|
|
|
Jewish World Review July 20, 2005 / 13 Tammuz, 5765 Robbing the poor to build a rich man's stadium — it's just plain wrong By John Stossel
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
Politicians want to build palaces for rich people. OK, they not
palaces — they're sports stadiums — but the difference is subtle. In
recent years, New York politicians have talked about a football stadium, a
basketball arena, and two new baseball stadiums. All four projects would
require financial help from the government, for the stadiums, nearby
facilities, or both. Why? Why should they get our money?
If the wealthy owners of sports teams want new stadiums, let
them build them with their own money. They're not entitled to our money.
Just as cities take people's homes so rich corporations can do
what the politicians call "urban renewal," telling the courts economic
development is a "public use," sports tycoons argue their stadiums are in
the "public interest." Their politician friends tell voters that a stadium
will "bring jobs," be "good for the city," "pay for itself."
Bunk. Study after study finds stadiums cost far more than they
return.
"Assume it did create a thousand jobs," economist Mark
Rosentraub, author of "Major League Losers," told me. Then a $170-million
stadium costs $170,000 for every single job. "You could have done better
just saying to the people who would have been hired, here's $50,000 — start
a business!"
Most wealthy team owners would not talk to me about their
subsidies. But Jerry Reinsdorf of the White Sox did. He told me the
government "had to" fund his stadium. "I couldn't have" raised the money
privately, he said. "You have to pay it back."
Welcome to the real world, Jerry. Students get loans and pay
them back. So do homeowners and small business owners. You want a ballpark?
Build it with your money.
"You mean, if somebody walks up to you and hands you money, you
shouldn't take it?" asked Reinsdorf. "The fact is, I was offered this
stadium by elected officials."
Bingo.
Reinsdorf got his stadium after James Thompson, then governor of
Illinois, leaned on some legislators. When the park was built, the governor
threw out the first ball. Thompson and Reinsdorf are friends from law
school. Cozy.
It's Robin Hood in reverse. Politicians take money from
taxpayers and give it to people like Reinsdorf and George W. Bush. (Years
ago, Bush, along with his fellow owners of the Texas Rangers, got taxpayers
to build the team a stadium.)
I confronted Governor Thompson: Wasn't he just taking money
taxpayers were forced to give the government and giving it to a rich friend?
Not for the out-of-towners, it isn't — and not for the Chicago
businesses where they might have spent the money. Thompson's reasoning is as
muddled as the fallacy in economist Frederic Bastiat's story of the broken
window:
In a small town, an idiot breaks a shop window. He's called a
vandal, until someone points out that a window installer now must be paid to
replace the window. The window installer then will have enough money to buy
a new suit. A tailor will then be able to buy a new desk. And so on. The
whole town apparently gains from the economic activity generated by the
broken window. Of course, if this made sense, cities should hire people to
run though town, breaking windows.
But it doesn't make sense. It's a fallacy because the
circulating money is seen; what is not seen is what would have been done
with the money if the window were still whole. The shopkeeper, instead of
paying the window installer, might have expanded his business, or bought a
new suit or a new desk. The town is worse off because of a broken window.
Subsidizing stadiums is equally foolish.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
© 2005, by JFS Productions, Inc. Distributed by Creators Syndicate, Inc. |
Columnists
Toons
Lifestyles | ||||||||||||||||||
Click 
