Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm • Hacker News Board

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#41

Post by aspaceman » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:40 AM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #31

alisonkisk wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are those roles in in TW? McD employees, for all their troubles, are well above "pooping in the park" in economic comfort.

The lowest rung there are the recyclers. They pick up recyclable trash (kind of like the trash bin ladies do in SF but unlike SF don't leave a strewn mess). They rummage through dumpsters looking for recyclable items, take them to places which can recycle them for pennies, but it's enough to survive. It's kind of like if you had people redeeming bottles and cans and lived in section-8 housing. But these people are go…

In terms of homeless folks I’ve met in the US, they do the same.

They just use the money to buy drugs / alcohol and sleep outside because the recycling money isn’t enough for rent, but it’ll get you fucked up enough you won’t care.

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#42

Post by elihu » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:40 AM UTC

whiddershins wrote: post #29

elihu wrote: post #17

> Kristof and the Times, of course, would prefer a national infrastructure project to provide free toilets. If you've followed this over the years, you will see many efforts at government provided toilets. Costs are often hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the effort falls apart. There are some free toilets. In Chicago, the park district still had some. Without the incentive to charge a bit of money, they were typ…

‘ This is clearly a problem that can be solved with a little planning and adequate funding. ‘ That’s not true when costs can escalate to any amount. Which they can, and do. Regularly. With governmental projects.

Sure that could happen. But it doesn't have to. We already have a lot of public infrastructure: schools, roads, government buildings, parks, and so on. Some of those projects are managed well, and some aren't. Either way, we put up with it because on average the benefits of those things outweigh the costs. Public restrooms aren't fundamentally different from all the other forms of public infrastructure we already have.

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#43

Post by draw_down » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:41 AM UTC

patio11 wrote: post #39

This is always a fun thing to explain to people at home in Tokyo. "Oh wow this office building put the toilet outside the security cordon." "What." "Well the guard checking badges is there and the toilet is outside that, so, well, that would never happen [in a big city in US]." "... Do you think the valuable things in this building are stored... in the toilet?" "Ah, no, that's not the nature of the problem." "What is…

So funny that we all just blithely assume people of other cultures are insane idiots for not doing what we do.

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#44

Post by jimkleiber » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:43 AM UTC

I said if I ever run for public office in the US, one of the first items on my agenda would be public toilets. In most cities, there aren't even paid public toilets, one has to rely on the goodness (and business interest) of Starbucks and the like.

I think there are all sorts of downsides to not having public toilets besides the obvious of people using the street for a toilet. The stress people have by having to hold it in, the hesitation to drink too much water and therefore dehydration of people, etc.

I think government should cater to some of the most basic needs of humans and I believe a sanctioned and sanitary place to relieve oneself should be high on that list.

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#45

Post by meetups323 » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:44 AM UTC

astrea wrote: post #36

cwwc wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the toilets in Taiwan are great —- and free. They have masses of public toilets in park, along with cleaning attendants. But here is the rub —- in the US, they would be overrun with homeless (I’m not saying this is bad; just that it would be the reality) while in TW the people who are attending to them would likely be homeless were they in the US. Is part of this cultural? Yep, probably. Is part of it structural…

I don't understand this argument in American politics ("If we build something nice, those no good poor people will just ruin it!") and I especially don't understand it in this context. Unless my memory is far worse than I imagined, there are free toilets everywhere in the US (not so much now with COVID restrictions) and they're not all overrun with homeless. Have you never been to a public beach?

Many public toilets in the US close at night, especially in big cities.

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#46

Post by whiddershins » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:53 AM UTC

elihu wrote: post #42

whiddershins wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

‘ This is clearly a problem that can be solved with a little planning and adequate funding. ‘ That’s not true when costs can escalate to any amount. Which they can, and do. Regularly. With governmental projects.

Sure that could happen. But it doesn't have to. We already have a lot of public infrastructure: schools, roads, government buildings, parks, and so on. Some of those projects are managed well, and some aren't. Either way, we put up with it because on average the benefits of those things outweigh the costs. Public restrooms aren't fundamentally different from all the other forms of public infrastructure we already hav…

What exactly is the downside to making it legal to charge for the bathroom?

Like, what exactly.

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#47

Post by TedDoesntTalk » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:55 AM UTC

elihu wrote: post #17

> Kristof and the Times, of course, would prefer a national infrastructure project to provide free toilets. If you've followed this over the years, you will see many efforts at government provided toilets. Costs are often hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the effort falls apart. There are some free toilets. In Chicago, the park district still had some. Without the incentive to charge a bit of money, they were typ…

> Bathrooms aren't expensive to operate as long as

Read the entire article. You need to hire an attendant or someone who at least cleans regularly. That’s the major cost, especially at $15/hour minimum wage + health benefits + 3 workers per 24-hour day.

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#48

Post by jdminhbg » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:57 AM UTC

ggm wrote: post #2

I live in an economy with ubiquitous free toilets and they do not all descend to the unbearable. Socialised maintenance of the commons takes many forms. Only a reductionist believes the absence of paid toilets reduces toilets to the unspeakably bad. I concede the best toilets are free, but gatekept by transactional relationships of higher worth. The razors I steal from Singapore Airlines majestic marble temples in ch…

> I concede the best toilets are free, but gatekept by transactional relationships of higher worth.

That's not free in any useful sense of the word. A 5 star hotel doesn't charge extra to use the very nice toilet in your room, but it's not free.

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#49

Post by aaron695 » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:57 AM UTC

elihu wrote: post #17

> Kristof and the Times, of course, would prefer a national infrastructure project to provide free toilets. If you've followed this over the years, you will see many efforts at government provided toilets. Costs are often hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the effort falls apart. There are some free toilets. In Chicago, the park district still had some. Without the incentive to charge a bit of money, they were typ…

> Ideally we'd find a way to alter the average person's behavior

33% of people are killing themselves from being obese. That also costs society money.

How would you change the behaviour of people on an issue they have no personal stake in?

> created by 1% of the users.

So you are looking at 100% compliance?

Re: Pay toilets and NYT: a free market microcosm

#50

Post by floren » Tue, Mar 09, 2021, 3:58 AM UTC

WuTangCFO wrote: post #34

I have lived in London, NZ, Australia. All have had free toilets. Why? Growing up in NZ free bathrooms were normal so we take it for granted. Yes, a small population means that these facilities were less likely to be abused. But London? In Shoreditch, a part of East London that is full of pubs and hipsters quaffing the Devil's Dandruff the council sets up urinals in the street where any punter can see you pissing but…

Certainly not a new thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pissoir

It will not be implemented in SF because it's only suitable for men. Switzerland appears to have created a solution for women by providing disposable paper "funnels" so the ladies can use it too, but because people lack any decency they would all be stolen within minutes in SF--and if you think creating a male-only public urinal won't fly in SF, just wait until you propose that the women should have to put in a quarter to get a funnel that the men don't need :)