Let's see if this has any legs!

[MadMadWorld]

So again, taking situational context out of things, you are ok with excluding someone just because you want to?

Rosa Parks is just a convenient example. It wasn't life or death, she didn't need to ride, hell she could still get where she wanted to go.

Yet that example of exclusion is terrible, but physically not even letting someone use a service, that again is just a luxury, is ok.

Both scenarios fall under the choice argument you brought up. Im just asking why you think that way.

You keep hanging onto the fact that you as a human being are excluded from going to MRG/Alta/DV because you are a snowboarder. But you could walk up to the ticket window with the same clothes, hair do, etc that you would have on if you were go snowboarding and they would give you a lift ticket as long as you were skiing. If they refused to give you a lift ticket simply because you "looked" or "acted" like a snowboarder then I could completely understand your argument. But that's just not the case here.

 

[AdironRider]

Alta cant really argue that skiing only is their niche in their market considering they share half a mountain with a competitor that allows snowboarding (and arguably a more successful competitor in terms of financials).

 

[AdironRider]

You keep hanging onto the fact that you as a human being are excluded from going to MRG/Alta/DV because you are a snowboarder. But you could walk up to the ticket window with the same clothes, hair do, etc that you would have on if you were go snowboarding and they would give you a lift ticket as long as you were skiing. If they refused to give you a lift ticket simply because you "looked" or "acted" like a snowboarder then I could completely understand your argument. But that's just not the case here.

No, again snowboarding has nothing to do with it.

Its the fact that you think its ok to exclude someone for something you don't like/disagree with. I find it interesting as to why.

Its more my libertarian nature than my preference to ride. I just find it laughable when dealing with inconsequential matters how you can justify it, especially in a business sense.

 

[MadMadWorld]

No, again snowboarding has nothing to do with it.

Its the fact that you think its ok to exclude someone for something you don't like/disagree with. I find it interesting as to why.

Its more my libertarian nature than my preference to ride. I just find it laughable when dealing with inconsequential matters how you can justify it, especially in a business sense.

I think most Libertarians would support free enterprise over government involvement any day of the week.

 

[Edd]

It's official. This thread has legs.

 

[WoodCore]

It's official. This thread has legs.

+1

 

[BenedictGomez]

I think most Libertarians would support free enterprise over government involvement any day of the week.

That was a shocker for me too.

It was a bit like the end of Sixth Sense.

 

[lerops]

No, again snowboarding has nothing to do with it.

Its the fact that you think its ok to exclude someone for something you don't like/disagree with. I find it interesting as to why.

Its more my libertarian nature than my preference to ride. I just find it laughable when dealing with inconsequential matters how you can justify it, especially in a business sense.

Locke and Hayek would turn in their graves!

It is quite simple: Alta is not in the business of providing a mountain for snowboarders to slide down. It would be entirely OK for another mountain to not provide these services to skiers. For example, most driving tracks would not let all kinds of vehicles into their facilities. They are running a business. They have the liberty to choose what services they provide, and what they don't. A true libertarian would fight against any government imposed rule telling businesses what services to provide and what services not to provide.

 

[BenedictGomez]

For example, most driving tracks would not let all kinds of vehicles into their facilities. They are running a business. They have the liberty to choose what services they provide, and what they don't. A true libertarian would fight against any government imposed rule telling businesses what services to provide and what services not to provide.

Are you suggesting my lawsuit against Daytona International Speedway not allowing me to ride my mountain bike doesn't have legs?

Just a few laps is all I ask, I'm awesome at left turns.

 

[Scruffy]

So again, taking situational context out of things, you are ok with excluding someone just because you want to?

Rosa Parks is just a convenient example. It wasn't life or death, she didn't need to ride, hell she could still get where she wanted to go.

Yet that example of exclusion is terrible, but physically not even letting someone use a service, that again is just a luxury, is ok.

Both scenarios fall under the choice argument you brought up. Im just asking why you think that way.

You need to disabuse yourself of the delusion that Alta's ban on snowboards is a discrimination. With Rosa, the service was sitting in a seat on a bus for the purpose of transporting; not any other service, for example: skateboarding in the isle of a bus while the bus is transporting. She was discriminated on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin for requesting the same service the bus company was providing any other person - that service of sitting in a seat on the bus for the purpose of public transportation. With Alta, the service is skiing, not snowboarding. If find yourself being discriminated against for wanting to ski there on on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, sexual origin or national origin, then you have a case.

