Anda di halaman 1dari 2

PRO Alexander - Xiao

Pub subsidies financed through bonds


Hard to attract team w/o subsidy
People in community decide whether or not they benefit
C1: Sports benefit Society?
A. Positive externalities ------- non-unique; 70% dont want stadiums;
Johnson: results are almost unanimous only about 20% on avg want
to pay for subsidy
a. Holland 2014
i. Rigley field
ii. Non-use value
iii. Give city major-league benefits
iv. Even citizens who arent sports fans benefit
B. Consumer surplus ------- C/A Johnson; extend Eminent Domain 84%
think its wrong, at least 50% stadiums with subsidies also use eminent
domain
a. Honan 2005
i. 51.1 Mil dollars
ii. Justifies spending on arenas
iii. QOL benefits -> good investment for subsidy
C2: Community Benefits
1. Economy-------Jobs cost too much; C/A Gordon jobs are 147k per
job, prvt is capable of doing this without job loss; little impact
Gordon: most jobs from pub stadiums are small jobs, neg impact of
jobs and decrease of wages
a. Increase Happiness of residents
b. Happiness -> economic benefits
c. Uni of Warwick
i. Happiness up by 20%
ii. Increases employment
2. Property Values ------- result of this is stadium proximity non-unique
to subsidies but to stadiums; property value increase still occurs in neg
world
a. Increase in property values
i. Charles 2005
ii. Increase in rent
iii. Increase in property taxes
3. Social Cohesion ------- no link to community benefits; 3 studies
people are less likely to pay full amount or at all; unity is not the public
subsidy but from the stadium/team, Matt Forte

a. Impacts QOL
b. Some author
i. Stadium decreases crime
ii. Decrease in violent and nonviolent crime
iii. 3% overall
SUMMARY:
Dont buy regressive taxes

We are unique public subsidies are the only way to benefit stadium MLB
and NFL
Need money to achieve the ends to achieve happiness
Minnesota ev is only 1 city
Johnson ev has something
Overall people are willing to pay 2x cost of subsidy for stadium
Coates & Humphreys doesnt account for recent trends
Santo does account recent trends
Their jobs arg doesnt count, Santo shows jobs benefit
People want stadiums, improves econ, and improves QOL

FF:
1 opts only make privatization, they must prove benefits are harm but they
didnt, they arent actually negating bc we still have benefits
2 its all about the incentive, w/o subsidies stadiums are no built
Happiness people are willing to pay and want stadiums
Their ev outdates, recent trends: increase in employment; their ev doesnt
account for spinoff dev
Most direct way to benefit local community
Displacement this happens regardless of public or private; eminent domain
is just displacement; not unique to public subsidies
We are benefiting QOL and happiness and long-term stability