• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

Ahlevah said:
Free parking and meter rates below the market rates for parking spots in private garages. One reason private rates are so high is public rates are so low. Lower the number of cars coming into the city and rates will drop overall.
Click to expand...
You want to regulate private rights?

Do you understand supply and demand pricing?
 
Lord of Planar said:
You want to regulate private rights?

Do you understand supply and demand pricing?
Click to expand...

No. They can charge whatever the market will bear. Right now, the market will bear a relatively high price because there's a relative scarcity of cheap public spots. It's similar to my example of two stores in the USSR; there was the cheap option with empty shelves for the peons, and the expensive but abundant option for people with foreign currency.

Anyway, if you raise the cost of public parking you'd reduce the relative scarcity of parking overall because some people simply wouldn't or couldn't pay the unsubsidized rate. They'd start walking, riding a bike, carpooling, or taking the bus or trolley. Under that scenario the private garages would have to adjust to the new market reality and reduce their rates.
 
Ahlevah said:
No. They can charge whatever the market will bear. Right now, the market will bear a relatively high price because there's a relative scarcity of cheap public spots. It's similar to my example of two stores in the USSR; there was the cheap option with empty shelves for the peons, and the expensive but abundant option for people with foreign currency.

Anyway, if you raise the cost of public parking you'd reduce the relative scarcity of parking overall because some people simply wouldn't or couldn't pay the unsubsidized rate. They'd start walking, riding a bike, carpooling, or taking the bus or trolley. Under that scenario the private garages would have to adjust to the new market reality and reduce their rates.
Click to expand...
Most parking meter rates in SF are already $2.00 to $3.50 per hour. I don't know what parking structures cost, but I'm OK with raising the prices. You, however, claimed they were subsidized.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Most parking meter rates in SF are already $2.00 to $3.50 per hour. I don't know what parking structures cost, but I'm OK with raising the prices. You, however, claimed they were subsidized.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not bad for a city with a severe parking problem. I see rates on the Internet from about $2 to more than $15 per hour, depending on location. That's for a Friday evening. I know when I found that spot across from the Maritime Museum right on the Bay near Fisherman's Wharf it was free. That was on a Thursday afternoon. I guess I was just lucky. But I don't imagine those were the only free spots in the city.
 
Ahlevah said:
Actually, that's not bad for a city with a severe parking problem. I see rates on the Internet from about $2 to more than $15 per hour, depending on location. That's for a Friday evening. I know when I found that spot across from the Maritime Museum right on the Bay near Fisherman's Wharf it was free. That was on a Thursday afternoon. I guess I was just lucky. But I don't imagine those were the only free spots in the city.
Click to expand...
If I recall, we have some paring spots in Portland near events that go as high as $30/hr. SF probably does the same thing. The up to $3.00/hr was most... Not All.
 
Lord of Planar said:
If I recall, we have some paring spots in Portland near events that go as high as $30/hr. SF probably does the same thing. The up to $3.00/hr was most... Not All.
Click to expand...

And if San Francisco still has people lined up to the moon waiting for them then the price is too low.
 
So many lawyer wannabes on this thread~!
 
Ahlevah said:
This is hilarious. The progressives in San Francisco can either stifle free speech or permit the capitalists to hold public parking spots hostage for private gain:
Click to expand...
What?

I don't consider myself a progressive, but FFS we're talking about someone selling access to a public area, for private gain. That's not how things are supposed to work.

And by no means is it free speech being stifled. Reasonable restrictions on capitalism are necessary, and this is one of em'.
 
The Mark said:
What?

I don't consider myself a progressive, but FFS we're talking about someone selling access to a public area, for private gain. That's not how things are supposed to work.

And by no means is it free speech being stifled. Reasonable restrictions on capitalism are necessary, and this is one of em'.
Click to expand...

I just don't see how the city can stop this, legally or practically.
 
Ahlevah said:
I just don't see how the city can stop this, legally or practically.
Click to expand...
Just watch.

They will.

And many of us disagree with the legality of it. I am amazed that anyone doesn't see it as a crime.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Just watch.

They will.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily mean these particular apps. I'm talking about people sharing knowledge about parking on the Internet, either for money or for free. Cellphones and tablets are ubiquitous; everyone has one. So, practically speaking, how can San Francisco stop this sort of activity if someone organizes it underground? If the city sells a judge on the idea that it can regulate the Internet and shuts these apps down, others will surface to replace them as long as there's a dearth of available spots in San Francisco.
 
ecofarm said:
Preventing the organized private sale of public services is "stifling free speech"?

