- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
- Messages
- 34,951
- Reaction score
- 16,311
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
Should We Privatize National Parks?
Should We Privatize National Parks?
Should We Privatize National Parks?
Should We Privatize National Parks?
Should We Privatize National Parks?
Should We Privatize National Parks?
No. I've done the math, and it doesn't work. Parks, forests and wilderness areas could not turn a significant profit without cost of entry becoming prohibitive for the average person; developing the land would always be tempting as it would be vastly more profitable.
Public parks/forests/etc are among the few things better handled by gov than by the free market.
No, but there are some areas that are so vast and largely inaccessible to the general population at large that I don't see the harm in taking a more liberal attitude to issuing concessions for natural resource exploitation.
Should We Privatize National Parks?
The states are more likely to cut corners and deals which compromise the parks and make them open to exploitation as cash strapped states all compete for economic investment from the private sector. I think giving them to the states would be a bad idea.I picked other. I think they should be turned over the states to control and maintained.Privatizing the parks would be disaster.
Should We Privatize National Parks?
The sustainability of National Parks is a matter of national security.
I picked "Other". I'd consider changing them to be the responsibility of the states. Not sure privatizing is a great idea.
But could the States be able to afford to maintain them. Or would they be tempted to sell part or let loggers and oil companies destroy them.
No. I've done the math, and it doesn't work. Parks, forests and wilderness areas could not turn a significant profit without cost of entry becoming prohibitive for the average person; developing the land would always be tempting as it would be vastly more profitable.
Public parks/forests/etc are among the few things better handled by gov than by the free market.
Should We Privatize National Parks?
How so ?
No, but there are some areas that are so vast and largely inaccessible to the general population at large that I don't see the harm in taking a more liberal attitude to issuing concessions for natural resource exploitation.
But could the States be able to afford to maintain them. Or would they be tempted to sell part or let loggers and oil companies destroy them.
National Parks are not only for people. They have a separate charter and designation than BLM, Nat. Forest Service, Wilderness areas, Refuges, Dept of Nat Resources, etc. THey all have different charter, purposes, and regulations
Nat Parks are also for the preservation of open space and the preservation of the species that inhabit them. They are also for the preservation of the other natural resources in those areas....including the geologic features, any rivers/bodies of water, micro and macro habitats, etc.
Which is done for the people. We don't preserve anything just for the sake of preserving it, we do it because we anticipate the preservation to be of some value to the people. I'm simply saying some, especially in the Arctic, are so remote and so sparsely populated that their exploitation is worthy of consideration.