Should taxpayers fund stadiums or should they be completely privately financed?

Please give a reason for your opinion?

Other urls found in this thread:

brookings.edu/blog/brookings-now/2016/09/09/top-10-biggest-federal-subsidies-for-pro-stadiums-hint-the-yankees-are-1/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Depends on if its for major league teams and if the city/state owns the players

private because it's a for profit business.

private, not everyone likes sports, so they shouldnt be forced to pay it

If publicly owned, yes
if privately owned, no

Oooh that Anthony Recker booty

private unless you do a referendum and the public overwhelmingly supports the project. stadiums shouldn't be subsidized without explicit consent.
In Milwaukee they're building a fucking trolley downtown. they've already spent 30 million and they estimate for completion of the project is 124 million dollars - for a fucking trolley that only tourists will use. it's route and travel speed qualifies it as absolutely worthless. dated infrastructure that no one wanted, a 124 million dollar ANTIQUE.

THICC

nice fucking cake

anyway no are you retarded. not everyone watch sports and it's a nigger-dominated sport, if you're white and you care about sports you're a cuck.

nigger-dominated industry*

>Oooh that Anthony Recker booty
Who is he and what is he known for?

brookings.edu/blog/brookings-now/2016/09/09/top-10-biggest-federal-subsidies-for-pro-stadiums-hint-the-yankees-are-1/

Private. I don't get a single fucking penny from my city paying to have a half million drunk retards drinking in one place while they watch niggers throw a ball around.

This sounds like homework.

Why the fuck would the gubbermint pay for a stadium when you kikes wont even fork out for important things like healthcare?

>reckerposting on Sup Forums
Unironically hang yourself, faggot.

>>reckerposting on Sup Forums
Reckerposting?

do you understand how this country works? stadiums are expensive and you'll never get a return on your investment that's worth all of the time you'll be spending maintaining an enormous round concrete slab where people go to enjoy the adrenaline rush of mob mentality and idol worship.

so jews will lobby the right people and have local newspapers drum up support until the path of resistance f looks like an unused 10 lane highway littered with normies clapping and cheering as the jews shoot through like a bullet in a 20 passenger prius with bulletproof glass and tank armor.

Taxation is theft.

The name of the guy in the picture is Recker and the faggot OP consistently spams pictures of his ass on the /mlb/ threads on Sup Forums.

If they can be used as shelters during emergencies, stimulate the local economy, and is taxed a reasonable rate

then fuck yeah, it's a good investment

>The name of the guy in the picture is Recker and the faggot OP consistently spams pictures of his ass on the /mlb/ threads on Sup Forums.
What’s so significant about this guy that he would do that?

>If they can be used as shelters during emergencies, stimulate the local economy, and is taxed a reasonable rate
How often does that actually happen though?

>then fuck yeah, it's a good investment
if it was a good investment, then someone would be motivated to fund the project in the private sector.
>shelters during emergencies, stimulate the local economy
they're used as shelters when they're privately owned too dummy. you think in an emergency situation the owners of a stadium hire guards to keep the public out? kek. they would get killed by a fucking mob, and the surrounding communities would never use the stadium again.
>stimulate the local economy
at the cost of drunk drivers killing productive members of society.
>stimulate the economy by stealing money from every human in a 50 mile radius for 20 years
but it was worth it because jose can sell hot dogs and cotton candy 3 times a week now for 4 months out of the year. oh, it's a football stadium? make that once every other week for a grand total of 8 days of work.

...

Fuck Sportsball niggers and their Jew owners. You'd have to be the toppest Goyium bitch to support their financial shenanigans.

>Have to pay for parks I don't use
>Have to pay for social security I won't ever get
>Have to pay for medicare I don't use and don't qualify for
>Have to pay for medicaid I don't use and don't qualify for
>Have to pay for public broadcasting I don't watch
>Have to pay for public transportation I don't use
>Now I have to pay for public sports stadiums I won't use

FUCK YOU!!!!

>Please give a reason for your opinion?
When is your homework assignment due?

We should just get rid of pro sports all together and bring back the Colosseum

...

Why the baseball player pic?

Companies should be making a profit from owning stadiums, so it should be completely privately financed.

not often, but you would want one if it does happen

I hope you're just pretending to be retarded

i hope you're just pretending this qualifies as a response to an argument.

Privately funded.

First off, all taxing is theft but with sports, why the fuck should i have to pay for something i dont even like or participate in? I mean, i like nigger ball but thats it. But i dont even watch it on the reg anymore. I’m not paying for shit. Let it fail, if no one likes it.

