When they first started charging entrance fees to public land, is when you should have protested. I have already paid taxes for the road and land so paying again to enter the area is not right-IMO. I have no problem with use fees for facilities that are maintained for a particular group. If it was up to me, they would charge access fees for handicapped toilets and churches/non-profits would pay taxes.
Chevy 2500 Duramax, 30ft Prowler, 18ft Bass Boat, 2 big dogs,
Boondocking at Rio Costilla, NM
AGBAT wrote: When they first started charging entrance fees to public land, is when you should have protested. I have already paid taxes for the road and land so paying again to enter the area is not right-IMO. I have no problem with use fees for facilities that are maintained for a particular group. If it was up to me, they would charge access fees for handicapped toilets and churches/non-profits would pay taxes.
Yup, we all paid taxes for the land and we do get to enter it, and most of it for free all the time. But, the addtional fees are for maintenance of 'specific areas' and services. I have no problem with that.
What I do have a problem with is a vendor changing the 'rules' FOR PROFIT !! The NP service has given discounts for years, and survived fine, and the vendors knew those discounts were in place when they first bid. NOW, after the bidding process is continuing and sort of 'policy' the vendors begin to erode the discounts to make PROFIT ... if the feds tell me I have a discount for life (Says it right on my card) - then that's for life, not for a part of my life ... I earned it, and I'd go to war again to defend that idea. It's not within the rights of private enterprise to remove a benefit the feds granted and I earned and have been promised, simply because that enterprise wants MORE and MORE of the pie.
rolnhome wrote: monkey44 before I go to far off the path here ...... how much were the day use fees not counting the 50% off camping.
I think the fee for day-use was $4 ... but the issue is more that the vendors take these discounts away one by one until none remain.
I've watched it happen over the years with my military-retired benefits too. Little by little, each year the vendors bargain "just this one small thing" they say, but over ten years it becomes ten small things, and one large thing, and pretty soon half the benefit is gone.
Problem is, the people that make the decisions are counting beans instead of living the life they vote about (The RV lifestyle) and they vote looking at a balance sheet instead of into our eyes.
$4 might not be much, but when a retired traveler enters two or three 'vista areas' in a day, or say ten in a week, that's $40 or half a tank of fuel. Might not seem like much, but add that over a month or a year and see what it is ... and it's not something we 'steal', it's something the feds authorized years ago to help seniors and the disabled a little bit.
We talk about 'greed in private CG owners sometimes' - well, they don't even come close compared to these vendors. At least some of the CG owners are independents and work for a living. The fed vendors are all huge corps that live to see the bottom line "UP" -- RAISE prices, REDUCE services, and now want our discounts disallowed too.
Either it is in the contract or it is not… I highly doubt the vendor drew up the contract or any clauses in it… they bid on the contract in its entirety… after winning a bid they are obligated to it and at liberty to charge based on what the contract allows only…
If after winning a bid the vendor does not have the ability to add charges arbitrarily… if they want or need a change they must submit a request for a change order… the controlling party will then either reject or issue the change order… only then would the vendor be allowed to make the change…
Love my mass produced, entry level, built by Lazy American Workers, Hornet
JJBIRISH wrote: Either it is in the contract or it is not… I highly doubt the vendor drew up the contract or any clauses in it… they bid on the contract in its entirety… after winning a bid they are obligated to it and at liberty to charge based on what the contract allows only…
If after winning a bid the vendor does not have the ability to add charges arbitrarily… if they want or need a change they must submit a request for a change order… the controlling party will then either reject or issue the change order… only then would the vendor be allowed to make the change…
That is pretty close to how it works. Main point is the Goverment knows the terms under which the contract will be administered and agreeed to those terms. The terms are neogatiable. What upsets me is the Goverment is taking away "benefits" they promised me, a disabled vet, and awarding them to private enterprise as increased earnings.
I don't think the goverment owes me anything, but if you promise me something honor that promise. Don't sell it away to subsidize the lowest bidder.
QUOTE: "I don't think the goverment owes me anything, but if you promise me something honor that promise. Don't sell it away to subsidize the lowest bidder."
And that is the issue, much more than "free stuff" !!!!!!!!!
And Quote: "I highly doubt the vendor drew up the contract or any clauses in it."
Right, feds drawn up the 'bid quotes', but you can also bet the vendors have a huge lobby voice pushing those 'perks' away every chance they get BEFORE the contract is written.
If you want to see prices really explode, put goverment workers back in charge. Perhaps not to you on the street level, but certainly to the national debt. Their wages and benies are way out of wack with the private sector.
I totally understand why many of the benefits are being reduced or discontinued entirely.... Any of us who have had to deal with government employees, contract administrators and the like in major contracts have had the unpleasant experience of witnessing an increasingly corrupt process.
Offline
