I began the week talking about opera. If I end the week discussing football, you can be sure that I’m closer to my home turf.
Which doesn’t make this any easier, for, though many operas stay afloat with taxpayer funds, far more taxpayer money goes to football.
The National Football League, owned by billionaires whose product rakes in big bucks through ticket sales and eye-popping broadcast fees, could certainly support itself. And yet these rich folk don’t merely pass the hat, they wave guns under the table, extorting money out of taxpayers across the country.
Writing in The Atlantic, Gregg Easterbrook surveys the damage. He might as well channel Carl Sagan, for the answer to “how much do taxpayers waste on football?” is “billions and billions.”
Santa Clara’s new “home” for the 49ers is a $1.3 billion stadium, which, writes Easterbrook, although largely “underwritten by the public,” will drive revenue that will mostly “be pocketed by Denise DeBartolo York, whose net worth is estimated at $1.1 billion, and members of her family.”
So much of subsidy ends up helping mainly the rich. Opera? Mainly an upper class thing. Football? It may reach the lowbrow, but boy, do the rich make out like bandits, off the taxpayers.
Indeed, argues Easterbrook, this is worse than the bailouts. “Public handouts for modern professional football never end and are never repaid.”
If you don’t oppose subsidies to football, which are obviously unnecessary transfer payments from the poor to the super rich, what subsidy would you oppose?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
6 replies on “Billions to Billionaires”
I have a friend who used to say, “I wouldn’t give a nickel to see a monkey (euphemism for to have sexual relations) with a football.”
If I agree with that, and I do, why should my tax money support “Fat Cat” sports franchise owners?
How true. and the overall touted economic benefits are greatly exaggerated. Touchdown!
Easy enough to open up the public monopoly franchise to public bidding. That would straighten it out in a hurry.
Some years ago, in Tampa, FL, the Tampa bay Bucs threatened to move unless they got new stadium (or, perhaps the old one refurbished) at tax payer expense. At the same time, the City of Tampa and Hillsborough County ( where Tampa is) needed more and upgraded police and fire stations. There was a ballot question–money for the police and fire stations VOTED DOWN. For a stadium, voted yes. (actually, was 2 separate elections, several weeks apart)-but that is where the voters and politicians stood. (Well, they did use SOME of the money to build a new practice field for the NY Yankees so they could continue their spring training in style. The late George Steinbrenner didn’t have the money for a field. Like the Glaser’s couldn’t afford a stadium.
I often bemoan the billions of tax dollars funneled thru sports stadiums to team owners. Supporters say that it benifits local businesses. My end statement is “that if its such a good deal, why don’t they build their own playpens and keep all the profits?” Because, I am told, they would go to whatever city will fork out for a new stadium. I think the city managers must be getting kickback because they never say NO.
Houston did say NO to Bud Adams and his Oilers and they moved to TN becoming the Titans. We remained unaffected by this until a new spot opened up in the league and we built the Texans. And the debt goes on…
Yet more evidence, that the more the government can pick winners and losers, the more the rich will have the advantage over the rest of us.
I don’t expect them to start picking the Super Bowl winner. But I seem to remember stories of national athletes that didn’t do well, being penalized at home by their government because of it. Some even executed I think.