Should Public Funds ever be used on a stadium?

[Farnhamia]

Eh. There are times when a stadium may be beneficial. There are others where it would not.

Go not to the Kowani for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.

[Greed and Death]

If the people want a stadium then they can use public funds.

[Kowani]

Eh. There are times when a stadium may be beneficial. There are others where it would not.

Go not to the Kowani for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.

There are situations in the matters of governance where absolute terms are of no help to anyone.

[NERVUN]

Go not to the Kowani for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.

There are situations in the matters of governance where absolute terms are of no help to anyone.

You missed it! You should have countered with "Only a Farnhamia deals in absolutes."

On topic, I tend to lean more no than yes. Too many times are cities being held hostage for vanity projects that earn money for teams and tax burdens for the city's citizens... which the owners then threaten to leave if they don't get another stadium for more bragging rights.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Yes, stadium funding should be a mix of private and public. If we had more of this, we'd see a lot more teams owned by the fans and less owned by rich owners, because they'd be able to afford all of what they need without some rich benefactor.

[Kuominwave]

Depends how much public support there is for one. Public funds are generally to be used for public services, not for some random rich punk or corporation. Stadiums fall in between "public" and "corporation property" (such as stadiums owned by NFL)

[Risottia]

No

I say yes. Stadiums draw in a lot of revenue and also instill the idea of sport to the people

The idea of sport isn't "60000 people eat junk food while watching 20-ish people do a sport of some kind"

[Ethel mermania]

I say yes. Stadiums draw in a lot of revenue and also instill the idea of sport to the people

The idea of sport isn't "60000 people eat junk food while watching 20-ish people do a sport of some kind"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YAS8GAm-TMg

Just sayin

[Greater vakolicci haven]

I say yes. Stadiums draw in a lot of revenue and also instill the idea of sport to the people

The idea of sport isn't "60000 people eat junk food while watching 20-ish people do a sport of some kind"

Exactly. That's why governments don't do a massive kids sports push whenever the world cup and Olympics are on.

Oh wait, they do!

[Risottia]

The idea of sport isn't "60000 people eat junk food while watching 20-ish people do a sport of some kind"

Exactly. That's why governments don't do a massive kids sports push whenever the world cup and Olympics are on.

Oh wait, they do!

According to what sources? Because I don't recall money being spent on anything but WATCHING sports the last time the World Cup or the Winter Games or the FINA Championships were hosted here. I do recall a lot of bribery and a lot of money wasted in oversized infrastructures which crumbled after five years anyway because no one rented them.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Exactly. That's why governments don't do a massive kids sports push whenever the world cup and Olympics are on.

Oh wait, they do!

According to what sources? Because I don't recall money being spent on anything but WATCHING sports the last time the World Cup or the Winter Games or the FINA Championships were hosted here. I do recall a lot of bribery and a lot of money wasted in oversized infrastructures which crumbled after five years anyway because no one rented them.

Don't know about what happened in Italy, but when London 2012 was on it was all you got told about, how so many wonderful sports opurtunities were available and how kids should get involved with them. My school went a little sports nuts for a year or so, before finding out the students weren't interested.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

BTW, you might want to add an opinion, OP.

[The New California Republic]

Hosting the Olympic Games etc kinda entails many countries using public funds to build stadiums, unless suitable venues exist beforehand.

[Risottia]

According to what sources? Because I don't recall money being spent on anything but WATCHING sports the last time the World Cup or the Winter Games or the FINA Championships were hosted here. I do recall a lot of bribery and a lot of money wasted in oversized infrastructures which crumbled after five years anyway because no one rented them.

Don't know about what happened in Italy, but when London 2012 was on it was all you got told about, how so many wonderful sports opurtunities were available and how kids should get involved with them. My school went a little sports nuts for a year or so, before finding out the students weren't interested.

Well, totally unexpected, British kids aren't exactly thrilled by the CIO policies of "only junior football, no rugby, no cricket, no caber toss, no hurling, gallopping around on horses aye but only if no foxes are involved, why don't you try badminton and curling instead".

[Liriena]

Only if sports were an exclusively public thing. Public funds being used to fund stadiums for privately owned sports teams, whose owners often contribute nothing of value to either the community or their workers, is almost as gross as when Walmart gets its starvation wages de facto subsidized by the welfare state.

[American Pere Housh]

If it is a privately owned stadium then no but a publicly owned stadium that built for college sports teams of public universities then yes. A new stadium is being built for UAB football team.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Only ignore the city then makes significant profit off said stadium

[Bienenhalde]

Absolutely not. It is a waste of public money that ought to be spent on more important things.

[Aclion]

Hosting the Olympic Games etc kinda entails many countries using public funds to build stadiums, unless suitable venues exist beforehand.

Olympics are an even worse prospect then a team because with the Olympics you know they're leaving.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Absolutely not. It is a waste of public money that ought to be spent on more important things.

It's not wasteful of the government to spend money on public entertainment.

[Major-Tom]

Generally no, unless there is overwhelming public support combined with conclusive evidence that the stadium (or any entertainment venture) would bring about a great deal of revenue.

[US-SSR]

Depends how much public desire there is for the stadium. There's no reason the government shouldn't spend money on entertainment for the public.

If public funds are used on public sports entertainment then the public should own the sports teams and profit from them. Spending public funds on major league sports facilities amounts to welfare for the billionaire team owners. Our house needs new siding; why shouldn't the government pay for that if they pay for sports arenas for billionaires?

[Northwest Slobovia]

Depends how much public desire there is for the stadium. There's no reason the government shouldn't spend money on entertainment for the public.

If public funds are used on public sports entertainment then the public should own the sports teams and profit from them. Spending public funds on major league sports facilities amounts to welfare for the billionaire team owners.

Beat me to it. It doesn't bother me that Green Bay, Wisconsin owns Lambeau Field, since the Packers are effectively a publicly-owned team. They are unique in American sports, however, AFAIK.

There are reasonable objections to the amounts of money some areas spend on high school sports facilities, but that's their problem, not mine.

[NeoOasis]

No

I say yes. Stadiums draw in a lot of revenue and also instill the idea of sport to the people

Stadiums almost never draw more revenue than they cost to build and maintain. The projections tend to be based on best case senarios and often ignore the drawbacks of having a massive stadium in the middle of a city. If a football team that makes billions in profits wants a stadium, they can fund it themselves.

[Farnhamia]

I say yes. Stadiums draw in a lot of revenue and also instill the idea of sport to the people

Stadiums almost never draw more revenue than they cost to build and maintain. The projections tend to be based on best case senarios and often ignore the drawbacks of having a massive stadium in the middle of a city. If a football team that makes billions in profits wants a stadium, they can fund it themselves.

Okay, well, you explain to the mob of fans with torches and pitchforks that gathered at City Hall when their beloved Mudskippers move to Toledo.