12/21/24
March 25, 2004
Study: Aid for baseball stadiums unneeded.: While it's already common sense that huge public subsidies for team owners shouldn't pass the laugh test, two Dayton University economics professors have conducted a study concluding that they're not even necessary on their own terms -- the subsidies, not the economics professors -- because privately-funded facilities are perfectly capable of paying for themselves anyway. (Substitute any major sport for "baseball".)
I've never understood the justifications of spending public money on privately-owned property. I'm glad this study was done, but in reality I couldn't care less if building stadiums is profitable. It's a private venture, with the profits going to private hands - public money should never be involved. Besides, I can't think of one instance where a publicly funded stadium ended up being a good deal for a city. I can think of lots of times where the city got the short end of the deal. When Al Davis brought the Raiders back to Oakland, I watched the city treasury get pilfered to mutilate the Coliseum: once a classic baseball stadium, now a lopsided monstrosity. The city spent millions in taxpayer money to accommodate the Raiders. What did they get for their troubles? A lawsuit from Davis.
posted by dusted at 01:25 PM on March 25, 2004
Some of the best summary work on this, IMO, has been done in Dollars and Sense magazine. Then there's this classic (though pessimistic) Brookings report from 1997.
posted by jeffmshaw at 02:17 PM on March 25, 2004
Just in time for New York to spend $600 million on a stadium for the Jets!
posted by Jugwine at 02:51 PM on March 25, 2004
Not sure why you all want to treat stadium subsidies differently than any other corporate subsidy, of which there are many and more each day. The rationale is economic development--jobs and tax revenue--that wouldn't occur if the subsidy didn't get the beneficiary to agree to the locale.
posted by billsaysthis at 07:54 PM on March 25, 2004
... how about because there's no evidence stadiums promote jobs or increase tax revenue? And I suspect many of us would say lots of corporate subsidies are bad, too.
posted by jeffmshaw at 09:20 PM on March 25, 2004
jeffm, can't disagree with your latter point, corps definitely play one gov against the other for the biggest meal.
posted by billsaysthis at 11:25 PM on March 25, 2004
I would agree in general with the authors. But what about how privately funded stadiums lockout fans by requiring expensive seat licenses just to get the right to get a ticket?
posted by Bag Man at 02:14 PM on March 29, 2004
Heresy.