Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
But just as case for public funds for a new arena is undermined by the reality that average Calgarians can't afford to attend entertainment events that increasingly cater to the wealthy, these sporting facilities will be used almost exclusively by the children of the affluent. Many winter sports today are effectively restricted to the wealthy, who can afford thousands of dollars a year for elite training starting at age nine. Is it really a great public benefit that southern Alberta would have some new ski jumps and slalom courses for a handful of the children of the affluent to train on?
|
I didn't say great, I said a lot more potential benefit.
Tax dollars to an arena is a straight public injection to increase asset value for the Flames owners who will thank us all by turning around and charging 25-40% more for tickets. The Olympics, if its cost reasonable (it won't be) can bring infrastructure fast tracking, which is a tangible benefit. It's not about the games itself, they're a waste, it's about what improvements to the city can be negotiated as part of the overall project and what the dollar value it comes in at.
Again, for the record, I'm against hosting. I think the cost will be way too outrageous. However, I can understand why someone would support this and not the arena, even with the cost disparity.