Why are fiscal conservatives like yourself for this project?
I'm a big time fiscal conservative and I'm for this project for these reasons.
1) I'm a Flames fan
2) The economic benefit is substantial
3) The government spends money on way worse things
It does hurt when billionaires are the ones who benefit, but the sad reality is is that they always are. Look who gained all the wealth during Covid. It's simply the way our economic system works and it's almost impossible to prevent because they will always have options elsewhere like moving to London, setting up off shore accounts, investing in other jurisdictions, etc. If we don't provide government funding, the team could easily find a home elsewhere and it would be way worse for tax payers and the citizens than the 500+M investment they'll provide for this.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bourque's Twin For This Useful Post:
Is there any chance that they let the Saddledome stay with renovations as a second arena? With Flames, Wranglers, Hitmen, Roughnecks and concerts, I’m sure the arena can get decently busy.
I'm a big time fiscal conservative and I'm for this project for these reasons.
1) I'm a Flames fan
2) The economic benefit is substantial
3) The government spends money on way worse things
It does hurt when billionaires are the ones who benefit, but the sad reality is is that they always are. Look who gained all the wealth during Covid. It's simply the way our economic system works and it's almost impossible to prevent because they will always have options elsewhere like moving to London, setting up off shore accounts, investing in other jurisdictions, etc. If we don't provide government funding, the team could easily find a home elsewhere and it would be way worse for tax payers and the citizens than the 500+M investment they'll provide for this.
You have to feel for the restaurants and pubs that are not around the arena, this really hurts them. During the 2012 lockout there were studies done that showed that there was no net drop in spending at pubs and restaurants, the money just was spent at different pubs and restaurants. It was not surprising to find out that no NHL hockey at that time did not have an economic impact, people are going to drink and eat regardless of whether there is hockey or an arena.
The Following User Says Thank You to Aarongavey For This Useful Post:
Why are fiscal conservatives like yourself for this project?
Fiscal conservatism is a total lie, and fiscal conservatives like to spend public money as much or more than the rest of the population.
My take is that when somebody starts preaching fiscal conservatism it's just a convenient excuse because they don't have a rational argument to oppose things that are good society.
Many conversations go:
Me "Why are you against this project that will to help the poorest or disadvantaged members of society?"
Fiscal Conservative: "Well, I'm a fiscal conservative...."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to marsplasticeraser For This Useful Post:
Is there any chance that they let the Saddledome stay with renovations as a second arena? With Flames, Wranglers, Hitmen, Roughnecks and concerts, I’m sure the arena can get decently busy.
The dome is actively crumbling. It's coming down.
The Following User Says Thank You to Gemnoble For This Useful Post:
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourque's Twin
I'm a big time fiscal conservative and I'm for this project for these reasons.
Based on what you said below, no you're not.
1) I'm a Flames fan
2) The economic benefit is substantial Well, then this would be just about the first arena that that is true for
3) The government spends money on way worse things So? This not an argument for anything, nor is it compatible with your "I'm a big time fiscal conservative"
It does hurt when billionaires are the ones who benefit, but the sad reality is is that they always are. Look who gained all the wealth during Covid. It's simply the way our economic system works and it's almost impossible to prevent because they will always have options elsewhere like moving to London, setting up off shore accounts, investing in other jurisdictions, etc. If we don't provide government funding, the team could easily find a home elsewhere and it would be way worse for tax payers and the citizens than the 500+M investment they'll provide for this.
My points in red.
But now that I think of it, you actually are landing right in line with what most people who call themselves Fiscally Conservative actually mean.
Which is, I want the government to spend money only on things I care about. Anything else is socialism!
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
The Following User Says Thank You to Bring_Back_Shantz For This Useful Post:
I'm a big time fiscal conservative and I'm for this project for these reasons.
1) I'm a Flames fan 2) The economic benefit is substantial
3) The government spends money on way worse things
It does hurt when billionaires are the ones who benefit, but the sad reality is is that they always are. Look who gained all the wealth during Covid. It's simply the way our economic system works and it's almost impossible to prevent because they will always have options elsewhere like moving to London, setting up off shore accounts, investing in other jurisdictions, etc. If we don't provide government funding, the team could easily find a home elsewhere and it would be way worse for tax payers and the citizens than the 500+M investment they'll provide for this.
citation needed.
The Following User Says Thank You to Cappy For This Useful Post:
I'm a big time fiscal conservative and I'm for this project for these reasons.
1) I'm a Flames fan
2) The economic benefit is substantial
3) The government spends money on way worse things
It does hurt when billionaires are the ones who benefit, but the sad reality is is that they always are. Look who gained all the wealth during Covid. It's simply the way our economic system works and it's almost impossible to prevent because they will always have options elsewhere like moving to London, setting up off shore accounts, investing in other jurisdictions, etc. If we don't provide government funding, the team could easily find a home elsewhere and it would be way worse for tax payers and the citizens than the 500+M investment they'll provide for this.
Have you ever tried to quantify the economic benefit it generates over and above other things vs. the overall economic cost? Or are you just guessing at it being substantial?
I don’t think actual fiscal conservatives would support this. I think it’s people who call themselves fiscally conservative but are actually just interested in conservative spending on things they don’t like or care about. That’s definitely not even close to the same thing.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
