Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
it's still nearly a billion dollars of tax payer money going to subsidize a billionaire's business interests.
if it works out, they'll get it back in taxes, but not nearly as fast as harris recoups his money from owning it (the stadium, the complex, is he the landlord on the retail and housing too?).
I'm not against it, but it's definitely a thing that's going to be brought up.
|
I see your point now, although I don't think it is that simple as you are making it to be. I personally hate the idea of NFL owners using tax funds to cover stadium costs, and I was surprised by this arrangement between Harris and DC as I see it differently. The infrastructure around the stadium would still happen if there is no stadium - of course, the designs would have been different if there is no stadium but infrastructure improvements still have to happen anyway. Not only the improvements are needed, it would create better traffic control and jobs for people near the stadium. Yes, Harris benefits this indirectly but taxpayers also benefit from Harris' investment into the stadium. So to me, it's win-win situation except for those taxpayers who don't like football.