Shadow of the Stadium reader Scott Myers, whom I wouldn't exactly call a Malcolm Glazer or Stu Sternberg sympathiser, elaborates on this point in response to a state effort to specify which professional teams and leagues will get tax dollars:
[I]f the project is capable of having a positive return on the state’s investment, why would any of these projects need state support at all? Why would the private entities applying want to share the profits with the government? So I do not see this as a good use of up to $12 million per year of taxpayers money.
...
I think it is interesting to note that the net worth of the 8 owners of the sports franchises (already receiving state subsidies) range from a minimum of $500 million to a maximum of $7.2 billion.
...
So instead of giving this money to billionaires, I suggest that these funds (up to $16 million) could be better spent on replacing broken down school buses, increasing the pay of special needs aides, reducing the cost of after school care for working parents, and other such 'mundane' needs.
"So instead of giving this money to billionaires, I suggest that these funds (up to $16 million) could be better spent on replacing broken down school buses, increasing the pay of special needs aides, reducing the cost of after school care for working parents, and other such 'mundane' needs."
ReplyDeleteImpossible for me to agree more with that statement.
Unfortunately, no billionaire out there is lobbying for tax dollars to be spent in that fashion, nor will there by any in the future. All the more so when the "alternative" is to pump more money into ostensibly public sports venues which are really the owners' playthings.
The Gov. is a business 1st. The idea is to make more then their investment to be able to give more to the other things like "broken buses". Besides, a lot of the cost has to go to infrastructure around the park, which is a investment worth making compared to many of times the ugly areas a nice new ballpark replaced, not including the instant real state value a city gains by replacing ugly areas into areas w/ new shinny stadium, which most "mundane needs" don't even come close to doing. SOO really the "tax payers money" is basically put into a bank called property value opposed to donating the money to charity-like needs. Which one would you chose if you were Tampa?
ReplyDeleteB. Dufala,
DeleteI notice you made no comment regarding my additional suggestion:
Or, how about this? Take that $16 million per year and add it to the Port of Tampa capital budget so that they can accelerate enhancements to the port to increase its container and automobile shipments that will create permanent (not temporary) high paying jobs. I’m sure the ports of Miami and Jacksonville could similarly benefit.
Scott,
Delete"I noticed you made no comment regarding my" factual belief. As to your money for the port, it's going to become irrelevant when the ships are to big to pass under the SkyWay. Though in the mean while, Jax got the auto ships on lock, and a lot of jobs are year round while the players spend big money year round around town. Plus, a lot of jobs are year round, and draw crowd for out of stadiums...
It's only the mega cruise ships that are getting taller. Cargo ships don't anticipate any problems continuing business into Tampa Bay.
DeleteThe government drains revenue it does not create revenue. It does not even come close to being a business. Give me one example of a government entity generating revenue and not draining it.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-tax_revenue
Delete