Comparing riding a ski lift at Alta to riding a bus is a non-starter. The permit granted to Alta to operate on public land is more than a permit to simply operate lifts for the purpose of public transport. The permit allows them to operate a ski area in a manor they deem fit.

If you don't like it, by all means feel free partition your congressman to change or revoke the land use permit Alta maintains; but don't call it discrimination.

 

[Conrad]

It is quite simple: Alta is not in the business of providing a mountain for snowboarders to slide down. It would be entirely OK for another mountain to not provide these services to skiers. For example, most driving tracks would not let all kinds of vehicles into their facilities. They are running a business. They have the liberty to choose what services they provide, and what they don't. A true libertarian would fight against any government imposed rule telling businesses what services to provide and what services not to provide.

Exactly, a true libertarian would realize that life isn't always fair, but the less the government meddles/regulates, the better, in the big picture. Alta has been operating for over 75 years and has banned snowboarding for almost 30 years, using it as a marketing tactic. And now "libertarians" want to force Alta to allow snowboarders?

 

[BenedictGomez]

a true libertarian would realize that life isn't always fair, but the less the government meddles/regulates, the better, in the big picture......And now "libertarians" want to force Alta to allow snowboarders?

No; but some people think they're libertarians, when they're clearly not.

 

[Rowsdower]

Meh, Libertarians. They're just letting a different group of people tell them what they should and shouldn't do.

Look, if Alta wants to be a bunch of dicks, they're free to it. The snowboarders won years ago anyway. Sure, there'll be a couple of houldouts that don't want to change, but that's just the way the world works. Some people just don't want to move on.

 

[deadheadskier]

Look, if Alta wants to be a bunch of dicks, they're free to it. The snowboarders won years ago anyway. Sure, there'll be a couple of houldouts that don't want to change, but that's just the way the world works. Some people just don't want to move on.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Wish Alta and MRG would stop being dicks.

I don't buy into the rationalization that either place is discriminating. I also don't buy any defense of a "ski only" policy as anything but being a dick.

Share your slopes Alta, Deer Valley and Mad River Glen. Stop denying the joy your mountains bring to you from others who choose to slide down mountains on a snowboard. They're after the same joy you are.

 

[C-Rex]

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Wish Alta and MRG would stop being dicks.

I don't buy into the rationalization that either place is discriminating. I also don't buy any defense of a "ski only" policy as anything but being a dick.

Share your slopes Alta, Deer Valley and Mad River Glen. Stop denying the joy your mountains bring to you from others who choose to slide down mountains on a snowboard. They're after the same joy you are.

I like the way you think. Wanna be friends? :beer:

 

[thetrailboss]

Libertarians: there were a bunch of Ron Paul stickers and signs on the way up to LCC a few years back. How funny!

 

[dlague]

Locke and Hayek would turn in their graves!

It is quite simple: Alta is not in the business of providing a mountain for snowboarders to slide down. It would be entirely OK for another mountain to not provide these services to skiers. For example, most driving tracks would not let all kinds of vehicles into their facilities. They are running a business. They have the liberty to choose what services they provide, and what they don't. A true libertarian would fight against any government imposed rule telling businesses what services to provide and what services not to provide.

Look if a friggin' golf course can do this:

The home of the Masters now has green jackets for women.

In a historic change at one of the world's most exclusive golf clubs, Augusta National invited former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and South Carolina financier Darla Moore to become the first female members since the club was founded in 1932.

''This is a joyous occasion,'' chairman Billy Payne said Monday.

For some, it was a long time coming.

Then the ski areas that are hold outs can do the same! In the famous words of Rodney King: "Can't we all just get along?"

 

[hrstrat57]

A mountain only for snowboards is an interesting concept......

Could work?

Save Mt. Whittier....there you go!

 

[MadMadWorld]

A mountain only for snowboards is an interesting concept......

Could work?

Save Mt. Whittier....there you go!

Sadly it's too far gone

 

[AdironRider]

Look if a friggin' golf course can do this:



Then the ski areas that are hold outs can do the same! In the famous words of Rodney King: "Can't we all just get along?"

This pretty much sums up my thoughts.

And the Libertarian thing always gets lumped into a general "anti government everything" vibe. Yeah sure maybe for loonbats, but most Libertarians realize that some services (like water, sewer, roads) are public utilities. Libertarianism isn't all free state bullshit.

Anywho, my libertarian nature comment is more on the live and let live side of things than an anti-government intrusion stance in this specific situation.