Screwing the Commons and All Things Civic

[peristaltor]

Just caught a piece of rage-inducing news: a Washington State House bill proposing selling naming rights to elements of public transportation to raise money. As he almost always does, I think Goldy says it best:

Personally, I'm opposed to selling the naming rights on state bridges and highways because I think it cheapens the commons and

Comments

[policraticus]

One of the few times you"ll see me disagree with badlydrawnjeff...

It seems to me that if you want your name on something you should build it yourself. So, as long the cost of the naming rights equals the cost of construction or maintenance, I'd be OK with naming a bridge or overpass after a company or individual, but just turning our public buildings into billboards is unseemly. The government shouldn't be in the business of owning stadiums, period.

[peristaltor]

It seems to me that if you want your name on something you should build it yourself.

Thank you. My point exactly.

My initiative would not require 100% cost coverage, but that's because I was feeling generous last night.

[notmrgarrison]

[rimpala]

Stark likely built that, there's nothing wrong with businesses owning skyscrapers, the commercial sector of a city is where you expect that after all.

[dwer]

it's funny, because STARK Tower is an office building owned by Tony Stark, built by the company he owns, using green energy apparatus he invented.

[rimpala]

They go through great lengths to make him look corporate and the good guy.

[notmrgarrison]

No shit. Can you people read?