NetworkedBlogs
Legal Extortion and Bizarro Robin Hood
There is perhaps no greater imposition on individual liberty than having the government confiscate one's private property for the purpose of distributing it to someone else. Whether it is our paycheck or our home, expansion of the government means a decrease in the rights of Americans, and as the government's intrusiveness increases so does the incentive for other interests to lobby the government for special treatment — for property to be confiscated from others and distributed to them. It is particularly contemptible when the beneficiary of government redistribution is the already-powerful, already-wealthy — such action represents Robin Hood in reverse.
Few interests have been more successful over the years at convincing the government to enact "Bizarro Robin Hood" policies than wealthy owners of professional sports franchises. Rather than viewing stadiums and arenas as investments to be considered part of the cost of owning a franchise and either absorbing the expense or passing it along to those who actually attend the games, these owners have engaged in what amounts to legal extortion: either the city (or county, or state, or some combination of the above) foots the bill for a new stadium (decked out, of course, with luxury suites), or the owner threatens to move the team. Experience suggests this is no hollow threat, with teams like the New Orleans (nee Charlotte) Hornets, Indianapolis (nee Baltimore) Colts, St. Louis (nee Los Angeles) Rams, Washington Nationals (nee Montreal Expos), and Carolina Hurricanes (nee Hartford Whalers) proving that this is a multi-sport phenomenon.
A current victim of attempted legalized extortion is the city of Houston. The perpetrator is the Houston Dynamo, the local Major League Soccer franchise. The soccer club is a repeat offender, having moved to Houston from San Jose when that city refused to give in to the extortion. Houston no doubt seemed a fruitful target, having provided public funds to build stadiums for the Rockets, Astros, and Texans, all in the past 10 years. Smarting from the pain of losing the Houston Oilers NFL franchise to Nashville, Houston over the past decade has seemingly taken Bizarro Robin Hood to a new level.
The Dynamo currently play at Robertson Stadium on the campus of the University of Houston. I have no idea what the team's financial bottom line looks like, but if the owners who willingly brought the team to Houston and the fans who willingly pay to watch the team play can't afford the $100 million dollars for a new stadium, then the Dynamo should either accept their current digs, move elsewhere, or fold up the tent altogether. If the money isn't there, then raise funds from donors or advertising. Neither I nor anyone else who doesn't wish to contribute to such an endeavor should have be forced to by the government.
These stadium deals are nothing more than welfare for the wealthy. Such misuse of government power needs to stop. Extortion should not be rewarded, even legal extortion.
Few interests have been more successful over the years at convincing the government to enact "Bizarro Robin Hood" policies than wealthy owners of professional sports franchises. Rather than viewing stadiums and arenas as investments to be considered part of the cost of owning a franchise and either absorbing the expense or passing it along to those who actually attend the games, these owners have engaged in what amounts to legal extortion: either the city (or county, or state, or some combination of the above) foots the bill for a new stadium (decked out, of course, with luxury suites), or the owner threatens to move the team. Experience suggests this is no hollow threat, with teams like the New Orleans (nee Charlotte) Hornets, Indianapolis (nee Baltimore) Colts, St. Louis (nee Los Angeles) Rams, Washington Nationals (nee Montreal Expos), and Carolina Hurricanes (nee Hartford Whalers) proving that this is a multi-sport phenomenon.
A current victim of attempted legalized extortion is the city of Houston. The perpetrator is the Houston Dynamo, the local Major League Soccer franchise. The soccer club is a repeat offender, having moved to Houston from San Jose when that city refused to give in to the extortion. Houston no doubt seemed a fruitful target, having provided public funds to build stadiums for the Rockets, Astros, and Texans, all in the past 10 years. Smarting from the pain of losing the Houston Oilers NFL franchise to Nashville, Houston over the past decade has seemingly taken Bizarro Robin Hood to a new level.
The Dynamo currently play at Robertson Stadium on the campus of the University of Houston. I have no idea what the team's financial bottom line looks like, but if the owners who willingly brought the team to Houston and the fans who willingly pay to watch the team play can't afford the $100 million dollars for a new stadium, then the Dynamo should either accept their current digs, move elsewhere, or fold up the tent altogether. If the money isn't there, then raise funds from donors or advertising. Neither I nor anyone else who doesn't wish to contribute to such an endeavor should have be forced to by the government.
These stadium deals are nothing more than welfare for the wealthy. Such misuse of government power needs to stop. Extortion should not be rewarded, even legal extortion.
Great, incredible blog, but I'm afraid I disagree with your points here. If the team owners have enough money to buy these sports teams - i.e., they were successful enough CAPITALISTS to become rich - then they should be able to keep their money! It shouldn't be up to people like you who want to take that money away just because you don't like sports.
If people want to see these sports teams, they should PAY to see them, in a stadium or whatever. If they don't have a stadium to play in, do you expect them to play in the streets? Of course not! The cities should build the stadiums so they can play! The team owners should be able to keep their money so they can INVEST in other things, such as better players, faster equipment (e.g. high tech balls), or even railroads. The point is, the free hand of the market will decide the best course of action. If someone does not want their city to buy the stadium, they can just move to another city. I don't have the right to tell Exxon where to drill for their oil, so why should you have the right to tell a sports team where they can play sports? That's the free market!
Reply to this
In regards to Hank's comments: I wrote a long, detailed and logical response to your post, but in the end I figured that you wouldn't "get it". Instead I thought long and hard about how to show you where your logic went awry in terms that you could understand and what I came up with is a quote from the movie BILLY MADISON: "Mr. Madison (insert "Mr. Reardon"), what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
In response to a few of your ill-conceived points:
-No one is trying to tell a sports team where they can play, only that they have to pay for the stadium that they play in. The bank is not going to tell you where to live, only that you have to be able to afford and pay the note/rent on your house.
-You are correct that you don't have the right to tell where Exxon to drill for oil, but they aren't asking you to pay for the cost of drilling. They are investing their money with the intention of receiving an return on that investment.
-Buying a sports team is an investment that these team owners intend to profit from. Good for them, but they need to cover the costs of owning the franchise which includes paying for the facilities. They can continue to play at Robertson Stadium; however, if they can't justify a new stadium, then why should someone else provide it? If you disagree, then I need for you to give me some money so that I can buy a mansion that I can't afford.
-In regards to your comment, "[i]f someone does not want their city to buy the stadium, they can just move to another city": There are many ways to question your ability to have a rational thought, but I will ask just one question - When did it become the responsibility of the city government to fund stadiums for private entities?
In summary, I will say that I am a fan of soccer, but I am a bigger fan of free market capitalism and responsible spending.
Reply to this
I'm surprised anyone would quote a socialist movie like Billy Madison! But I guess even a religious kook who can't but help invoke God can find his way to a capitalist site once and a while! As the great Ayn Rand said, "Faith, as such, is extremely detrimental to human life: it is the negation of reason." Maybe you believe that the team owners should have to pay a "tithe" or something like that. However, I reject religious dogma. I believe that the team owners should be able to KEEP their profits! Since they are rich, they clearly deserve to be rich. And if you don't believe that, there are thousands of OTHER towns that you can move to!
Reply to this