4 ms·

> a joint benefit to society american top level sports teams are part of a multi-multi-billion industry. this isn't getting together to build a library, it's

> a joint benefit to society american top level sports teams are part of a multi-multi-billion industry. this isn't getting together to build a library, it's a direct transfer of tax money to private companies that can or should easily afford to pay for it themselves. christ alive.

mardifoufs 5y ago
Stadiums exist in the rest of the world, and multi billion corporations can still be a benefit to society. I don't agree with funding huge mega stadiums for a single team. But it's ridiculous to pretend sports teams, even big ones, can't provide a huge service for a community. It's hard to overstate just how important big teams like say, Chelsea or Barca are for a huge chunk of not just the people who live in their home cities but also across the world. How do you quantify that in terms of cost? It will obviously never happen but let's say barca wanted to leave Barcelona, do you think the city shouldn't do anything about it because it helps billionaires? Tons of Arts museums, especially those for contemporary/avant garde arts are usually displaying private collections and in practice only benefit a very small minority of usually rich people. Operas and orchestras too. Shouldnt we just stop funding those too then? Where do we draw the line?
- sidr 5y ago
  > just how important big teams like say, Chelsea or Barca are for a huge chunk of not just the people who live in their home cities but also across the world. Here "important to" is equivalent to "liked/entertained by", as a form of entertainment. The question here is what forms of entertainment should tax payers pay for and your comparison with art museums, operas and orchestras is apt. > let's say barca wanted to leave Barcelona, do you think the city shouldn't do anything about it because it helps billionaires? If barca were extorting the city of Barcelona by demanding they pay 10s or 100s of millions to upgrade Camp Nou, then the city should tell the team to go to hell. This exact scenario has played out in multiple cities in the US and with the IOC and city bids.
- wincy 5y ago
  If I don’t pay the taxes to fund the stadium, men with guns will literally come to my house (this happened when I did my taxes incorrectly) to tell me to pay. I think the line should be drawn somewhere before that and everyone calls me crazy.
  - mardifoufs 5y ago
    Isnt that true for any government program? Funds going towards arts and culture also require men with guns to enforce taxation they require
  - colinmhayes 5y ago
    This is just how society works. We all work together to build things people want, you won't like everything we build, but you still contribute because you're getting plenty of stuff you do like.
  - psyc 5y ago
    What country do you live in? I'm in the U.S. and they just sent me a polite letter.
- tormeh 5y ago
  IMO we probably would be better off not funding any of it. Entertainment talent would be better allocated according to ticket sales than political prestige.

mardifoufs 5y ago

Stadiums exist in the rest of the world, and multi billion corporations can still be a benefit to society. I don't agree with funding huge mega stadiums for a single team. But it's ridiculous to pretend sports teams, even big ones, can't provide a huge service for a community. It's hard to overstate just how important big teams like say, Chelsea or Barca are for a huge chunk of not just the people who live in their home cities but also across the world. How do you quantify that in terms of cost? It will obviously never happen but let's say barca wanted to leave Barcelona, do you think the city shouldn't do anything about it because it helps billionaires? Tons of Arts museums, especially those for contemporary/avant garde arts are usually displaying private collections and in practice only benefit a very small minority of usually rich people. Operas and orchestras too. Shouldnt we just stop funding those too then? Where do we draw the line?

sidr 5y ago
> just how important big teams like say, Chelsea or Barca are for a huge chunk of not just the people who live in their home cities but also across the world. Here "important to" is equivalent to "liked/entertained by", as a form of entertainment. The question here is what forms of entertainment should tax payers pay for and your comparison with art museums, operas and orchestras is apt. > let's say barca wanted to leave Barcelona, do you think the city shouldn't do anything about it because it helps billionaires? If barca were extorting the city of Barcelona by demanding they pay 10s or 100s of millions to upgrade Camp Nou, then the city should tell the team to go to hell. This exact scenario has played out in multiple cities in the US and with the IOC and city bids.
wincy 5y ago
If I don’t pay the taxes to fund the stadium, men with guns will literally come to my house (this happened when I did my taxes incorrectly) to tell me to pay. I think the line should be drawn somewhere before that and everyone calls me crazy.
- mardifoufs 5y ago
  Isnt that true for any government program? Funds going towards arts and culture also require men with guns to enforce taxation they require
- colinmhayes 5y ago
  This is just how society works. We all work together to build things people want, you won't like everything we build, but you still contribute because you're getting plenty of stuff you do like.
- psyc 5y ago
  What country do you live in? I'm in the U.S. and they just sent me a polite letter.
tormeh 5y ago
IMO we probably would be better off not funding any of it. Entertainment talent would be better allocated according to ticket sales than political prestige.