EY: The other examples Jim gives - libraries, schools and what not - are all legitimate functions of government. However, I don't see how subsidizing professional sports falls into that category.Eva Young writes "A stadium in downtown Minneapolis does not improve my quality of life living in Minneapolis. I wonder whose quality of life he is talking about." I will do my best to remain civil but it is this sort of self-centered thinking that has gotten us into the political mud hole that we know find ourselves.
I wrote the item about quality of life - because the "quality of life" argument has been the big argument Pawlenty has been pushing to justify public subsidy for stadiums.... As far as the Guthrie goes - I wasn't particularly fond of public funding for that project - but as someone else on this list has noted - private funding for that project exceeded the private portion of the funding proposed for Twins and Vikings Stadiums.
As I wrote before:
The Governor doesn't even try to make a return on investment argument for the stadium - rather he talks about the "quality of life". A stadium in downtown Minneapolis does not improve my quality of life living in Minneapolis. I wonder whose quality of life he is talking about. I saw Rep Eric Lipman from Stillwater on Face to Face a few weeks ago. Lipman supports this stadium boondoggle because it "improves the quality of life" and "my constitutents want it" and "my constituents don't want to pay taxes to pay for it". But Lipman has no problem with increasing sales taxes on Hennepin County residents to pay for this stadium.
EY: A major part of my point was that legislators in suburbs who won't be increasing their taxes to pay for this stadium - are perfectly willing to raise taxes on Hennepin County residents.
Bernstein:
Yes - but then this argues that funding for the stadium should come from a statewide tax base - rather than limited to just Hennepin County. I happen to think there are other higher bonding priorities for Minneapolis - especially for the Planetarium - which unlike the Stadium - did get supported as part of the library referendum several years ago. Compare this to the stadium - where Minneapolis Residents voted to restrict city spending on the stadium.All of us pay taxes for some things that we may not support or may not use or may not affect our lives all that much! The notion that any one of us should be able to opt out of paying for something that we don't use or don't like is what has left us so many public services, public facilities, and public agencies struggling.
There are a lot folks who do not use public transit, do not use public schools, do not use public libraries, do not use Sect. 8 housing assistance, do not use public health services like HCMC or community clinics, do not use general assistance, do not use crisis centers, do not use public golf courses, do not use community or park buildings (except maybe, to vote once in a while)and the list can go on, but you get the point! Some of those non-users argue that they should not have to pay for those "government programs" since they do not use or approve of them.
Those are different things - and there are different justifications for government spending on these things. I just happen to think that the pro-sports gravy train is something that should be opposed - especially in light of other priorities - that seem much more pressing.
There is a huge undertow of selfishness running through the citizenry right now; the idea being promoted by many in the conservative ranks that government should do nothing more than provide only the "base essentials" and that there is no common good or community interest beyond defense and public order. They argue that life is a footrace and if you stumble or if you are tripped then either you pick yourself up or fall into the gutter - or hope that a religious charity will provide for you. If one listens carefully to the Taxpayers League among others you will hear them boasting that "it is your money and government ought not to take it from you to pay for things you may not need or want".
The "I don't use it or want it, why should I have to pay for it" argument offered by Eva White can - and has - been used as an argument against just about every function of government at every level. If applied evenly, we'll see no stadium to be sure, but we will soon see no busses, no libraries, no public schools, and no public purpose!
That's Eva Young - not Eva White..... I think there are legitimate reasons for public libraries, buses, public schools etc. However I don't think there's good reasons for public subsidies for billionaire stadium owners.
Eva Young
Near North
Minneapolis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog is up:
http://lloydletta.blogspot.com
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
