what do you expect for free?

lostinrates

ninky wrote: »

plus it's just fun. does absolutely everything have be valued in terms of money in / money out?

No, just most the things we have to consider as a social paid choice not our own choices. Associating fun with activity is also good value as its more likely to be sustained I'd guess.

ninky_2

the thing with parks, beaches, footpaths and woodlands is whilst the natural resource was originally free our social system has now added value to it and the very fact of fencing it off from alternative development could in some way be seen as a cost.

my local park has had lots of added value recently with children's play areas and a cafe (actually not revenue generating, the local group had to campaign to get it as staffing costs were an issue). they have also got a load of lottery money for a big redevelopment of the park. plans i saw included an urban farm which i was wary about because it would effectively fence off an area of common land and i could see charges being introduced to visit. not to mention the fact i find urban farms a pointless concept - the need to introduce a town child to a lamb in an unrealistic urban setting seems as necessary as having a mock underground system and shopping mall to show a village child.

it does make me think in a system where nothing is provided for free how long we can hold on to free at the point of use parks, beaches and footpaths.

ILW

A country park near me used to be a real haven, it was mainly paths through woodland and a few small lakes. The refreshments were a small hut near the car park staffed privately by two ladies serving tea, coffee, bacon sandwiches etc.

All very nice, but then they got a lottery grant.

Paths have all been tidied up, the lakes have been fenced off, there are warning signs all over the place. They have built a bloody great visitor centre with a restaurant where it now costs upwards of £5.00 for a poncy chiabatta (will not do just a plain sandwich). I do wonder why what was a pretty natural area had to be turned into something which (to me anyway) is now closer to a theme park.

Kennyboy66

ninky wrote: »

not to mention the fact i find urban farms a pointless concept - the need to introduce a town child to a lamb in an unrealistic urban setting seems as necessary as having a mock underground system and shopping mall to show a village child.

it does make me think in a system where nothing is provided for free how long we can hold on to free at the point of use parks, beaches and footpaths.

I think everyone should have an idea exactly where their food comes from.

I can remember when (in Liverpool) there were still small-holdings a few miles from the city centre where plenty of chickens and a few pigs were kept. Older people can no doubt remember when a couple of cows being kept in city centres was normal (and this is amongst terraced houses). Many of the building are still there.

Check out a census from turn of century (1891 say) and amongst city occupations will be Cowkeeper.

ninky_2

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

I think everyone should have an idea exactly where their food comes from.

I can remember when (in Liverpool) there were still small-holdings a few miles from the city centre where plenty of chickens and a few pigs were kept. Older people can no doubt remember when a couple of cows being kept in city centres was normal (and this is amongst terraced houses). Many of the building are still there.

Check out a census from turn of century (1891 say) and amongst city occupations will be Cowkeeper.

why is it important to see where the food comes from? if that's the case why not have mocked up clothing factories / sweat shops so we can see where our clothes come from.

city farms don't show people where their food comes from. they are very different from actual working farms. we have the internet and television plus it's never that far to travel to a working farm even from central london.

the justification that city farms somehow give an insight into modern food production is fundamentally flawed. most of the time it's just a little bit of a hobby job for the people that run them and another excuse to keep domesticated animals merely for the titillation of humans.

abaxas

I expect to 'be free' from having to subsidise those who cannot be bothered.

ninky_2

abaxas wrote: »

I expect to 'be free' from having to subsidise those who cannot be bothered.

it's odd how the english word for political / moral freedom is the same as the word for something that is free of charge. not the case in other languages but i sort of see the connection. having to pay for stuff is a sort of slavery after all.

lostinrates

ninky wrote: »

city farms don't show people where their food comes from. they are very different from actual working farms. we have the internet and television plus it's never that far to travel to a working farm even from central london..

Interestingly, this is an issue in this area too. My neighbour does ''farm safari'' for primary schools in local towns and villages, where they show local children the farm and wildlife in it, explaining the cycle of a dairy farm...looking at cows and wildlife. she tells me even in an area where children HAVE to pass through rurality between the fairly close urban ''units'' a significant number children have no idea what meat is, where milk comes from. Sometimes she's not sure the volunteer parents and teachers grasp it either.:eek:

ILW

Are their really kids that do not know that meat comes from animals, or is this just an urban myth?

crazyguy

To use public toilets without having to pay, its so bloody annoying that you pay tax on each and everything you purchase and then are expected to pay for a pee !