Those articles almost invariably come from academics who also often require public funding in various forms. They often display a strong tendency to dismiss any potential benefits that are difficult to quantify or are at all subjective in nature.
And the idea that the spending is highly substitutable also probably misses the mark, as it looks at spending as a 'single game choice'. Seasons ticket holders (which compose the vast majority of the spending) are not going to spend several thousands of dollars 'going to the movies or bowling'. They are far more likely to substitute that kind of spending on things like travel.
I've read several studies on this, and I find them dubious at best, if not highly biased.
|