I’m not sure concrete buildings are natural, and these ads were not found primarily in national parks so I don’t see the relevance.
Ironically most of the arguments against ads also apply to housing which is why there’s a global housing crisis. A lack of nuanced thinking about trade offs
There are huge trees everywhere in São Paulo. Billboards would block the view of some of that gorgeous green. Nature doesn't exist just in national parks.
Your question was "What's something that isn't an eyesore?", then went on to suggest that "eyesores" are not all bad since they can provide public funding for fixing problems.
I gave an example of something that isn't an eyesore and provides very large amounts of public funding.
Ironically most of the arguments against ads also apply to housing which is why there’s a global housing crisis. A lack of nuanced thinking about trade offs