Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
Economists have measured these benefits and tried to put actual dollar figures to how much the intrinsic value is to people. When push comes to shove these benefits are about two orders of magnitude less than whatever the public cost was.
I've been beating this drum for a while now but there isn't one honest methodologically sound analysis that shows that public subsidies of private arenas is a sound economic decision.
And yes all the arguments you raise have been well explored.
Let's call this as it is. A bunch of billionaires see an opportunity to have someone else pay for their stuff. Who wouldn't try to bilk the unwashed masses and dress it up as civic pride?
|
Let me give you a nice tidy "analysis that shows that public subsidies of private arenas is a sound economic decision".
Assume the team is moved for better returns in another city. that's bad for Calgary right? Jobs lost. Tax revs lost.
Now assume that the team could be retained with a $100 cheque from city hall. That $100 is the amount needed to nudge the marginal return from a Calgary team above that found elsewhere.
Fictional but you get the point. Capital budgeting decisions are real.
There is a point that money from city provides high dollar return to the city vs losing the team.