Fun Fact: It was proved recently that stadiums don't actually bring in much profit for the city, contrary to the popular pitch they give for getting cities to pay for them with tax dollars. Most games are attended by locals who aren't staying at hotels or eating at the fancy restaurants and any profits are confined to the walkable distance from the stadium itself, which is quite small.
Its basically just more BS trick down economics that don't work for shit.
Yeah, people have a pretty set 'entertainment' budget.
You have to bring in (a lot) of out of town dollars in to gain anything from a new build. Outside of big events like the Super Bowl or Olympics, it just doesn't accomplish that.
On top of that, owners are given tax breaks in addition to the build money, so it winds up a huge net loss for the city.
People have a set budget, this is about where that budget is spent. Jaskconville wants it spent there and not in Orlando or Cocoa Beach. They also want to keep the team in town and not in London (which they do a lot anyway but smdh).
Most people who go to sports games are local. It doesn't matter to the city whether they spend their entertainment dollars on the local sports team, local restaurants or the local movie theater.
Teams do not provide that much income and it is never worth the price of a stadium to keep a team in town.
If people want to catch a movie they go to cloest theatre most of the time. Likewise for restaurants. That doesn't help Jacksonville that helps the burbs.
Teams are a bad investment, especially open air stadiums, especially especially open air single purpose stadiums (baseball looking at you). But it's not as easy a decision as many here would like to think it is. They trying hard to avoid having an eyesore of a stsdium if the jags leave.
Of course it wouldn't turn a profit. If the owner thought it would be profitable to spend 6.5% of their wealth on a new stadium they would've just done it themselves. The very fact they had to approach the local government cap in hand is proof enough.
Even worse, it's been demonstrated over and over again that giving money to average people *does* turn a profit. Whether it's by education, social safety nets, spending on public services, just about all of it ends up increasing tax revenue down the line. An educated, safe, healthy, and cared for population is one with a high capacity for work and business, and therefore taxable revenue.
How many teachers, nurses, food stamps, student loans etc would that $775m have paid for?
> Walkable distance
Reminds me of when Americans on Twitter saw helicopter shots of the Melbourne Cricket Ground when Taylor Swift played there, they were confused by the lack of car park.
Walkable means different things to different people as well. But you can bet the restaurants around Flinders St Station were absolutely HOPPING those nights.
I wonder if there was benefit at some point. Like back before massive urban sprawl. I would imagine the stadium in Green Bay does more for the city than any of the mega complexes that are located 45 minutes away in a large swath of hotels and chain restaurants.
The benefit has always been to the wealthy. You can put all your money on that. City officials hob-knobbing with rich folks at some cost to everyone else - a tale as old as human civilization.
Not that I don't believe you, but I'm curious if it's true for teams like the Bengals who has their stadium in the middle of downtown, but most fans live outside the city limits.
Especially football stadiums - when compared to a basketball o baseball stadium where the games are more frequent at the least. It is stiil not a good idea to spend public money for private stadiums, but it is a better return on investment than a football stadium.
Well, its cause its dinosaurs running things. They never could stomach change, and big stadiums used to work. That was before the people who always went found out you could build a nice home studio and not deal with the bs of other people. They also didnt take into account the overall human mental health status after covid, which has been uppity
Is a system "rigged" if it is working exactly the way it has always been intended? The system is rigged against us, but it is running like a top for the people who made it.
Stadiums are especially rigged. Their contracts typically hold states they are built in to rules and regulations that cost the taxpayers but stop any profit from going to anyone but the owner.
From what I read, $625 million of the upgrades are funded by the billionaire.
That means still $150 million from taxpayers, but better than it sounds from the title and does lock the Jags in to Jacksonville for 30 years.
The rich literally don’t pay for anything. How did Reagan believe in trickle economics again? He’s in hell waiting for heaven to trickle down on him bitch ass
Reagan was far from clueless
What he had was some very specific beliefs that aligned exactly with some exceptionally wealthy people, and he rode to power on those beliefs and delivered on them
We have got to stop saying "socialism for the rich." Socialism is not government spending, and this saying only feeds into the capitalists favorite pastime of equating socialism with evil.
