Should taxpayers fund stadiums and arenas for pro sports teams?

[Facetious]

This question was asked on an economics board that I used to post on. I found it incredibly amusing how many of the self-described "fiscal conservatives" on there said yes. Many of those same people, who were against the auto and banking bailouts, were for taxpayer support of sports stadiums and such.

Maybe they have a business plan built around these stadiums, i.e. parking lots, restaurants, lodging etc. :dunno: Follow the money as they say.

Even the TEA Party darling, Rick Perry is going to allow $25-$30 million of Texas taxpayer money to be used to pay the sanction fee for the Austin Formula One race next year. I'm looking forward to taking advantage of Perry's willingness to give away taxpayer funds, as I hope to be there. But these people are hypocrites that speak out of both sides of their mouths.

I thought that Herman is the grass roots rights' favorite. :dunno: Also, on the whole, I thought that fiscal conservatism was geared against excessive s-o-c-i-a-l spending as opposed to the kind of spending that offers future returns on investment, i.e. as mentioned above, stadiums etc.

What's even more ridiculous is that these stadiums are often built near areas that can't afford to build decent schools. So to me, it's just another sign of the decline of our society and the republic.

...and the people who live in the section 8 vote in favor of the ballparks! :rofl2:

...better drug selling ops I guess.


You see, everybody has their own individual special interests, Rey, 'magine that!

 

[JacknCoke]

No

fuck you my message is too short!

 

[Facetious]

edit

 

[Rey C.]

I thought that Herman is the grass roots rights' favorite. :dunno:

Still Rick Perry, as of the last TEA party poll that I saw a few days ago. Cain won a straw poll in Florida. But that's about it AFAIK.

But Perry shouldn't feel too bad. He isn't the first Jethro that Bernie Ecclestone has taken for a ride and dropped him off sans trousers. Hell, he took Tony George for about $100 million. Got so bad that Tony's sainted old mammy finally had to fire his dumb, coke snorting ass. But when you're THAT dumb, and a recovering coke head, finding a job ain't easy. So she rehired him after watching him wander aimlessly for a year or so. So maybe if this President gig doesn't work out for Ricky, he can go help Boy George finish killing of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Rick and Tony can compare notes on Ecclestone's sodomy technique.

Also, on the whole, I thought that fiscal conservatism was geared against excessive s-o-c-i-a-l spending as opposed to the kind of spending that offers future returns on investment, i.e. as mentioned above, stadiums etc.

So you were in favor of the auto and banking bailouts afterall??? Funny, I could have sworn... No, the (faux) fiscal conservatives were screaming "socialism", "fascism", "communism" and every other (made up) "ism" that they could think of when the government provided debtor-in-possession financing to the auto companies.

And anyway, if this "future return" is such a sure bet on these things, why can't they find private investors? :dunno: Easy answer: it's not a sure bet. The team might suck, could go into bankruptcy and be dissolved or just leave town. So this just another example of wishful thinking to cover up the fact that profits would be privatized while losses would be socialized. Because if it goes bust... that is EXACTLY what happens. :nono:

But we Americans do love our little games, don't we? We've got spirit, yes we do. We've got spirit... How 'bout you?! Goooo team! :nanner: We love games more than life itself. And clearly we'd rather waste our money on games and stadiums than on things that would actually further our society.

 

[BadNewsBewes]

No. I don't agree with taxpayers funding this. The same opinion goes for any kind of project funding, for other private profit making companies.

 

[Petra]

This question was asked on an economics board that I used to post on. I found it incredibly amusing how many of the self-described "fiscal conservatives" on there said yes. Many of those same people, who were against the auto and banking bailouts, were for taxpayer support of sports stadiums and such. Even the TEA Party darling, Rick Perry, is going to allow $25-$30 million of Texas taxpayer money to be used to pay the sanction fee for the Austin Formula One race next year. I'm looking forward to taking advantage of Perry's willingness to give away taxpayer funds, as I hope to be there. But these people are hypocrites that speak out of both sides of their mouths.

What's even more ridiculous is that these stadiums are often built near areas that can't afford to build decent schools. So to me, it's just another sign of the decline of our society and the republic.

If you're going to be going to the Texas Grand Prix, you must buy me a ticket + my flight over or you'll get banned.

Don't worry, I may throw a BJ in it for you.

 

[STDiva]

Yes. I don't want my hard earned money going towards schools or roads. I want sports, god dammit!

 

[LukeEl]

Lower the beer price, and charge extra for people who have no idea what the sport is about!

 

[Null8008]

I think its a matter that should go entirely up to vote. It shouldn't be decided on either way by any elected representative, but if the citizens are for it then I have no problem with it.

 

[Rey C.]

If you're going to be going to the Texas Grand Prix, you must buy me a ticket + my flight over or you'll get banned.

Don't worry, I may throw a BJ in it for you.

Ya know... I do have some frequent flyer miles banked. And if a certain company signs on as a race sponsor, I may get free tickets. Hmm.

But wait a minute. Is that "maybe BJ" like that "maybe HJ" that I'm still waiting for Bree Olson to give me for voting for her last year?!

I've never been to Austin. But this should be a good time. Now that they've (officially?) changed the date, maybe the weather will be bearable too.

So let's thank Jagger and all the other Texans on here for paying higher taxes so that we can enjoy "the highest form of motorsport in the world." Their schools suck. But by golly, they're going to have F1! :nanner:

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

I can't believe Jaggermeister and StanleyScratch[my balls] havent posted in this thread yet. :crying:

 

[Togath]

This question was asked on an economics board that I used to post on. I found it incredibly amusing how many of the self-described "fiscal conservatives" on there said yes. Many of those same people, who were against the auto and banking bailouts, were for taxpayer support of sports stadiums and such. Even the TEA Party darling, Rick Perry, is going to allow $25-$30 million of Texas taxpayer money to be used to pay the sanction fee for the Austin Formula One race next year. I'm looking forward to taking advantage of Perry's willingness to give away taxpayer funds, as I hope to be there. But these people are hypocrites that speak out of both sides of their mouths.

