I’m a decision-maker in local government. I have this great plan to install lots of parking metres in the local neighbourhood for extra revenue.
The problem is a lot of my constituents are up in arms about this. They say it’s just a cash grab and that the parking metres will disadvantage a lot of the locals who are mostly from low income demographics.
But no-one’s forcing anyone to use the parking metres. Locals can surely just park a bit further away, or even better, move out of the area altogether. This will then allow for gentrification (as long as the gays decide it’s worth it), which will then increase property prices. And all thanks to those shiny new parking metres. That no-one’s being forced to use.
What can I do to show my critics that it’s really a very logical system?
Dear User Pays,
Indeed. What could be simpler than; if you use something, you pay for it?
I think you’re on to something here. Studies have shown again and again that in the two biggest industries that refer to their clients as ‘users’, (the IT industry and the illicit drug trade), it is indeed the ‘user’ who pays. Either with useless technical support, or collapsed blood vessels, bad skin and paranoia. Extending this simple economic principle to all facets of society really seems like the logical progression.
So regarding the disconnect between your vision for society and what your critics think of it, I think there are two possible explanations.
The first is that your critics simply don’t understand how the modern capitalist system works (sadly, not uncommon these days).
The second (and more likely) is a bit awkward. How can I put this delicately…? You’re a fucking arsehole.
With Kind Regards,