Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 9 years ago

Why don't Liberals want to privatize our National Parks? Is it because they hate Capitalism?

Our National Parks; from Yosemite, to the National Mall, to the Grand Canyon, to Liberty Island, to Mount Rushmore - should all be owned and run by private corporations.

Yosemite would be a lot more efficient and make more money if it were run by a joint operation between Exxon-Mobil and the Trump Organization.

The Florida Everglades would make more money if it were run by the Century 21 real estate agency. Could probably make more money if we drained some of that useless swamp and built homes on it - and offer them as zero-down lending to poor families that can't afford it. And when they can't pay the mortgages, and the housing bubble bursts, then we'll blame the Democrats, so it's no big deal.

It's a shame that the Liberal Socialists won't allow our National Parks to be privatized. It's because they hate Capitalism and they hate Freedom.

8 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Spoken like a true conservative. Why don't we just let corporations buy our whole country, would that make it more efficient?

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    nicely why do no longer you in easy terms leap and holler and hoop over something it is in the thought degree and long from being a completed deal Brewster a business enterprise that has been offering guided excursions for 126 years has proposed putting in a trekking path with a pair of remark posts. The land does no longer be offered yet on an prolonged time hire. Canadians could have loose get right of entry to to something of the park yet could could pay $10 or $15 to apply the direction with the handbook. A path and remark structures that don't exist now. that is not a lodge or on line casino that would break the wasteland yet a path that Canadians can use to boot as vacationers. What Parks Canada has to come back to a selection is that if the tourism money that the style of path could usher in is nicely worth slicing Canadians off except they pay or is it extra advantageous to maintain the park as is. no person is well-liked by what their decision would be so carry your criticism until that element and weigh all the techniques earlier you pass off 0.5 ******

  • 9 years ago

    Great idea! I can't wait until McDonalds buys Mount Rushmore and there's a picture of a Big Mac on George Washington's forehead!

    Source(s): If I could, I would marry Capitalism.
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    AS Yosemite sam would say. BACK OFF. DOn't dishonor the good works of one of my favorite President, Teddy Roosevelt. If you touch my Yosemite, as A good Republican, and now that it's legal to carry a gun on federal land, I will go defend it. I will just ignore the state laws on guns.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 9 years ago

    The answer to PRIVATIZATION is REVOLUTION, A tent city slogan Rothschild Blv, Tel Aviv israel.

    When I was a kid parks were free. That's when we had a tax base instead on a free ride to rape and pillage America. Read this if you wanna get educated

    JP Morgan Tells Investors Why Middle Class Americans Are Screwed

    http://www.politicususa.com/en/jp-morgan-middle-cl...

    Source(s): Damn straight I hate capitalism
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    It will only increase cost. The taxpayers foot the bill and they have no control on how money is spent, at least with congress in control we have a say.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    If the parks can survive on a commercial basis, more power to em. We can't afford them.

  • 9 years ago

    Seriously guys...

    This guy is a troll, don't take him seriously

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.