I like this. Conservative fiscally as in low taxes, cut goverment size and spending type conservative? Except when its to pay for a massive unnecessary building for something im specifically interssted in.
It's not really a peace bridge rant, it's comparing the utility the public would get from a NHL rink vs a bridge.
I'm pretty conservative fiscally but I see the value in the AB gov't pitching in for a rink. The Saddledome is a dump with long lines. The seating bowl is like a morgue, and it has to be one of the worst stadiums in all major sports on this continent for amenities and entertainment around the rink. I'm pro a top tier rink, even if it has some public money in it.
Not a chance, if the AB government pays into the Edmonton rink and the Calgary rink they're throwing $300 mil at least out there when they're running a deficit.
Neither the Flames or Oilers are in any kind of trouble, they're owned by billionaires and they're paying millionaires. I think they can foot their own bills.
Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the Questions.
I'd much rather see the government throw that money into a new convention centre facility for Calgary than a new arena. We are falling behind much smaller cities in Canada for our space and ability to attract the major conferences/shows.
The Following User Says Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
I really love this design. Kudo's to the Oilers and the city of Edmonton if they can get this thing built. This absolutely blows away the ACC and whatever Vancouver is calling there barn. The gauntlet is set Calgary - this is going to be tough to beat!
The Following User Says Thank You to North East Goon For This Useful Post: