View Single Post
Old
03-24-2013, 03:36 PM
  #63
Alexdaman
Wolfman
 
Alexdaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hell/Heaven
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,009
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gelu88 View Post
That't the theory, but the problem is that in reality, after you go back and do an economic analysis after the fact, nearly every instance of public sports financing is pure corporate welfare and does nothing to help the economy. The idea is simply false.

This recent CBC report summarizes the research well: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...iums-cost.html

For a more acedemic overview see this: http://www.ualberta.ca/~bhumphre/papers/pfm2003.pdf

Abstract:
Well of course when it comes to sports funding it's much better for a society to have private instead of public funding.

But one can still argue that some investments are better than others. Of course the big O is a total failure and ended up costing taxpayers much more $ than it could generate. That's because the stadium is not used enough, not enough concerts, not enough sport... But then if you look at the Bell centre who is one of the most busiest amphitheater in North America can easily be argued to be a good investment of public funds.

It's all about the building's location, management and the economic situation of the city. Provincial and Federal investments are also better than loans, but private investments are always the best option.

Alexdaman is offline   Reply With Quote