Is this what constitutes a moral question these days? There’s no issue here.
But, it is another example of answering for the Man:
The MonkeyParking smartphone app, which, in the words of a recent Los Angeles Times editorial, “allows drivers in parked cars to let others know when they are leaving parking spots — and to turn the space over to the next driver for a fee,” was recently condemned by the city of San Francisco and one Santa Monica official called the use of the program “immoral.”
Q: Does this modern-day situation raise for you an age-old ethical question? Is the practice of “selling” a parking space to the highest bidder immoral? Or is it a fair and square way to make a few extra dollars?
Then the preachers get onto the question, most thinking that, yes, this app is indeed immoral in some way.
But of course it’s not. The space has usually already been paid for (an explanatory fact that the Times editorial conveniently leaves out), and so the only unethical thing here is when the city tries to charge for it again during the very same time period just because they have a camera ID on the car — a roll-back ability that most of these new meters possess when the car leaves the spot. So let these drivers do what they want to do and keep the phony umbrage to yourselves, “people.”
It’s also immensely hypocritical, this outrage; just like those cities and landlords (such as in Burbank) who get pissed about tenants making money on Airbnb. They always try to make a moral issue about this one as well, but they’re completely full of crap. So what if you share your home for cash? In most cases these landed institutions are really just mad that they’re not in on the action themselves and can’t control it.
As always, it’s all about the $$$. Not yours; theirs.
These same public entities btw went completely bananas about 15 years ago when Santa Cruz lost an old lawsuit about whether or not a hippie with a bucketful of nickles could go around filling up expiring parking meters.** The court ruled that he could indeed, and that not only was this a speech issue on his part, but the city had no right in the first place to demand that a street meter expire just so they could pounce on it and collect the fine.
To do so was getting things ass-backwards if the car still had a timely right to be there. The point of these parking meters was to collect parking fees, not send out violation notices.
Here’s the kind of “moral” mentality we’re forced to deal with:
http://www.ksbw.com/news/lawsuit-filed-against-group-that-feeds-parking-meters-in-keene-nh/20158936
Oh boo-hoo. They always lie, don’t they?
** It didn’t stop there of course. After Santa Cruz lost in court they then passed a phony law that said it was illegal for someone to put nickles into a meter without getting permission from the car owner. When that went south they eventually rescinded the law.
Point? These people will never, ever quit. So fuck their morality. That’s not what it is.
Burbank, California 