View Single Post
Old
07-22-2011, 09:11 AM
  #121
corksens
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 766
vCash: 500
Quote:
That is correct, but that doesn't mean that it should be the tax payer that funds it. If building a major arena to host a sports team, concerts and events is truly a money maker, then no taxpayer dollars should be required to build it. A smart businessman/woman/group should be able to convince enough investors in the community to finance the construction of the facility so that they can all profit from it. Ottawa already has a major rink, it's called Scotiabank place, and an insignificant amount of taxpayer money went to build it, on top of the overpass they had to pay for. Meanwhile, the OSEG is getting the city to pay the entire cost of a stadium that they will profit from, while allowing them to build developments that they will also profit from on prime real estate.
I love how this rationale is only applied to sports teams and general entertainment.

Do you agree with Federal defunding of the arts? How about the elimination of the publically funded CBC? Face it, there are countless examples of public/private partnership to help build a better overall environment.

Personally I don't want 2.1b spent on light rail. I spent more money on my home in central Ottawa and will likely never use the damn thing, but I'm okay with money going towards it because it contributes to a greater good.

The redevelopment of Landsdowne is a GOOD thing for the city. Period. The Glebites might hate it, but the rest of the city is all for a new stadium, shopping centre and entertainment facility. This is entirely a "not in my back yard" case.

corksens is offline   Reply With Quote