Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
Laugh. Nice try to conflate two issues to make them appear equal. One is a direct transfer of public value to private and people simply wishing that fact away because there's no " money" involved.
The other is a straw man that you've erected. I don't think a single person had argued that there's zero benefit. What I've argued with multiple peer reviewed ex post and ex ante economic analyses is unanimous agreement that the benefits are smaller than the costs to the public, that the benefits are almost always vastly overstated for the public, and that most of the benefits are privatized and that this is almost entirely rent seeking behavior by sports team owners.
|
yeah ok
the cost benefit analysis would be a function of the cost, and since we don't yet know what that is, hard to argue that the costs outweigh the benefits.
And you have now admitted that there are benefits, so you can no longer argue (sensibly) that there should be no costs.