Professional teams bail on DC due to crime wave (Baltimore, work, places)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well one way that Virginia will generate new revenue from this project is the "jock tax." All the athletes on the visiting teams will now have to pay VA income tax on the days they are in state. DC does not tax income earned by non-residents.
Really, how? How can it be lucrative considering you have to pay them to locate there?
The Yankees never turned the economic fortunes of the South Bronx. Losing the Giants and the Jets did not harm New York City and help New Jersey.
The Raiders and the As did not help the fortunes of Oakland. Las Vegas would thrive with or without them.
Brooklyn suffered an emotional wound by losing the Dodgers but did not suffer economically.
DC- our case in point- had its greatest economic era in the early 80s when only the Redskins called DC home. The Caps and Bullets were in Maryland and there was no baseball team.
Virginia is a prosperous state. Having two professional franchises on their soil does nothing for them other than gving them something to boast of in promotional materials- something they could do anyway with the teams currently a few miles away.
If Ted wants to spend $2 Billion, that is his perogative. Virginia should not have to and I hope the legislature shoots this down. No economist worth his salt ever touted such plans as prudent.
I love it. I'm an economist and I support - in strict financial terms - many sports and business incentive deals. What I am not is a liberal who would rather see the same monies wasted on social programs or a hyper-righty who can't stand to see any .gov involvement.
Staying focused on the Caps and Wizards the new business activity sight planning, construction and then new business activity centered around games, concerts, meetings etc. will produce a cascade of new spending and new money for the area (velocity if you prefer) etc.
A far away example is TX luring Toyota's new US HQ to Plano Texas......there is no possible way anyone can look that the direct and indirect benefits of this deal and say TX/Plano didn't win in a net, net, net sense.
_________
It's totally OK to not like these deals and to be against them on philosophical grounds. It is not OK to claim they don't work - when most work out very well for locals and cities.
I love it. I'm an economist and I support - in strict financial terms - many sports and business incentive deals. What I am not is a liberal who would rather see the same monies wasted on social programs or a hyper-righty who can't stand to see any .gov involvement.
Staying focused on the Caps and Wizards the new business activity sight planning, construction and then new business activity centered around games, concerts, meetings etc. will produce a cascade of new spending and new money for the area (velocity if you prefer) etc.
A far away example is TX luring Toyota's new US HQ to Plano Texas......there is no possible way anyone can look that the direct and indirect benefits of this deal and say TX/Plano didn't win in a net, net, net sense.
_________
It's totally OK to not like these deals and to be against them on philosophical grounds. It is not OK to claim they don't work - when most work out very well for locals and cities.
Were Alexandria attacting a corporate HQ like Toyota we would likely be having a different discussion. That is not the case.
If you are an economist, then you know quite well these kind of deals are never beneficial in economic terms. I posted one source and you are welcome to write out a point by point rebuttal.
The "cascade of new spending" is going to come from the pockets of taxpayers. The new jobs will be minimum wage and seasonal (not quite like Toyota, eh?). Sure, there will be new development and the like, but that would happen anway.
It has been 66 years since the Dodgers left Brooklyn for LA Since then numerous teams have moved around. There is not one case where a city gained a team and improved its fortunes beyond a marketing/image perspective. Were it so profitable, then Brooklyn, Baltimore, Oakland, etc, etc would have ponied up and never allowed the teams to depart in the first place.
Were Alexandria attacting a corporate HQ like Toyota we would likely be having a different discussion. That is not the case.
If you are an economist, then you know quite well these kind of deals are never beneficial in economic terms. I posted one source and you are welcome to write out a point by point rebuttal.
The "cascade of new spending" is going to come from the pockets of taxpayers. The new jobs will be minimum wage and seasonal (not quite like Toyota, eh?). Sure, there will be new development and the like, but that would happen anway.
It has been 66 years since the Dodgers left Brooklyn for LA Since then numerous teams have moved around. There is not one case where a city gained a team and improved its fortunes beyond a marketing/image perspective. Were it so profitable, then Brooklyn, Baltimore, Oakland, etc, etc would have ponied up and never allowed the teams to depart in the first place.
1. Sub out Plano/Toyota and sub in Arlington TX/The Dallas Cowboys and Texas Rangers if that makes you happy. People on you side co-mingle sports and other business subsidy deals all the time.
2. I don't need to write a rebuttal. Arlington Texas retired all Cowboys and Rangers related stadium debt early - some decades early. It's super easy to make any deal look bad by not accounting for spillover benefits properly. One trick the people you quoted pull is they fail too account for non-team stadium use nights like one set of weekends a while back in which ATT Stadium hosted two (might have been three) Taylor Swift concerts and then two Metallics shows.
3. The cascade of new spending is overwhelmingly private money.
With respect it does not seem like you have a good fix per how all this works.
There should be a lot of sports fans that are happier the DC teams will be playing in a safer area that is more supportive of both EVs and ICE vehicles.
It seems like a win win except for the DC criminals, who will have to find new lines of work.
1. Sub out Plano/Toyota and sub in Arlington TX/The Dallas Cowboys and Texas Rangers if that makes you happy. People on you side co-mingle sports and other business subsidy deals all the time.
2. I don't need to write a rebuttal. Arlington Texas retired all Cowboys and Rangers related stadium debt early - some decades early. It's super easy to make any deal look bad by not accounting for spillover benefits properly. One trick the people you quoted pull is they fail too account for non-team stadium use nights like one set of weekends a while back in which ATT Stadium hosted two (might have been three) Taylor Swift concerts and then two Metallics shows.
3. The cascade of new spending is overwhelmingly private money.
With respect it does not seem like you have a good fix per how all this works.
San Diego is still paying for a stadium that's been gone for over ten years.
San Diego is still paying for a stadium that's been gone for over ten years.
That one I simply don't understand. Somehow SD still has stadium debt from the 1990s and will until 2027 or '28 and the team is long gone.
I'll try to big up some background info. tonight or tomorrow.
________
OK. In reality the stadium is ~50 years old. The 90s money was for renovations that were apparently not done well. The Chargers for various reasons paid nearly zero rent and the kicker is the stadium is/has been so crappy the city had never been able to use it for much other than the Chargers and San Diego State football.
1. Sub out Plano/Toyota and sub in Arlington TX/The Dallas Cowboys and Texas Rangers if that makes you happy. People on you side co-mingle sports and other business subsidy deals all the time.
2. I don't need to write a rebuttal. Arlington Texas retired all Cowboys and Rangers related stadium debt early - some decades early. It's super easy to make any deal look bad by not accounting for spillover benefits properly. One trick the people you quoted pull is they fail too account for non-team stadium use nights like one set of weekends a while back in which ATT Stadium hosted two (might have been three) Taylor Swift concerts and then two Metallics shows.
3. The cascade of new spending is overwhelmingly private money.
With respect it does not seem like you have a good fix per how all this works.
Um, yea you do. Most economists decry these kind of deals and this one is no exception.
As for Taylor and Metallica, they are already a plethora of places in both DC and Baltimore for them to play.
Were this deal (scam actually) so sweet, Ted Leonsis would not need that kind of help (aka MONEY) from the Commonwealth of Virginia.
And raising money from bonds is not private money. Talk about not having a good fix on how this works.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
