The Dumbest Thing I've Ever Read - part the second

The econ types have, for decades, studied the macro-benefit (limited in territory to the entity providing the moolah) of public money to build sports stadiums. Welfare for billionaires.

Well, the idiots of Nashville have broken the bank, quite literally. A city of 715,884 is ponying up $1.26 billion (how much in the end with the 'oh how suprising' cost overruns?) for this edifice. That's $1,760 for each man, woman, and child. I wonder how else they might want to spend that much?

financing for the project includes the largest public subsidy for a stadium in United States history

Just what Nashville's taxpayers most need.

They noted "nearly 70 percent of speakers opposed the deal" during a five-hour public hearing before the final vote, including council member Angie Henderson.

Let's see if this is, once again, minority rule. Let's start with the wiki
- since 1970 the jurisdiction has become less white
- since 1970 the jurisdiction has become more black
- since 1970 the jurisdiction has become a lot more hispanic
- while officially non-partisan, The Council is widely seen as leaning Democratic
- the Tennessee legislature has been meddling for some years (what's good for Mississippi is good for Tennessee)

Here's just one study of economic impact of publicly subsidized sports arenas.

[S]ports venues don't produce the expected economic benefits for two main reasons: the substitution effect, which holds that the money spent on sports would be spent on other entertainment in the area, and leakage, wherein public investment "leaks out of the community" via high salaries that are spent outside the local area.

Put another way, the way I put it, the only way for such facilities to positively affect the paying territory is for the facility to bring in 'aliens' who spend their money in the territory. So, naturally, the states abutting New Jersey and Connecticut made casinos legal, so that their gamblers would stay nearer my God to thee. Again, the econ types have, for decades, shown that gambling revenue to states, via taxes on facilities or their lotteries, is regressive taxation. Makes rich white people happy.

The economics literature supports the argument that gambling activities, particularly lottery activities, are regressive in nature and attract poorer population. Therefore, gambling often leads to reduction of disposable income for low-income households, particularly at a time when their income is not growing and is even declining in real terms.

The Leona Helmsley form of governance.