13y ago> and their actions should be serving the public interest. We still have state owned toll roads across the country. There is an established habit of limiting road traffic via tolling even on public roads.
- gojomo 13y agoExactly! As proposed upthread, the airport should charge a toll per visit based on impact, not based on old business model patterns. Toll roads (state owned or private) charge by use, which is fairly reasonable and efficient, not by a deep inspection of your gross revenues.