1051
Bro, come skiing
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
1051 points (97.8% liked)
shitposting
1632 readers
130 users here now
Rules •1. No Doxxing •2. No TikTok reposts •3. No Harassing •4. Post Gore at your own discretion, Depends if its funny or just gore to be an edgelord.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's ironic, I used to live in a mountainous region and had a season pass so a day of skiing would set me back less than 30 bucks, but if I ever wanted to swim in the ocean, something that's basically free for many people, I'd have to pay easily more than the person in this post
Who charges you to use the ocean?
The ocean is free, getting there or staying there, not so much.
But same thing goes for a lot of mountains. The lift company only owns the lift, but if you wanna hike up the slope and then ski it back down your free to do so. There are even special furs that you clamp to the underside of your skies to not slide back down
Many ski resorts are built on private land and you skinning uphill is against the rules and will get you kicked out and/or banned because it creates a safety hazard for other skiers. Even if the resort is on public land you'll get the boot for being unsafe.
Lots of mountains on public land without resorts you can do that on though.
I'm assuming they're factoring in travel, lodging, food, etc costs for a trip away from their area to wherever a beach is.
You usually have to pay for parking. When I lived in L.A., that was what I had to do. But apparently they have a train to the beach now.
I don't know why, but I had to do the math. The total cost was $320.
If they live far away from the beach, I imagine gas would he the main cost.
Let's assume gas is $4/ gallon, and they're getting about 20 miles/ gallon:
They'd have to drive 1600 miles for it to be that expensive.
That's kind of a false equivalency though because you always have to actually get to where a thing is. You can live thirty feet from a mountain and all these costs are the same as if you lived a hundred miles away.
I was just curious if it was going to put them super far from the coast. They would have to be about 400 miles away from one coast, and then drive the opposite direction, 1,600 miles, to get to the other coast lmao. (In the US)
Also, you can find a nice hill and just ski, but you won't have a lift. I lived in the San Bernardino mountains, and snowboarding and skiing was free. The big issue was safety (making sure the path was free of trees) and avoiding private property.