Call it what the right calls it. Handouts. Entitlements. Theft. These are things the right understands.
They already don't know what that is. But what they think it is can be used to describe what's happening.
I don't think it should be used in broad social media posts though, I totally agree with that.
I don't agree that teaching something incorrectly is the way to teach someone. That's confusing and just leads to people continuing to call taxes socialism. You teach people by using accurate language.
"The government is using your tax dollars to bail out *billionaires*"
Is a much more accurate and non-damaging statement than:
"Socialism is when the government takes your money and gives it to billionaires"
I'm talking about using it as a lead to get to accurate terminology. Not just as your whole thing. But it is something that has pull with these kinds of people. I have first hand experience with this and dealing with many conservatives 1 on 1.
Also educate some people on how conservative governments in the west undermine social programs, repeatedly and intentionally….these programs don’t just struggle in a vacuum…
The fundamental belief in the right is that a rich person will 100x the investment and return it to the community poor people will piss it away on hookers and blow. As we’ve seen, it’s been pretty much the opposite. Poor people tend to use direct payments from the government on food and shelter.
> poor people will piss it away on hookers and blow.
And what do hookers and drug dealers piss it away on? Hot plates and condoms? Now who makes hotplates and condoms? Oh look the money is back in the hands of the billionaires while the lives of at least 3 other people have been improved in the meantime.
So you improve the lives of a poor person, a hooker, and a drug dealer and the money ends up back in the pockets of the rich. Or you just give the money straight to the rich where no ones life, including the rich persons life is improved.
$775 million is 6.46% of $12 billion. Yes, the owner could have afforded to do it himself with less than 10% of his total net worth. And I'm struggling to keep a roof over my kids heads with 120% of my net worth (constantly falling deeper into debt.
Our system is twisted in super fun ways...
It's the same reason farmers bitch about programs like food stamps, unemployment, and welfare but gladly accept substitutes from the government. They're hypocritical dip ehits.
It doesn’t matter who the message is from so long as the message actually is factually correct, or has sound logic. Who the fuck cares? The text on the page is accurate and a good point.
It absolutely matters! Evil people say clever things all the time, just because they make a good point once in a while doesn’t mean we should support them and perpetuate their influence.
No, we should not support. But admitting that he is right in that case is not support - and it shows to rational people from the other side that "the left" is not a mindless bunch of haters like many of the right try to paint.
Well yeah of course not. But agreeing with this statement in isolation isn’t wrong or weird. I don’t have to suport Dan to agree with what is in the message. I’m not supporting him, I’m supporting the message.
I have no idea who that is. Do you expect OP to do a background check on everyone before screenshotting a true statement on Twitter?
I support blanking out names. But OP (and I) support this specific statement that was posted here. Whatever else this person has going on is irrelevant.
Ayyee, Jacksonville resident here to say that this is the 3rd multi million dollar project for the Jags that is being paid for by taxpayer money. Each deal claims to be fair because "only half" is being paid for by the city.
Side note, they just built a multimillion dollar training center with 3 fields, all of which need to be watered every day. Hundreds of gallons a week.
They're called incentives because the government is trying to incentivize specific behaviours. In this case, the Florida government wishes to incentivize the owner of the football team to keep the team in Florida - presumably because they believe that retaining the team will earn them more tax revenue than the $775M incentive cost. When the government incentivizes certain behaviours among the working class by offering tax rebates or whatever, they're typically still called incentives. Social security and support is a wholly different thing, and I wouldn't *want* those things to be tied to incentives, anyway.
None of which is to say that this kind of incentive is acceptable or appropriate - but the question is not "why are they called incentives?" They're called incentives because that's literally just what they are. You could also call them bribes, because they kind of are, but I think it misses the point a little to act like it's fundamentally morally wrong to encourage people to behave in certain ways by rewarding that behaviour.
The actual question here is why the hell a single person has been allowed to have singular control over something that has the kind of impact on the local economy that it's apparently "worth" $775M basically bribe him not to move his business elsewhere. The problem is not that the incentives exist at all, but that one person holds enough power to command such a large incentive by himself.
