• Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I’m not really sure how I feel about this…

    On the one hand if they are spending more than they take in to handle cash, that’s obviously broken, so the move is logical… but aren’t there alternatives that don’t disadvantage people who don’t have plastic options for whatever reason?

    Like idk, making them free to enter and paid for entirely by business taxes or something, the way they should be? I realize they are basically self-funding a lot of what they do by charging admission, but that is still an unfair barrier on public enjoyment of a public good. And so unnecessary.

  • mipadaitu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Cash should always be an option, especially when dealing with a government service, ESPECIALLY when it is a critical government service like NATURE ACCESS.

    Not to mention the fact that existing in nature should be free.