XPost: nyc.general, nyc.politics, talk.environment 
 From: liberty@once.net 
  
 "JohnAndrew"  wrote in message 
 news:2fcaf67c.0407292059.3fe153d9@posting.google.com... 
 > "Freedom Fighter," you believe that without the power of local 
 > government, there were be more public parks in Brooklyn than 
 > there are now? 
  
 Yes, with some exceptions. Depends on what you mean by "local" government. 
  
 > What would keep them all from being converted into more 
 > economically intense, and economically profitable, uses -- 
 > such as apartment buildings, offices, retail stores or 
 > even parking lots? 
  
 As illustrated by my post that started this thread, government agencies, 
 like the Parks Department, are often corrupt and can be bought by commercial 
 interests that want to make money from the exploitation of public land. Some 
 politicians like ex-mayor Ghouliani favor ONLY the wealthy developers and 
 couldn't care less for parks, other public recreational facilities, and the 
 common people they benefit. 
  
 > In Europe, where there are some fairly grand parks, most of 
 > them were established by aristocratic or autocratic rulers, 
 > who had the power to override the petty concerns of ordinary 
 > citizens to make their cities beautiful whether the merchants 
 > wanted them that way or not. 
  
 Here and now the autocrats, like Ghouliani, couldn't care less for beauty 
 and the public wellbeing. They would sooner poison us all with Malathion 
 than allow small community gardens to exist. 
  
 > In the United States, parks have mostly been the work of local, 
 > state and federal government.  Certainly free parks - for example, 
 > the esplanade the runs along the edge of part of Brooklyn Heights, 
 > and the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens - are not going to be the 
 > work of private enterprise, because there's no profit in them. 
 > 
 > So it doesn't make any sense to take a "libertarian" approach 
 > to parks, does it?  Keeping a suspicious and watchful eye 
 > on the mismanagement of the parks by the city bureaucracy is 
 > another question, of course.  Nobody sane believes that 
 > governments become honest or stay that way all by themselves, 
 > without a lot of agitation by affected citizens. 
  
 I couldn't agree more, but where are these citizen activists today? Where 
 were they when Autocrat Ghouliani bulldozed the community gardens? How many 
 will, as a result of my post here re. the unnecessary construction in 
 Brooklyn, write to the appropriate government officials to demand an 
 investigation? 
  
 > But do you think the Botanical Garden, the Bronz Zoo, 
 > Central Park in Manhattan or any of the big national parks just 
 > grew up in the middle of the surrounding real estate markets, all 
 > by themselves? 
  
 They were established when the land they occupy was not nearly as valuable 
 to the greedy developers as it is today. I also suspect that government was 
 then less corrupt, and less easily bought by these interests. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)