PDA

View Full Version : More Scott Walker economics: "Let's build them a stadium"



Norman Bernstein
06-09-2015, 03:12 PM
Yeah, they sure do create their own 'reality'. Even the Cato Institute can see through this 'feed the rich' scam.....

...and this guy wants to be elected PRESIDENT?

Is this really the best the GOP has to offer?



On ABC News' This Week Sunday, Gov. Scott Walker defended (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/scott-walker-defends-tax-dollars-rate-hike-sports/story?id=31595770) his proposal (http://www.si.com/nba/2015/06/04/milwaukee-bucks-new-arena) to spend $250 million of taxpayers' money to build a new arena for the Milwaukee Bucks:"All across the nation when they do projects like this," Walker said. "It's a good deal."

The Bucks franchise, valued (http://www.forbes.com/teams/milwaukee-bucks/) at $600 million, is owned (http://www.cnbc.com/id/102097394) by a group of billionaire financiers in New York. But no matter what it's worth, Walker's statement is at wide variance with the findings of independent economists.

Economic projections for subsidized stadiums are always vastly overstated. As Dennis Coates and Brad Humphreys wrote in a 2004 Cato study (http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp89.pdf) criticizing the proposed D.C. stadium subsidy, "The wonder is that anyone finds such figures credible."

And indeed (http://www.cato.org/blog/surprise-stadium-predictions-flawed) the Washington Examiner reported in 2008 (http://www.examiner.com/a-1413574~Nats_fall_into_slump_on_field__in_revenue. html):


Attendance at Nationals Park has fallen more than a quarter short of a consultant's projections for the stadium's inaugural year, cutting into the revenue needed to pay the ballpark bonds and spurring a D.C. Council member to demand the city's money back.



Several Cato studies over the years have looked at the absurd economic claims of stadium advocates. In "Sports Pork: The Costly Relationship between Major League Sports and Government," (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1198) Raymond Keating finds:


The lone beneficiaries of sports subsidies are team owners and players. The existence of what economists call the "substitution effect" (in terms of the stadium game, leisure dollars will be spent one way or another whether a stadium exists or not), the dubiousness of the Keynesian multiplier, the offsetting impact of a negative multiplier, the inefficiency of government, and the negatives of higher taxes all argue against government sports subsidies. Indeed, the results of studies on changes in the economy resulting from the presence of stadiums, arenas, and sports teams show no positive economic impact from professional sports -- or a possible negative effect.



In Regulation magazine, (http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv23n2/coates.pdf) (.pdf) Dennis Coates and Brad Humphreys found that the economic literature on stadium subsidies comes to consistent conclusions:


The evidence suggests that attracting a professional sports franchise to a city and building that franchise a new stadium or arena will have no effect on the growth rate of real per capita income and may reduce the level of real per capita income in that city.



And in "Caught Stealing: Debunking the Economic Case for D.C. Baseball," (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2479) Coates and Humphreys looked specifically at the economics of the new baseball stadium in Washington, D.C., and found similar results:


Our conclusion, and that of nearly all academic economists studying this issue, is that professional sports generally have little, if any, positive effect on a city's economy. The net economic impact of professional sports in Washington, D.C., and the 36 other cities that hosted professional sports teams over nearly 30 years, was a reduction in real per capita income over the entire metropolitan area.



Stadiums, arenas, convention centers, arts centers, the story is the same. In 2011 theWashington Post reported (http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/artisphere-seeks-to-regroup-after-flat-first-year/2011/10/05/gIQAiPDHTL_story.html) that the financial projections for a government-funded arts center, Artisphere, in Arlington, Virginia, didn't seem to have panned out.


A 2014 report by Don Bauder in the San Diego Reader (http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2014/jul/02/citylights1-how-can-convention-centers-be-so-dumb/?utm_content=buffer23614&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer#) is worth quoting at length:


Would you take advice from a gaggle of consultants whose forecasts in the past two decades have been off by 50 percent?

Of course you wouldn't. But all around the U.S., politicians, civic planners, and particularly business executives have been following the advice of self-professed experts who invariably tell clients to build a convention center or expand an existing one.

