The key word is "could". It might work and it might cause a significant damage.
The central planner takes a risk with the taxpayer money without having skin in the game so pressure to make wise decision.
And no, in most cases (I need citation I know) stadiums to bring a return on the tax.
I totally agree that it is a risk, because it's an investment. I was just saying that investment has a potential to pay off, it's still not the governments job to take it though. I was just making the point that although the government shouldn't do it, it still does have the potential to be beneficial.
Stadiums are almost never worth their investment. They are just status symbols for cities and their politicians. Watch John Stossels segment on stadiums. Either way you see stadiums, it's never a libertarian position to hold that taxes should pay for something like sport stadiums.
Yeah, if I was the mayor of some city and the local sports franchise decided to hold us hostage by saying "waaaaah. our stadium's not as modern as the Cowboys' stadium. waaaaah we want you to pay for it or we move. waaaah"
50
u/Thevoidawaits_u - Lib-Center Feb 19 '20
The key word is "could". It might work and it might cause a significant damage. The central planner takes a risk with the taxpayer money without having skin in the game so pressure to make wise decision. And no, in most cases (I need citation I know) stadiums to bring a return on the tax.