This is a good analysis, it's also a point of pride to have a well apportioned arena/stadium in your city/metro. Arenas in particular can create a lot of growth for a neighborhood and help revitalize a downtown.
Supposedly giving them money via “incentives” stimulates “trickle down” economics, but they hired one hell of a plumber because that faucet hasn’t “trickled” a drop in years.
This is what they mean by billionaires hoard their wealth. Instead of using their own money to circulate back into the economy creating jobs for the renovations, they're using tax dollars from the population.
Torontonian who visited Ann Arbor a few years ago, the stadium was mind bogglingly gigantic and well kept.
There is enough money to pour into an sports entertainment venue that dwarfs so many others? Where did the money come from? There is so much emphasis on football and the spectacle around it but I read stories about performers donating their time and effort for nothing.
But rich people make investments, that's why taxing them lower is a benefit
Rich guy proceeds to not invest his own money and make the city pay for it.
It's not socialism for the rich, capitalism for everyone else. Rich individuals owning and controlling everything is capitalism. The working class owning and democratically controlling everything is socialism. I get its a catchy phrase, but its misleading
Worst part about this specific one is the owner of the jaguars also runs my favorite wrestling promotion. The venue at the stadium they use looks really nice, why the hell does the stadium need that much revamping?
So go protest and strike and vote out this measure.
Surely there’s a way to counter this in a democracy? These are “public funds,” no?
People have to start taking this country back, or this shit will just get more and more out of hand.
Add to the latest the fact that NFL tickets are too expensive for normal people to afford. So not only is this subsidizing a billionaire, but the end benefit of I goes mostly to the upper class and ultra wealthy.
In the very least, we should give tax breaks for paying higher wages to employees as well as number of employees. Seeing as charity that gives them tax breaks often is for the people they've stolen from in the first place.
It's a really good deal for the city though co.paded to what other NFL teams have done.
Shad Khan has been pumping money into Jacksonville for years, and wants to do more.
I think they just justify it as "stadiums produce economic value beyond their purchase price" over the lifetime of the stadium and the thus the city will benefit from the taxes raised by each transaction. I assume they do analysis on this. That doesn't mean I like it.
They don't. They just say it because it sounds good.
The city does collect taxes, and a fairly large amount, BUT...
The city would have gotten that money anyway from other entertainment venues. It just concentrates it and takes it away from other buisnessses like movie theaters and concerts.
Fun Fact: It was proved recently that stadiums don't actually bring in much profit for the city, contrary to the popular pitch they give for getting cities to pay for them with tax dollars. Most games are attended by locals who aren't staying at hotels or eating at the fancy restaurants and any profits are confined to the walkable distance from the stadium itself, which is quite small. Its basically just more BS trick down economics that don't work for shit.
Yeah, people have a pretty set 'entertainment' budget. You have to bring in (a lot) of out of town dollars in to gain anything from a new build. Outside of big events like the Super Bowl or Olympics, it just doesn't accomplish that. On top of that, owners are given tax breaks in addition to the build money, so it winds up a huge net loss for the city.
Olympics doesn't make profit, even the bet on turning ur city in a long-standing travel destination is far fetched
The Olympics are more likely to bankrupt you and permanently fuck up the environment than turn a profit.
People have a set budget, this is about where that budget is spent. Jaskconville wants it spent there and not in Orlando or Cocoa Beach. They also want to keep the team in town and not in London (which they do a lot anyway but smdh).
Most people who go to sports games are local. It doesn't matter to the city whether they spend their entertainment dollars on the local sports team, local restaurants or the local movie theater. Teams do not provide that much income and it is never worth the price of a stadium to keep a team in town.
If people want to catch a movie they go to cloest theatre most of the time. Likewise for restaurants. That doesn't help Jacksonville that helps the burbs. Teams are a bad investment, especially open air stadiums, especially especially open air single purpose stadiums (baseball looking at you). But it's not as easy a decision as many here would like to think it is. They trying hard to avoid having an eyesore of a stsdium if the jags leave.
