[WastingMyTime89]

I still think that it’s madness that entertainment companies priced out the general public like that. I understand that they are not charities and that’s some people are still paying these extortionate prices but still.

Part of me thinks it’s crazy how we all seem fine about building a two-tiered world where the rich get richer and can enjoy luxurious things while the poor scrap by.

I believe it’s clearly a consequence of the policies enacted in the 80s. These policies were pushed out with a total disregard for social cohesion. It’s all about making target numbers grow bigger without looking at the big picture. My belief is we have reached a point where inequality needs to be tamed if we don’t want our states to be torn apart but the idea has apparently never been as unpopular with half of the population.

[MattGaiser]

Stadiums remain pretty full in my anecdotal experience, so while they may have priced out the general public, they don't fit anyway.

[bombcar]

This is the main thing - if there was a large demand for "cheap Disneylands" for the general public, someone would build them and snap up that group.

And they have, SoCal and Florida have lots more amusement parks than they used to, and they're not all priced the same.

[dragonwriter]

> if there was a large demand for "cheap Disneylands"

There is a large demand for cheap family entertainment, and a lot of supply.

It doesn't look a lot like “city sized theme park with exclusively licensed characters from major popular media” because...that's inherently not cheap to operate, so people trying to do it either end up being expensive, or go out of business (and the universe of defunct theme parks is a testament to the latter outcome.)

[quxbar]

It is very difficult to recognize the dysfunction of a system that works to one's own benefit. Enough people are comfortable under the current system that any coherent policy change seems unlikely.