Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="cuseinchina, post: 1054884, member: 3079"]
The financial benefit is case dependent and has a lot to do with the intangible benefit of having a stadium - civic pride, national notoriety, etc which drive development, tourism, dining and lodging, traffic in adjacent attractions etc.

The people you elect should be acting on your behalf to figure out what the benefits are relative to costs.  But as is always the case with a public good, some of the benefit is difficult to calculate because it does not involve direct cash flow.    That does not mean it doesn't make economic sense, intangible assets have significant value - think of a strong brand name which is physically nothing but economically very valuable but nearly impossible to pin down to a specific number.         Again you are electing people to make those decisions on your behalf.   If people don't like it, elect new leaders.      When shareholders don't like management, they team up and kick them out at the annual meeting.

What is the benefit for example of allocating land, tax breaks, and tax dollars to something like an art museum that is necessarily going to lose money and rely on donations and ongoing help from the city to continue operating?    it's the stuff around it, and it's the 'branding' it provides to the city.  Better to have a noteworthy museum than to not, for various reasons.     Look at Milwaukee -- that city was left for dead many years ago.    Then they built a world class art museum and all of a sudden people from Chicago are moving there and buying luxury condos on the lake.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?