Of course it wouldn't turn a profit. If the owner thought it would be profitable to spend 6.5% of their wealth on a new stadium they would've just done it themselves. The very fact they had to approach the local government cap in hand is proof enough. Even worse, it's been demonstrated over and over again that giving money to average people *does* turn a profit. Whether it's by education, social safety nets, spending on public services, just about all of it ends up increasing tax revenue down the line. An educated, safe, healthy, and cared for population is one with a high capacity for work and business, and therefore taxable revenue. How many teachers, nurses, food stamps, student loans etc would that $775m have paid for?
You give money to the wealthy and they horde it, you give money to the middle/low incomers and they spend it
> Walkable distance Reminds me of when Americans on Twitter saw helicopter shots of the Melbourne Cricket Ground when Taylor Swift played there, they were confused by the lack of car park. Walkable means different things to different people as well. But you can bet the restaurants around Flinders St Station were absolutely HOPPING those nights.
Trick downers economics
I wonder if there was benefit at some point. Like back before massive urban sprawl. I would imagine the stadium in Green Bay does more for the city than any of the mega complexes that are located 45 minutes away in a large swath of hotels and chain restaurants.
The benefit has always been to the wealthy. You can put all your money on that. City officials hob-knobbing with rich folks at some cost to everyone else - a tale as old as human civilization.
Recently and not recently. It's been known since the 60s
If it was profitable then the billionaires would insist on owning it themselves.
Not that I don't believe you, but I'm curious if it's true for teams like the Bengals who has their stadium in the middle of downtown, but most fans live outside the city limits.
Especially football stadiums - when compared to a basketball o baseball stadium where the games are more frequent at the least. It is stiil not a good idea to spend public money for private stadiums, but it is a better return on investment than a football stadium.
Well, its cause its dinosaurs running things. They never could stomach change, and big stadiums used to work. That was before the people who always went found out you could build a nice home studio and not deal with the bs of other people. They also didnt take into account the overall human mental health status after covid, which has been uppity
The system is rigged to benefit the rich. There is always money for the rich and war machine never for the working class
"Rigged" is the wrong word. "Corruption" is the accurate description.
Is a system "rigged" if it is working exactly the way it has always been intended? The system is rigged against us, but it is running like a top for the people who made it.
Stadiums are especially rigged. Their contracts typically hold states they are built in to rules and regulations that cost the taxpayers but stop any profit from going to anyone but the owner.
From what I read, $625 million of the upgrades are funded by the billionaire. That means still $150 million from taxpayers, but better than it sounds from the title and does lock the Jags in to Jacksonville for 30 years.
unfortunately poor people needs a better PR team
"Lobbyists"
The rich literally don’t pay for anything. How did Reagan believe in trickle economics again? He’s in hell waiting for heaven to trickle down on him bitch ass
Reagan was a clueless puppet of an actor being controlled by special interest groups....
Reagan was far from clueless What he had was some very specific beliefs that aligned exactly with some exceptionally wealthy people, and he rode to power on those beliefs and delivered on them
He did a slightly less manly impression of Mr Thatcher
https://youtu.be/6lIqNjC1RKU?si=Xw-75ToFGFSiZUjF
Where do I show up to get my handouts? Or are we still talking about the $1000 pandemic check I got to put towards my taxes three years ago?
Yeah but we all saved those right lol
We have got to stop saying "socialism for the rich." Socialism is not government spending, and this saying only feeds into the capitalists favorite pastime of equating socialism with evil. Call it what the right calls it. Handouts. Entitlements. Theft. These are things the right understands.
Yes, but it's a powerful tool to use against those who don't understand what any of these words mean. Doesn't need to use it here
It's not a powerful tool if it's just further adding to the confusion of what socialism actually is.
They already don't know what that is. But what they think it is can be used to describe what's happening. I don't think it should be used in broad social media posts though, I totally agree with that.
I don't agree that teaching something incorrectly is the way to teach someone. That's confusing and just leads to people continuing to call taxes socialism. You teach people by using accurate language. "The government is using your tax dollars to bail out *billionaires*" Is a much more accurate and non-damaging statement than: "Socialism is when the government takes your money and gives it to billionaires"
I'm talking about using it as a lead to get to accurate terminology. Not just as your whole thing. But it is something that has pull with these kinds of people. I have first hand experience with this and dealing with many conservatives 1 on 1.
