Listening to College Sports on SiriusXM yesterday. They had a great discussion about using public (tax) dollars to build/expand professional stadiums.
There has been a lot of hub-bub lately about the enormous profits major league stadiums make off naming rights, concerts, events, etc. Tax dollars were used to build the stadiums, but the public gets no profit from those kinds of events. Some people think that's Bull ish.
The discussion yesterday was about why it's acceptable to use tax dollars to build professional stadiums for teams that have temporal contracts, but it's not OK to use tax dollars to build NCAA stadiums/arenas for teams that will NEVER leave. In other words, why is it OK for the Marlins to have a new stadium funded with tax dollars when the team isn't guaranteed to stay, but it's not OK for Oklahoma to build a stadium for the Sooners with tax dollars even though they would never leave? I think that's kinda bull ish.
What do you think?
There has been a lot of hub-bub lately about the enormous profits major league stadiums make off naming rights, concerts, events, etc. Tax dollars were used to build the stadiums, but the public gets no profit from those kinds of events. Some people think that's Bull ish.
The discussion yesterday was about why it's acceptable to use tax dollars to build professional stadiums for teams that have temporal contracts, but it's not OK to use tax dollars to build NCAA stadiums/arenas for teams that will NEVER leave. In other words, why is it OK for the Marlins to have a new stadium funded with tax dollars when the team isn't guaranteed to stay, but it's not OK for Oklahoma to build a stadium for the Sooners with tax dollars even though they would never leave? I think that's kinda bull ish.
What do you think?