What's even more ridiculous is that these stadiums are often built near areas that can't afford to build decent schools. So to me, it's just another sign of the decline of our society and the republic.

This is so true. I can not believe that for me and my son to go see the indianapolis colts just once would cost me almost $200 just for tickets. My son who would want a souvenir, well thats another $50. A couple of hotdogs and a few sodas, another $30. Parking, $25. Fuck these superficial atheletes who contribute aboslutely nothing to society other then to distract us from the real social issues facing our nation. Fuck these billionaire tycoons who sit up in thier fancy luxury suites watching a game on sunday afternoon using it as a tax write off. Fuck college sports and fuck pro-sports. They are just over paid nuckle dragging duche bags who serve no puropse in life other then to waiste my space and suck up the collective intelligence of the united states. Seriously though, this could be said across the board on every pro sports.

 

[CunningStunts]

No fuckin way.

 

[JBoy11]

This topic has once again become heated in my community (at least the third time within about a decade, and maybe forth if I include TCF Stadium) and there are a lot of opinions on the matter.

I know when we brought the NHL and the 'X' to town, a number of people found work and $20 mixed drinks on Club level bring in nice tax revenue for the county and city.

Should taxpayers foot (some of) the bill for stadiums and arenas? Does doing so recoup said dollars and in so doing help the counties, cities and states that make taxpayers pay these increases?

I'm interested in this, as this may be a referendum on my ballot very soon here where I am. I have heard what appear to be logical arguments on both sides and wonder why billionaires shouldn't be entirely funding these stadiums which only line their pocketbooks further.

:dunno:

Hell no the taxpayers should not be paying for a new stadium for the Vikings!! I'm so sick of hearing about the owner threatening to take them somewhere else if the state doesn't build them a new stadium. If the people actually owned the team then it might be different but they don't. So if the billionaire owners feel that they need a new stadium and don't want to shell out all their own money then they should work on getting some private investors to raise the funds to build it. The taxpayers already pay enough to support the teams by paying such high ticket prices and the really high prices for all the food and drinks and souvenirs at the games. If the taxpayers have to pay for a new stadium too then they'll end up paying even more because ticket prices will go even higher along with everything else.
That taxpayer money can be put to much better use by putting it into things that really need the funding, like schools, and not to help out billionaires because they don't want to spend their own money.

 

[PirateKing]

yyyeee-No.

 

[Will E Worm]

yyyeee-No.

Not even for the Sacramento Pirate Kings? Or, Pittsburgh Pirate Kings?

 

[Jon S.]

The "Pittsburgh Pirate Kings" already jacked the Commonwealth while Tom Ridge (he wasn't a conservative Republican was he? )was still the Governor. Former Governor Ridge actually tried to ram it through at the end of a legistlative session as an attachment (which included funding what was to be PNC Park for the Pirates, Heinz Field for the Steelers, and the new Eagles and Phillies stadiums) to an unrelated bill. This royally pissed off the legislature and many who had originally supported the Governor on the issue backed off of their support because they were mad that he had tried to "backdoor" such a big spending bill. So, to appease them, and garner their support again, the Governor added a big block of extra spending to the spending bill to fund SEVERAL "lesser projects" in the other respective districts, and reintroduced the issue as a seperate bill, as should have been the case in the 1st place. One of those "lesser" projects included a new arena in Hershey (The Giant Center).....God knows HERCO (the entertainment & resort part of the "Hershey Trust Company," which is itself part of the "Milton Hershey School Trust," which includes "The Hershey Company" that makes all of that chocolate and candy that we all love) needed the money & couldn't have afforded to build it on their own dime. Ha ha ha!

Anyway, like I said......the Pittsburgh Pirate Kings, et. al. already jacked the Commonwealth......and as much of a Pittsburgh sports fan as I am.....I don't think it was money well spent.....and I strongly do not advocate what amounts to little more than "corporate welfare" in the form of using tax dollars to (FULLY) fund sports stadiums and/or arenas. When all is said and done, the only good jobs that are created are those in constructing the venues, and after that it's only the athletes that play in the palaces that the taxpayer built. :2 cents:

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

Hell no the taxpayers should not be paying for a new stadium for the Vikings!! I'm so sick of hearing about the owner threatening to take them somewhere else if the state doesn't build them a new stadium. If the people actually owned the team then it might be different but they don't. So if the billionaire owners feel that they need a new stadium and don't want to shell out all their own money then they should work on getting some private investors to raise the funds to build it. The taxpayers already pay enough to support the teams by paying such high ticket prices and the really high prices for all the food and drinks and souvenirs at the games. If the taxpayers have to pay for a new stadium too then they'll end up paying even more because ticket prices will go even higher along with everything else.
That taxpayer money can be put to much better use by putting it into things that really need the funding, like schools, and not to help out billionaires because they don't want to spend their own money.

But I don't want to lose the Queens. :dunno:

 

[JBoy11]

But I don't want to lose the Queens. :dunno:

Let em go, within a year or two there will be another team here just like what they did with hockey.

 

[guitarnnblack]

I vote no on this one... I think the government will be making money on sales tax, taxes on the liquor sold, property taxes, inevitable parking tickets and other traffic violations.

However I do see where people are coming from in the government will have a hand in the actual sales... but really, the government can't handle money, I Doubt it will be able to make a worth while profit on this one.