You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
No taxpayer funded anything is ever economically beneficial, unless it's a necessity, like roads. Every time they do a stadium/economic cost-benefit analysis, it has a negative effect.
Which pisses me off even more about these players bc their salaries would not be anything approaching what they are now w/o having that. High end welfare recipients, just like their common brethren.
those venues for the olympics are multipurpose though, and could concievably be used by other parties after the olympics. The packers stadium is just for the packers. Any "economic benefit" is also being weighed against the fact that when there's a game on, Highway 41 leading into/out of green bay becomes a nightmare parking lot if you're going with the flow of fans. I'd take a packer-less economy if it meant I didn't have to sit in traffic.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] [deleted] ago
[–] egamakadedidiut 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
No taxpayer funded anything is ever economically beneficial, unless it's a necessity, like roads. Every time they do a stadium/economic cost-benefit analysis, it has a negative effect.
Which pisses me off even more about these players bc their salaries would not be anything approaching what they are now w/o having that. High end welfare recipients, just like their common brethren.
[–] TimberWolfAlpha 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
those venues for the olympics are multipurpose though, and could concievably be used by other parties after the olympics. The packers stadium is just for the packers. Any "economic benefit" is also being weighed against the fact that when there's a game on, Highway 41 leading into/out of green bay becomes a nightmare parking lot if you're going with the flow of fans. I'd take a packer-less economy if it meant I didn't have to sit in traffic.