An Honest Conservative Viewpoint on Vikings Stadium Welfare

Here is an example of a conservative opinion with the intelectual honesty to call the Vikings stadium welfare proposal what it is. This comes from a discussion on KFAN’s RUBECHAT:

I am conservative and a huge football fan….and am conflicted. Generally speaking, I do not favor the government mixing with private business. The poster that cited studies that building a new stadium is not a great investment….this is true, serious economic studies have this finding. If we wanted to go the socialist rout and have the govt support business (like the Japanese), we would be wise to invest in manufacturing type industries that export out of MN….that is how you get the best bang for your buck.

The stadium is not a great investment economically, but if we build, on principal I think the support for it should come from taxes on the immediate region in which the staduim resides, ideally user tax of some sort. People outside of the metro should not be on the hook for this….unless they go to the game (attend, local hotel, restaurants, parking, etc). By the way, I live in the metro.

1. He admits it’s a bad deal.

2. Explains better investments.

3. Calls taxes taxes rather than PR spinning them as something else.

4. Suggests that he is willing to pay more for a team he supports.

Refreshing stuff.

4 thoughts on “An Honest Conservative Viewpoint on Vikings Stadium Welfare”

  1. Openness, honesty and integrity. Weird. And here I thought the best way to win an argument was to out-lie and out-spin the opposing side. I must be watching too much cable news…

  2. How refreshing that he is open in his opinion that it is my duty to subsidize his entertainment (which I find kind of sleazy), just because I happen to live near where this monstrosity is being dumped.

  3. I also applaud this honest posting, it is nice to be treated to commentary that treats me as an adult, maybe even a friend and neighbor, who can be trusted with the truth even if we disagree.

    The only point he expressed is related to the local user taxing, since it is still too broadbrushed. If I go to Trotters Cafe on Cleveland or Keys Cafe on Raymond for lunch, what are the chances they gain any benefit from a Viking Stadium…yet they would likely be subject to a Ramsey Cty Food and Beverage Tax, right?

    Certainly some businesses gain customers (users) due to the vikes stadium being there, but as has been pointed out–the Vikes are only there about 10 times all year! So even those businesses have 350+ days per year where they have to make money to pay ongoing bills…good luck to them, eh?

    So even this aspect is a lame effort to pull in money from others to support the luxury of a few. At that point, a more targeted ‘user’ tax would be on any Sports Bar in the state–certainly they profit more from the Vikes than my Wednesday lunch at the Muddy Pig.

    BUT ultimately, I think enough is enough–in this economy and these times, we are just kidding ourselves to make ANY viking stadium proposal a state priority…over virtually anything else in the state. This is a luxury item in a time of necessity items.

    This is just sound budget, money, financial management and yet for them to go forward with govt financing of the vikings would transform this from fiscal management issue into a moral issue–where our state would value hurting people in pro sports over hurting people with austerity gov’t budgeting.

    This would be __________ (I’ll let you judge) leadership.

  4. Oops, correction to my prior comment–I meant to write ‘the only he expressed that I would debate is’…sorry, I should proofread better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.