Can my friends and I occupy public parking spaces and charge money for them?
Click to expand...

And not paying your BLM bills makes you a freedom fighter. It's the new conservatism.
(That distant rushing noise is the sound of William F. Buckley spinning in his grave.)
 
Ahlevah said:
I just don't see how the city can stop this, legally or practically.
Click to expand...
I'm not entirely sure either.

But just letting it happen seems questionable as well.
 
If they are selling just information then they wouldn't make sure and hold the spot until the highest bidder arrived to take it. That point is so transparent that it boggles the brain cells that anybody actually tries to use it as a justification. They're selling the spot, get over it and admit it.
 
Maenad said:
When people who don't have command of the law start interpreting the law the end result can be quite silly looking.
Click to expand...

Wake up, honey. Why do you think there have been so many catfights in Congress over the years over the appointment of federal judges, especially appellate and Supreme Court jurists? Judges don't interpret the law based on the intent of the legislature or precedent. They do it based on their own prejudices and political views about the way the world is supposed to work. Sometimes they act a certain way because someone has bought them off or promised them something. They pretty much make it up as they go along.

I'm sure that if this thing ever went to the 9th Circuit it would rule that San Francisco can regulate the Internet and that it can fine a company based in Italy with no physical presence in the city.
 
Ahlevah said:
Judges don't interpret the law based on the intent of the legislature or precedent. They do it based on their own prejudices and political views about the way the world is supposed to work.
Click to expand...

Here's a perfect example:

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion in the ObamaCare case, finding the contraceptive mandate in its current form "unlawful." The court's four liberal justices dissented. :)shock:)

Supreme Court rules ObamaCare provision can't force some employers to cover contraception | Fox News
Click to expand...
 
If you live in/near San Francisco and you need (knead? :lol:) some dough:

I made $115 today!

by ItchyPickle
This is fantastic! I just started using this app yesterday, this is like a part time job for me now.

Today I made $115 selling parking spaces. Yesterday I made $20 but I only sold parking spots for about an hour yesterday.

Tomorrow is Saturday, i'm gonna be at it all day long, I bet i can rake in $200 easy on a saturday.

Thanks Monkeyparking for my new job. Lol. I'm an Uber driver also.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/monkeyparking-on-street-parking/id591974507?mt=8
Click to expand...

Strike one up for the 99%.
 
Ahlevah said:
If you live in/near San Francisco and you need (knead? :lol:) some dough:



Strike one up for the 99%.
Click to expand...
So, we have a person doing nothing more than holding parking for hostage.

This is a scumbag of society that you are endorsing.
 
MaggieD said:
But I'm not auctioning, renting or selling something that doesn't belong to me to begin with. I'm auctioning "when I'm going to move my car out of the spot I got into first."
Click to expand...

Semantics.

Same principle as asking someone to stand in for you on a ticket line. Or waving someone into your parking spot at the shopping mall.
Click to expand...

Not really as neither of those situations exchange public property for money.
 
MaggieD said:
Our entire legal system is built around semantics.
Click to expand...
It's one thing, and I still disagree with it, to wait and hold a public parking space until someone pays you to leave, but it's magnitudes worse yet where someone can do like Ahlevah posts in #144.
 
Lord of Planar said:
It's one thing, and I still disagree with it, to wait and hold a public parking space until someone pays you to leave, but it's magnitudes worse yet where someone can do like Ahlevah posts in #144.
Click to expand...

American ingenuity. I'd be grateful and HAPPY to pay $20 for a parking place close to my destination. Heck, I'd probably pay more. And it surely beats parking garage rates.
 
MaggieD said:
Our entire legal system is built around semantics.
Click to expand...

Not really. Killing someone for profit and in self defense aren't the same thing. Stealing is illegal regardless of the context. Rape and sex are defined through the use of force. This argument that there is a distinct difference between trading "information" on a parking spot you're covering and selling a parking spot is just that. Semantics. You are posting an advertisement about a parking spot, and you're waiting for a buyer. You stay in the spot until the buyer shows us. If I'm wrong, I welcome you to correct me. However, the very fact that the transaction is dependent on the parking spot being available through the occupation of another makes it clear that that is the good being sold. There is no information being traded here anymore than information is sold at a computer store. You don't go in to buy the advertisement or information on the computer, you go and purchase the good. The good in this case is the parking spot and the salesperson is whomever is occupying it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom