In the UK it would cost about the same, but that would be because he went by car and needed to pay for parking, parking charges at hospitals are getting ridiculous
The provision of parking is expensive, so it used to be subsidized significantly. Many people go to the hospital by public transport. It wouldn’t be fair to them that there’d be less money available for healthcare services because the NHS is subsidizing parking.
There’s an opportunity cost associated with using land for parking, particularly in dense urban areas.
In many cases a parking spot uses more space than the person who parked there uses to do their job (if they work in a cubicle for example). But they also need to be able to park not just at their job, but at their home, at the store, at their doctor’s office, etc. In the US there can be as many as 8 parking spaces per car, which collectively take up one third of the urban area.
There’s an opportunity cost associated with using land for parking
That’s not a cost of provision. Who’s to say that the medical benefit of many friends or relatives visiting is worth less than a house. Their is an opportunity cost of not having parking.
In general activities that have a negative impact on society should be discouraged, and certainly not subsidized so that they’re favored over the alternatives. There are many ways to make it easy to visit a hospital, not the least of which is simply allowing people to live in close proximity to one, which is something that has a positive impact on medical outcomes.
This is honestly
I can’t imagine
This would cost us 20 dollars in turkey
We don’t even have good healthcare…
In the UK it would cost about the same, but that would be because he went by car and needed to pay for parking, parking charges at hospitals are getting ridiculous
The provision of parking is expensive, so it used to be subsidized significantly. Many people go to the hospital by public transport. It wouldn’t be fair to them that there’d be less money available for healthcare services because the NHS is subsidizing parking.
No. It’s practically free. The maintenance is just some white lines every few years.
There’s an opportunity cost associated with using land for parking, particularly in dense urban areas.
In many cases a parking spot uses more space than the person who parked there uses to do their job (if they work in a cubicle for example). But they also need to be able to park not just at their job, but at their home, at the store, at their doctor’s office, etc. In the US there can be as many as 8 parking spaces per car, which collectively take up one third of the urban area.
That’s not a cost of provision. Who’s to say that the medical benefit of many friends or relatives visiting is worth less than a house. Their is an opportunity cost of not having parking.
American mind cannot comprehend public transit.
Doctors and medical researchers are in a position to say what the effects of public policy are on public health. And they’re saying that car-centric urban design has a negative impact on it, and that we should be building transit and pedestrian oriented urban environments instead.
In general activities that have a negative impact on society should be discouraged, and certainly not subsidized so that they’re favored over the alternatives. There are many ways to make it easy to visit a hospital, not the least of which is simply allowing people to live in close proximity to one, which is something that has a positive impact on medical outcomes.
Car storage costs in not built hospital wing, not built homes and not built public spaces.
Not in Scotland. Parking fees were scrapped at hospitals starting in 2008