I would only support publicly-funded stadiums if they were for women’s teams, which are underrepresented.

Go Packers.

Quiet. Sit down. Be Humble. Abele and Barrett know best.

>were for women’s teams
you can't trick the public into being fiscally irresponsible when the bait of a high capacity stadium is permanently tethered to something no one would leave their house to see - female athletes competing.

neither of them are going to be holding office when the entire thing comes crashing down. i'm going to find homeless people and pay them to be neurotic inside the trolley for 12 hour stretches, and taking a shit somewhere inside before exiting.

i will fix this economy.

>something no one would leave their house to see - female athletes competing.
Does that include the baseball player?

stop switching ID's to comment on the baseball player OP, we already thought you were a faggot to begin with so you have nothing to lose.

>you can't trick the public into being fiscally irresponsible when the bait of a high capacity stadium is permanently tethered to something no one would leave their house to see - female athletes competing.
Perhaps it should be like publicly-funded arts in Europe? They serve a higher social and cultural purpose than the purely commercial.

that's actually an interesting concept. if women played sports and only moved gracefully like ballerinas the entire time, i would consider going at least once.
> They serve a higher social and cultural purpose than the purely commercial.
are you talking about like soviet-era policy where artists living expenses and housing were paid for but they were required to create propaganda for the state regularly and work that didn't fit the state's definition of proper art was blacklisted and not shown publically or available for purchase?

i would support this system for female athletes too.

There are a few factors to consider. Let’s take the Philadelphia stadiums for example. These were both public and privately funded. The city was able to charge a 100% tax on all food and beverages served in addition to a tax on parking. This does not include the indirect taxes of the property tax, income and wage taxes. The city does make money from the investment. If that money over time is worth the upfront money I don’t have time to figure out. So if the city is able to directly tax the events and also use the property for city events and nonprofit events then public funding is appropriate.
Now this may be the arrangement on paper it rarely works out this way on reality. Usually the team beats the city over the had with needing upgrades, and not allowing them to use it when they want etc. the only tax money they see is the taxes paid by the employees and patrons of the games.
So much like socialism in theory the public money is worthwhile but in reality the public almost always gets screwed.

>are you talking about like soviet-era policy where artists living expenses and housing were paid for but they were required to create propaganda for the state regularly and work that didn't fit the state's definition of proper art was blacklisted and not shown publically or available for purchase?
More like how in Europe opera, orchestras, museums and public art are subsidized/supported because they are seen as a cultural and societal good that improves society beyond mere commercial considerations. They bring quality of life that is not necessarily quantifiable in a purely commercial sense.

sure. good art is good for everybody, it's a good use of public funds and is better than a giant stadium to watch sports on every imaginable level. but you're neglecting to mention that europe's culture is a giant tourist economy that is economically crucial to maintain and continue developing because it makes them a fuckton of money. it also costs less because while maintaining old architecture and 600 year old paintings is expensive, it's nowhere near the cost of building, maintaining, and eventually demolishing a stadium.

...

They did the same thing in Cincinnati. Gay assed trolley that cost millions that only hipsters and few tourists will use.

Why can't rich Europeans privately support those arts they think are so awesome? Because they can get the taxpayers to do it for them.

...

i don't get why the basketball americans aren't complaining about it more. why are there no progressives calling the trolley racist? they complained about the bus routes and got them changed, now every bus that goes through a mostly white part of town loops through the shittiest parts of the city before dropping basketballs off at the mall for work and leisure. the trolley doesn't go through a single majority black neighborhood - it loops through the arts district and then hits the amtrak station once in a while before going back to its loop. the amtrak station is MAYBE 12 blocks away from our arts district too. the kind of people that live there aren't afraid to walk 12 blocks.

it's only functional purpose when it's not looping is taking yuppies 12 blocks to an amtrak station that they don't use because they have cars. the only way this thing is turning a profit is if they serve brunch 24/7.

>Why can't rich Europeans privately support those arts they think are so awesome? Because they can get the taxpayers to do it for them.
It’s not just for rich Europeans. The arts get much broader public support in Europe than in the US.

...

because they were a place on earth making art a thousand+ years ago that preserved it. europe doesn't pump money into the arts for some noble or altruistic reason, they do it because it makes fucking money. and they know that eventually these artifacts will fall apart. and they are taking a risk and investing in the arts assuming that these forms of art will still be interesting or relevant to humans in the future and that these investments will create the same economic value that their old shit did. and they do this because if their tourist economies shrink, they are fucking fucked.

and it is just for rich europeans, because rich europeans don't have to interact with with a tourist every 5 minutes. europe is not for europeans.