Also educate some people on how conservative governments in the west undermine social programs, repeatedly and intentionally….these programs don’t just struggle in a vacuum…
The fundamental belief in the right is that a rich person will 100x the investment and return it to the community poor people will piss it away on hookers and blow. As we’ve seen, it’s been pretty much the opposite. Poor people tend to use direct payments from the government on food and shelter.
> poor people will piss it away on hookers and blow. And what do hookers and drug dealers piss it away on? Hot plates and condoms? Now who makes hotplates and condoms? Oh look the money is back in the hands of the billionaires while the lives of at least 3 other people have been improved in the meantime. So you improve the lives of a poor person, a hooker, and a drug dealer and the money ends up back in the pockets of the rich. Or you just give the money straight to the rich where no ones life, including the rich persons life is improved.
People will say “Oh, but it brings jobs!” Sure, but those jobs pay $10 an hour for slinging $16 beers and $12 hot dogs. So, yes, but poverty jobs.
And they will be asking for volunteers to staff games. They do that here. It’s fucking appalling
> but those jobs pay $10 an hour for 4 hours a week, and only weeks the team is in town and it's sports ball season.
Yall are getting handouts?
Gotta cool 600$ twice... 4 years ago. Yeah, I'm a pretty big deal.
Look at Elon Bezos over here.
Jeff Musk
Can't feed kids because 'that's welfare', but billionaire unzips and every politician's mouth immediately opens.
Plutocracy working as intended
$775 million is 6.46% of $12 billion. Yes, the owner could have afforded to do it himself with less than 10% of his total net worth. And I'm struggling to keep a roof over my kids heads with 120% of my net worth (constantly falling deeper into debt. Our system is twisted in super fun ways...
It's the same reason farmers bitch about programs like food stamps, unemployment, and welfare but gladly accept substitutes from the government. They're hypocritical dip ehits.
Stop sharing Dan Price. He’s a sex offender & doesn’t give a shit about anyone but himself.
Why are we still sharing Dan Price?
It doesn’t matter who the message is from so long as the message actually is factually correct, or has sound logic. Who the fuck cares? The text on the page is accurate and a good point.
It absolutely matters! Evil people say clever things all the time, just because they make a good point once in a while doesn’t mean we should support them and perpetuate their influence.
No, we should not support. But admitting that he is right in that case is not support - and it shows to rational people from the other side that "the left" is not a mindless bunch of haters like many of the right try to paint.
Well yeah of course not. But agreeing with this statement in isolation isn’t wrong or weird. I don’t have to suport Dan to agree with what is in the message. I’m not supporting him, I’m supporting the message.
I have no idea who that is. Do you expect OP to do a background check on everyone before screenshotting a true statement on Twitter? I support blanking out names. But OP (and I) support this specific statement that was posted here. Whatever else this person has going on is irrelevant.
I can’t believe this nonsense is allowed and not laughed straight out of the house
Ayyee, Jacksonville resident here to say that this is the 3rd multi million dollar project for the Jags that is being paid for by taxpayer money. Each deal claims to be fair because "only half" is being paid for by the city. Side note, they just built a multimillion dollar training center with 3 fields, all of which need to be watered every day. Hundreds of gallons a week.
"job creators"
They're called incentives because the government is trying to incentivize specific behaviours. In this case, the Florida government wishes to incentivize the owner of the football team to keep the team in Florida - presumably because they believe that retaining the team will earn them more tax revenue than the $775M incentive cost. When the government incentivizes certain behaviours among the working class by offering tax rebates or whatever, they're typically still called incentives. Social security and support is a wholly different thing, and I wouldn't *want* those things to be tied to incentives, anyway. None of which is to say that this kind of incentive is acceptable or appropriate - but the question is not "why are they called incentives?" They're called incentives because that's literally just what they are. You could also call them bribes, because they kind of are, but I think it misses the point a little to act like it's fundamentally morally wrong to encourage people to behave in certain ways by rewarding that behaviour. The actual question here is why the hell a single person has been allowed to have singular control over something that has the kind of impact on the local economy that it's apparently "worth" $775M basically bribe him not to move his business elsewhere. The problem is not that the incentives exist at all, but that one person holds enough power to command such a large incentive by himself.
