"I can't believe you're making an argument against public toilets."
Err, where exactly did I do that? Seriously, point out where - I certainly didn't mean to. (Unless by public toilets you are specifically referring to free public toilets).
I was only discussing the question of how to pay for public toilets, a direct response to parent's statement about how to use tax resources. I was in no way saying anything against public toilets, only saying that there are reasonable disagreements about how to tax things, with costs and benefits associated with them, and there's no one-size-fits-all solution, especially not a one-size-is-more-moral solution.
"I find it hard to think how the poor would use public restrooms less often than people who are more well off, considering the work environment, public transport dependency, and other factors."
So do I. But I also don't think a lack of access to public toilets is a big problem among poor people in e.g. the US. I could totally be wrong about this though - I'd be happy to learn something new. But just relying on emotion to make me imagine a problem doesn't persuade me.
"Access to public toilet in a civilized society is a matter of dignity and should not be only afford to those who can pay for it. Period."
I agree, but emphatically wanting something to be available to everyone doesn't change the basic economic reality - there are different ways to pay for things, different ways of distributing things, different ways to collet taxes, each with costs and benefits, and it's worthwhile trying to find the right solution.
And don't get me wrong - in places like the US, there is certainly enough money to make sure everyone gets access to public toilets. That still doesn't mean there is only one possible moral way to do things! And it still doesn't absolve anyone making an argument against a certain way of doing things from at least demonstrating there is a problem, instead of simply attacking the current way with emotional appeals.
Note: Just to be clear, I hate pay restrooms too, and try to avoid using them if I can. I just don't think that my beliefs about things are necessarily morally superior, and I certainly don't think it's in general morally correct to force others how to do things. And I think it's worth looking at all sides of an issue and understanding cause and effect - this is the essence of science.
Err, where exactly did I do that? Seriously, point out where - I certainly didn't mean to. (Unless by public toilets you are specifically referring to free public toilets).
I was only discussing the question of how to pay for public toilets, a direct response to parent's statement about how to use tax resources. I was in no way saying anything against public toilets, only saying that there are reasonable disagreements about how to tax things, with costs and benefits associated with them, and there's no one-size-fits-all solution, especially not a one-size-is-more-moral solution.
"I find it hard to think how the poor would use public restrooms less often than people who are more well off, considering the work environment, public transport dependency, and other factors."
So do I. But I also don't think a lack of access to public toilets is a big problem among poor people in e.g. the US. I could totally be wrong about this though - I'd be happy to learn something new. But just relying on emotion to make me imagine a problem doesn't persuade me.
"Access to public toilet in a civilized society is a matter of dignity and should not be only afford to those who can pay for it. Period."
I agree, but emphatically wanting something to be available to everyone doesn't change the basic economic reality - there are different ways to pay for things, different ways of distributing things, different ways to collet taxes, each with costs and benefits, and it's worthwhile trying to find the right solution.
And don't get me wrong - in places like the US, there is certainly enough money to make sure everyone gets access to public toilets. That still doesn't mean there is only one possible moral way to do things! And it still doesn't absolve anyone making an argument against a certain way of doing things from at least demonstrating there is a problem, instead of simply attacking the current way with emotional appeals.
Note: Just to be clear, I hate pay restrooms too, and try to avoid using them if I can. I just don't think that my beliefs about things are necessarily morally superior, and I certainly don't think it's in general morally correct to force others how to do things. And I think it's worth looking at all sides of an issue and understanding cause and effect - this is the essence of science.