Is it Ethical to Start Charging Park Goers to Use the Toilets???

[john_jet_au]

Currently I am about 45% complete in the building of my large 500 by 500 park and am running at a $5000 a month loss with debt just shy of $1,315,000,000. The park is in its 7th year.

I have been steadily increasing the entrance fees, food prices and rides, which has seen park goers still come at the rate of around 2,100 to 2.340 p/month but eventually, there will be a peak, I'm presuming about what they would be willing to pay for entry, food etc.

The only thing in the park not bringing in money, is the Toilets. Each one costs around $100 p/month to maintain, and am considering imposing a cost on their use. Say around 20 to 50c.

But is it ethical to do so, given that rides on average are $5.00 each and park entrance is $45.00.

Has anyone else tried charging for the toilets and found it has a negative effect/response or are the park goers just happy for you to take as much money off them as you can?

[Silvius]

I sincerely doubt you will receive angry letters from the Crohn's and Colitis foundation, but as the developers implemented the option to charge your park goers for using the toilet, they probably thought of some negative effect as well. As for the 'ethical' part; that's the joy of these type of games: it's your park, your decision.

[Mukatahren]

It's not ethical, it's business.

[[NcK]MasterShake|CM]

I always do.

As long as the price isn't too high , nobody seems to care and your toilets are profitable. If the price is too high, they won't use the toilets and it will result in a "messy" park.

[mccanlessjc]

asian countries charge to use public toilets its life.

[Dominian]

In Germany a law suit was just rejected about pay-toilets along the Autobahn for three reasons:

1. He actually sued the state, when the Autobahn is owned federally. (kek)
2. The judges claimed that there was no legal right to pay-free toilets anywhere in our laws.
3. There are free options along the way, too.

So legally, you are in the clear. People don't have to enter your park, you can eject them for peeing where they oughtn't to and you also can charge whatever you want for toilets.

Now when it comes to ethics, you usually look at either/or the virtue motive, the normative duty, the consequence of an action.

Your motive is profit. Being profitabel is a good thing and a virtue. Maximizing a good thing however, can become a bad extreme. Like bravery is usually considered a good quality in humans, but extreme bravery would mean that you're a daredevil, which isn't good. Some qualities like "honesty" aren't that simple but I'd say that almost every good quality has it's limits on the lower and upper end. Profitability and endless growth certainly are good for you, your employees and the community. Generosity is also a positive attribute in conflict with your profitablity, but do you value generosity over profitablity when it comes to other decicions in your park and why are toilets different from food or drink, which are also basic requirements for people, just like going to the toilet. They even take primacy over going to the toilet, because in order to go to the toilet, you body required food and drink. So what good does it to a man without money, if he can't drink for free, but pee for free?

When it comes to the normativity of costs for toilets whe need to ask ourselves where normative rules are derived from and if we just can make them up or if they are recognizable in the world. Usually the derivation of normative rules comes from either experience or hypothisized situations AND the exchange with other people about them. The creation of norms is a social function, as far as it only happens within groups of individuals. When you are alone, the only norm is that your actions are in accordance with your own rationality. In a group, your actions should be within the norms of general rationality and additional you should be polite and avoid being odd. If I'd ring at your doorbell, saying that I need to use your toilet, would you reject me and if not, would you charge me for the use? If you owned a business, would you require people to at least buy something to use your toilets? In the end, you must do what feels right and what is acceptable to others.

When looking at the consequences of your charging for toilets the scope of your view is the decisive factor. Do you look at the big picture and only care about median happiness or do you take into account the individual fate? As a utilitarian capitalist you wouldn't bat an eye at the guy who can't pay and pisses himself. After all that would only be one guy and he's to blame if he spent all his money before going to the toilet, especially since he should inquire about the cost factors in the park before making a prudent decision regarding his finances before going to your park and spending all his money friviously and then asking for free toilets like a bum! Genrerally your customers will not mind paying for the toilets and they will bring enough money to pay for them. If you give them the option of having an ATM around, there's no excuse for not having the money to pay a reasonable fee. If you are more happy to receive their money than they are unhappy at giving it to you, it's morally justifiably to take their money. Another way to ask about the consequence is whether it will impact them and how it will impact you. I'd say a small fee has very negligible negative impact on the life of a customer, while the great number of customers paying a small amount will have a high positive impact for you.

In the end I'd say that you shouldn't think about such things regarding virtual people. Video-Games are generally a very violent playground breaking with normative rules and giving you capabilities beyond anyone's real-world facilities in order to be fun and entertaining.

It's a slippery slope, asking about the morality of virtual beings. Next thing you'll wanna know is, if it's ethical to shoot up an entire fashion show in HITMAN(2016) and the answer is: Hell yeah! Who gives a damn about virtual people as long as it's fun to see them bleed and scream? I don't.

[john_jet_au]

So, I have set the cost of the toilets to 25 cents. Any higher than that and Happiness drops 15 percent and I get a lot of sad faces and "I can't afford it messages" or "I've seen everything message" and they go home with a low happiness rating.

The same happens when setting a price for park entry. While charging $5 for the coaster, $4 for the flat rides and $1-$2 for other attractions, I've discovered that anything over $60 for entry will also garner negative responses and a lot will simply turn away before getting into the gates with "I can't afford the entry price" message.

So it does appear, than when working in tandum with one another there is an upper limit, that they are willing to pay.

Oh well, at least they haven't complained about the $20 hamburgers yet