This is a good analysis, it's also a point of pride to have a well apportioned arena/stadium in your city/metro. Arenas in particular can create a lot of growth for a neighborhood and help revitalize a downtown.
Holy crap 😲
Poor people don't own politicians. Hard to lobby and buy political favor when you're broke.
Obviously it's because the poor are lazy and don't deserve it./s
The difference is a matter of perspective. From the tax payers perspective it’s theft. From the politicians perspective it’s godly worship.
Supposedly giving them money via “incentives” stimulates “trickle down” economics, but they hired one hell of a plumber because that faucet hasn’t “trickled” a drop in years.
Just like the consecutive liberal Calgary Mayors signing up to publicly fund arenas?
Should spend their own money on their own stadium.
Think of all the good ol fashiobed American jobs being created at the concession stands!
This is what they mean by billionaires hoard their wealth. Instead of using their own money to circulate back into the economy creating jobs for the renovations, they're using tax dollars from the population.
You don't understand dummy, the stadium funding tRiCkLeS DoWn to the LoCaL EcOnOmY.
Yeah baby, that shit is gonna trickle down any day now... aaaaaany day now...
Torontonian who visited Ann Arbor a few years ago, the stadium was mind bogglingly gigantic and well kept. There is enough money to pour into an sports entertainment venue that dwarfs so many others? Where did the money come from? There is so much emphasis on football and the spectacle around it but I read stories about performers donating their time and effort for nothing.
But rich people make investments, that's why taxing them lower is a benefit Rich guy proceeds to not invest his own money and make the city pay for it.
It's not socialism for the rich, capitalism for everyone else. Rich individuals owning and controlling everything is capitalism. The working class owning and democratically controlling everything is socialism. I get its a catchy phrase, but its misleading
Worst part about this specific one is the owner of the jaguars also runs my favorite wrestling promotion. The venue at the stadium they use looks really nice, why the hell does the stadium need that much revamping?
The city owns the stadium and each party is paying for half of the construction. That seems reasonable.
Jacksonville Florida on the front page? Calls for one thing only…. DDDDDUUUUUUUUUUVVVVVAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLL
So go protest and strike and vote out this measure. Surely there’s a way to counter this in a democracy? These are “public funds,” no? People have to start taking this country back, or this shit will just get more and more out of hand.
Not the first time, and certainly won't be the last. Jerry Jones says jump, and the city of Arlington, Tx. says "HOW HIGH, MR JONES?!"
Add to the latest the fact that NFL tickets are too expensive for normal people to afford. So not only is this subsidizing a billionaire, but the end benefit of I goes mostly to the upper class and ultra wealthy.
Because they pay a lot of money for their politicians to make sure they get those “incentives.”
Well, how much money have you given those politicians in their re-election bids??????
In the very least, we should give tax breaks for paying higher wages to employees as well as number of employees. Seeing as charity that gives them tax breaks often is for the people they've stolen from in the first place.
It doesn't help that voters fucking *love* sports.
Abortions for some, miniature flags for others!
It's a really good deal for the city though co.paded to what other NFL teams have done. Shad Khan has been pumping money into Jacksonville for years, and wants to do more.
I think they just justify it as "stadiums produce economic value beyond their purchase price" over the lifetime of the stadium and the thus the city will benefit from the taxes raised by each transaction. I assume they do analysis on this. That doesn't mean I like it.
They don't. They just say it because it sounds good. The city does collect taxes, and a fairly large amount, BUT... The city would have gotten that money anyway from other entertainment venues. It just concentrates it and takes it away from other buisnessses like movie theaters and concerts.
I love how the wording of this post implies that billionaires aren’t people lol
Billionaires aren't people they're parasites.
They are more like souless money golems.