A remarkable new book, Convention Center Follies: Politics, Power, and Public Investment in American Cities (http://www.amazon.com/Convention-Center-Follies-Politics-Investment/dp/0812245776/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1404927541&sr=1-1&keywords=heywood+sanders), published by the University of Pennsylvania Press, tells the amazing story of how one American city after another builds into a massive glut of convention-center space, even though the industry itself warns its centers that the resultant price-slashing will worsen current woes.

The author is Heywood Sanders, the nation's ranking expert on convention centers, who warned of the billowing glut in a seminal study for the Brookings Institution back in 2005. In this new, heavily footnoted, 514-page book, Sanders, a professor of public administration at the University of Texas/San Antonio, exhaustively examines consultants' forecasts in more than 50 cities....

The worst news: "These expansions will keep happening," as long as "you have a mayor who says it is free," says Sanders.



Or a governor (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/scott-walker-defends-tax-dollars-rate-hike-sports/story?id=31595770):

"We would lose $419 million over the next 20 years if we did nothing, if we said, go on, move somewhere else, which the NBA said they would do," Walker continued. "In this case, we don't raise any taxes. There are no new taxes, only existing taxes. And we get a three to one return."

The project will be funded by existing taxes on hotel rooms and rental cars, though the Wisconsin Center Board has the authority to raise the rate, he said.

"In this case, we take the tax, the revenues on hotels and rental cars that are currently paid for the convention center and allow those to continue to be paid for a new arena," Walker said. "It's not a new tax."

This wasn't the worst thing Scott Walker said to Jonathan Karl on ABC. He also said (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wisconsin-gov-scott-walker-rule-invasion-iraq/story?id=31590709)he wouldn't rule out re-invading Iraq. But any presidential candidate who believes that "All across the nation when [politicians spend taxpayers' money] on stadiums, it's a good deal," shouldn't be anywhere near the federal Treasury.

Nicholas Scheuer
06-09-2015, 03:25 PM
Don't ask, "is this the best the GOP can offer?" The answer might be "yes" What a miserable bunch of creeps.

Norman Bernstein
06-09-2015, 03:28 PM
And by all accounts, this fool is actually the front-runner! :):)

Keith Wilson
06-09-2015, 03:34 PM
Cut the university, build a stadium. What a sh*thead.

S.V. Airlie
06-09-2015, 03:40 PM
Norman....posted last week....old news!:)

Norman Bernstein
06-09-2015, 03:51 PM
Norman....posted last week....old news!:)
There's no expiration date on stupidity.

S.V. Airlie
06-09-2015, 03:53 PM
That's true, carry on!!!!

S.V. Airlie
06-09-2015, 03:56 PM
Scott probably thinks "If I build it, they will come!"

delecta
06-09-2015, 03:59 PM
Is this really the best the GOP has to offer?

I fail to see where anyone....ooops ANYONE said he was the best the GOP had to offer, do you have a link?

Norman Bernstein
06-09-2015, 04:03 PM
I fail to see where anyone....ooops ANYONE said he was the best the GOP had to offer, do you have a link?

I was merely referring to Walker's position at the top of the polls right now.

Since you seem to be discounting the idea that Walker is 'the best the GOP has to offer', perhaps you can tell us who is better. After all, I probably should be paying attention to the brightest minds of the GOP field, right?

Paul Pless
06-09-2015, 04:14 PM
perhaps you can tell us who is better. After all, I probably should be paying attention to the brightest minds of the GOP field, right?hillary is probably the best center right candidate running today

Reynard38
06-09-2015, 04:15 PM
Same thing happening here Atlanta, except it TWO new stadiums. One for the Braves and one for the Falcons. Neither of their existing facilities is very old.
Another reason I don't care for sports, college of pro.

And another reason I'm looking forward to our move to Beaufort. No sports teams.

Dan McCosh
06-09-2015, 04:29 PM
Three stadiums in downtown Detroit, one owned by a guy who "forgot" he owed a million or so in unpaid property taxes. Part of the massive default negotiated by the state's governor.

delecta
06-09-2015, 04:31 PM
I was merely referring to Walker's position at the top of the polls right now.

So where are these polls that show Walker on top, I checked the ones that matter. Perhaps I should have checked the ones that matter to liberals.

In any event the one to fear at the moment seems to be Rubio....you need to concentrate on that......like I said, good luck.

