OK, M.G. has some good points that I kept below. I still stand firm in my opposition to a taxpayer funded stadium for the Twins or the Vikings until homelessness and joblessness are not problems here. Our finite taxpayer dollars need to be spent wisely, and stadiums are not it right now. Do I want the Twins and Vikings to stay, YES. do I want it at my expense, NO. Its a business and should be treated as one. If Carl didn't know what he was getting into when buying the team, why should I pay for his mistakes. Same goes for Red. Is Carl or Red actually loosing money owning their team, or just not making "enough" money to satisfy their won personal needs? I DO NOT like being held up for a new stadium every time an owner feels a need to line his own coffers. Sell it if you can't make "enough" money. Move on to the next business venture that you think will make you "enough" money. Unfortunately baseball and football don't allow for public ownership anymore, and they like it that way so they can push us around every time an owner wants a new stadium. The Packers are a great example of publicly owned team. They will never move for that reason. How can a small town like Green Bay support a team that actually wins super bowls. Its the fans. Its the sense of ownership the city has. If the Twins or Vikings ever go up for sale to the public, I will buy in. Then I will be an owner and have a stake rather than one overly rich old man.
Maybe we would be better off right now if the stadium had stayed in Bloomington and the Mall of America was downtown. Just an off the wall thought. Ron Leurquin Nokomis East M.G. wrote: Professional sports teams in large cities are a fact of life. A lot of people want to watch them, either on TV or in person. Granted, on this list it may be a minority of members, but a lot of folks do want them here. Referring to the stadium as "an overpriced playpen for millionaires and their billionaire owners" is certainly a catchy phrase. But it doesn't contribute anything to the conversation. Yes, sports team owners tend to be pretty rich, and the players make good money too. <snip> Yes, Carl Pohlad will make more money with a new facility. Sure, he's richer than God. So what? I remember when he bought the team, saving it from being moved to another town. He was a hero then. He's probably not making a lot from the team nowadays, if he's making money at all. Yes, a new stadium would mean he could sell the team for more money. That's a fact of life. Target is also worth more since they built their new headquarters downtown. We ponied up for that, too--and though I complained and moaned about the subsidies, I have to say I really like shopping at the downtown Target. <snip> As for the dome, if we have to, demolish it. We got our money's worth. I can imagine a lot of things that could be built there which would really enhance that area too. Leaving off the name calling, is this a good idea for the city? M. G. Stinnett Jordan REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
