Ultimate17
VIP Member
Just to be clear on what I'm reading from a few of you: Since Uni is a profitting buisness (at the moment), they should not be recieving government $ to pay for something.
Does your logic also reason that if Uni was in the red, that then the government should pay for something like this bridge? I really think the profit/loss of any company should not enter the arguement. Is the government paying for something on govenrment property? Yes. Will any pedestrian be able to use the structure (not only Cabana Bay visitors)? Yes. Counties and cities put in pedestrian bridges/tunnels to help pedestrians cross busy streets. This makes sense to me. Any of you seen the pedestrian bridge that crosses I4 in lake mary? It cost millions of tax dollars to build and it honestly barely gets used. At least this bridge will get used.
Does your logic also reason that if Uni was in the red, that then the government should pay for something like this bridge? I really think the profit/loss of any company should not enter the arguement. Is the government paying for something on govenrment property? Yes. Will any pedestrian be able to use the structure (not only Cabana Bay visitors)? Yes. Counties and cities put in pedestrian bridges/tunnels to help pedestrians cross busy streets. This makes sense to me. Any of you seen the pedestrian bridge that crosses I4 in lake mary? It cost millions of tax dollars to build and it honestly barely gets used. At least this bridge will get used.