Paul Pless
06-09-2015, 04:34 PM
Three stadiums in downtown Detroit, one owned by a guy who "forgot" he owed a million or so in unpaid property taxes. Part of the massive default negotiated by the state's governor.all three detroit stadiums are behind on their water bill by hundreds of thousands of dollars, meanwhile the city shuts off water to residents for an unpaid bill as little as one hundred and fifty dollars

S.V. Airlie
06-09-2015, 04:35 PM
He's got to win the GOP nom first! Then, maybe, I'll seriously worry! Also the other Rep contenders are gonna slice and dice. They have fie first crack!r

Glen Longino
06-09-2015, 04:41 PM
He's got to win the GOP nom first! Then, maybe, I'll seriously worry!

Regardless which one of the clowns wins the nomination, you will not need to "seriously worry".
Hillary will kick his azz!

S.V. Airlie
06-09-2015, 04:42 PM
Glen, I thought Hillary in '08 was gonna too.

delecta
06-09-2015, 04:47 PM
all three detroit stadiums are behind on their water bill by hundreds of thousands of dollars, meanwhile the city shuts off water to residents for an unpaid bill as little as one hundred and fifty dollars

Lessons for conservative officials across the country, liberals know how to run a city and run it well. I'd drink to that but I like a splash of water.

Chris Smith porter maine
06-09-2015, 05:00 PM
So where are these polls that show Walker on top, I checked the ones that matter. Perhaps I should have checked the ones that matter to liberals.

In any event the one to fear at the moment seems to be Rubio....you need to concentrate on that......like I said, good luck.

Rubio lmao, the fiscally responsible one, there's a thread about him too. Had the following link in it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/10/us/politics/marco-rubio-finances-debt-loans-credit.html?_r=0

Glen Longino
06-09-2015, 05:01 PM
Glen, I thought Hillary in '08 was gonna too.

It was much different for Hillary then, Jamie.
If she had won the nomination over Obama I do not think she would have beaten McCain and what's her name.
If she wins this time, she can beat any of these Rep Clowns.

Barry
06-09-2015, 05:55 PM
And Bob Kraft wants the city of Boston to build and own a stadium for the NE Revolution soccer team(which he owns).
Seems he can't fill enough seats at Gillette stadium for Revolution games, and its become an embarrassment; Gillette is huge.
Also if the city owns the property , Kraft won't be liable for property taxes, if the franchise fails he's not out the cost.

PFFTTTT to him.

http://www.thebentmusket.com/2015/5/29/8687849/revolution-stadium-update-robert-kraft-tax-money-boston-marty-walsh

I remember when he threatened to move the Pats to Connecticut if he didn't get Public monies for a new stadium in Foxborough. Had a done deal!!
People laughed and there was a public movement to collect funds to pay for the U-hauls.

Osborne Russell
06-09-2015, 06:27 PM
Stadiums cost a lot but they absorb the anxiety of the rabble by periodic spasms of symbolic tribalism.

JimD
06-09-2015, 06:39 PM
Privatize the profits, socialize the costs. This is the way Capitalism works best.

Dan McCosh
06-09-2015, 06:59 PM
all three detroit stadiums are behind on their water bill by hundreds of thousands of dollars, meanwhile the city shuts off water to residents for an unpaid bill as little as one hundred and fifty dollars Well, you can't shut off flush toilets at a ball game, can you?

Keith Wilson
06-09-2015, 07:13 PM
Minnesota's building a stadium for the Vikings too, but we're running a budget surplus and not cutting funding for the universities. If I had my way, not one goddamn penny of tax money would go to professional sports, but that's obviously not a universally-held opinion.

If anyone is interested in poll results about the Republican presidential nomination, you can look at pretty much all of them here (http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-gop-primary). IMHO it's way too early to pay much attention. Walker's doing pretty well among the True Believers.

Captain Intrepid
06-09-2015, 07:19 PM
Well, you can't shut off flush toilets at a ball game, can you?

Why not? Shut off the water, the stadium is forced to close their doors, the team either folds or pays it's bills. Sounds like a winning scenario to me.

jclays
06-09-2015, 07:37 PM
hillary is probably the best center right candidate running today
LOL

Captain Intrepid
06-09-2015, 10:47 PM
LOL

Ok ok, she's more moderate right than centre right.