Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
Corporatejay if you would bother to read my history of posts in this thread you'd find that the substance of opposition is that the net benefits are negative to the city. There is a sizeable consensus of impartial peer reviewed research to support this.
You simply wave your hand and say that there are net benefits, run the numbers or look it up.
|
This is too simple of a statement. There is an entire spectrum of ways that the city and the flames can partner, and to suggest that every instance would be negative is false. If the city puts zero money upfront, and receives future revenue streams in the form of taxes on development that would otherwise not occur, show me mathematicaly how this can be a negative benefit to the city from a financial perspective.