Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
Would you have anything to prove this? What is your expertise to make this this claim? Very strange comment considering these documents are used as support to move forward or bury projects all the time.
|
I'm not making a bold claim here. EAI's are a laughing stock among economists and people who do cost-benefit analysis for a living.
The basic problem with EAI's is that anything shows positive economic impacts using their methodologies. Dig a big enough hole in the ground and you have $1 billion in economic impact.
The key issue is not whether you're having an impact, it's whether you're having a NET impact. As has been gone over time and time and time again in this thread, sports stadiums have little, no or negative NET economic benefit. This fact has not been dislodged so far in this thread.