America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by MCAddict. 101 replies replies.
3 Pages123>
NFL opposes U.S. Republican tax plan on stadium funding
cacman Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
NFL opposes U.S. Republican tax plan on stadium funding
(Reuters) - The National Football League said on Tuesday it opposes a tax bill proposed by U.S. House of Representatives Republicans that could force teams to put up more of their own money to fund stadium construction.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taxes-nfl/nfl-opposes-u-s-republican-tax-plan-on-stadium-funding-idUSKBN1D72PP

MACS Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,774
F*** the NFL. They're billionaires. They can pay for 100% of their stadiums.

If they can charge exorbitant amounts of money for tickets, parking, concessions, merchandise, etc... f*** you... pay for the WHOLE damn stadium.
frankj1 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
Kraft paid for most of Gillette Stadium. The state did supply some needed infrastructure/road work etc, but I don't believe taxpayers kicked in for the stadium at all.
Gene363 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
Stadiums are typically bad investments for tax payers, so of course they are wanting a tax break the greedy bass turds.
Gene363 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
frankj1 wrote:
Kraft paid for most of Gillette Stadium. The state did supply some needed infrastructure/road work etc, but I don't believe taxpayers kicked in for the stadium at all.


Oh, I'll bet they are getting some sort of tax break or tax deferral meaning the tax payers are supporting the stadium. The city/county/state will also be spending a lot of money to cover that stadium.
MACS Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,774
frankj1 wrote:
Kraft paid for most of Gillette Stadium. The state did supply some needed infrastructure/road work etc, but I don't believe taxpayers kicked in for the stadium at all.


Where did the State get the money to supply what they did? Taaaaxpaaayeeeers! (think of Affleck in Good Will Hunting, saying "reeeeetaaaaiiineerrrrr")
frankj1 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
the stadium and the acreage surrounding it cost multi millions to develop and nets tons of money yearly (there are tons of acres developed all around the property) that have probably generated many times the cost to taxpayers for the roadwork, not to mention the thousands of year round jobs in the shops/restaurants/hotels/function rooms/offices/health care sites/etc etc that are all on Kraft's property surrounding the stadium, paid for with private money

...while 98.2% of the NFL's owners hold guns to the heads of local citizenry and threaten to move if they don't pay for virtually every seat.

The road improvement was likely a pittance, we aren't even talking about a new exit ramp from the existing route 95...but actually good old 2-lanes each way route 1.

wicked smaht move by the taxpayers. and Kraft did not behave like any other owner.
MACS Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,774
Yeah, and Arthur Blank doesn't over charge for concessions. Laudable... but while they're both doing things to help out, it isn't out of any altruism.

You're defending a billionaire, Frank... tread lightly. HA!
bgz Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
I'm with MACS, fk the NFL.

cacman Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
Joe Lockhart wrote:
According to the NFL, building new stadiums enhances economic development in cities that are home to the venues and federal tax breaks should be available.

“You can look around the country and see the economic development that’s generated from some of these stadiums,” NFL spokesman Joe Lockhart told a conference call.

“These sorts of infrastructure projects have a long history and the benefits of them are obvious in many of our communities around the country, so we will continue to make our opposition known on that.”

The team owners are building stadiums and paying players millions for our entertainment and benefit. LMFAO!
And then these millionaires "protest" in a stadium paid for with support of tax-payer dollars?!?! FU!

Let's Go Pens!
chazbo Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 01-21-2007
Posts: 8,160
Nice to see you cacmanHerfing Get any snow your way yet?
frankj1 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
cacman wrote:
The team owners are building stadiums and paying players millions for our entertainment and benefit. LMFAO!
And then these millionaires "protest" in a stadium paid for with support of tax-payer dollars?!?! FU!

Let's Go Pats!

check it out Carl

really
frankj1 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
MACS wrote:
Yeah, and Arthur Blank doesn't over charge for concessions. Laudable... but while they're both doing things to help out, it isn't out of any altruism.

You're defending a billionaire, Frank... tread lightly. HA!

I know, I know. But most of you guys here incorrectly assume normal libs hate capitalism. I am all in. I am not unusual that way. Most here do not get it.

Most of youse guys speak for "the other side" in your arguments rather than reply to the reality and have no idea why there is an other side that also loves our system.

This particular billionaire used his own money, made a deal for the locals to kick in a fraction of the cost to create what we all claim is how it should work...that is: give something to the 1%ers and the rest will happen. And now the farthest righties here kick the one owner who does it in the teeth?

Kick the other owners in the teeth!
frankj1 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
#13
not my best English, but I deserve some slack.
Gene363 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
frankj1 wrote:
the stadium and the acreage surrounding it cost multi millions to develop and nets tons of money yearly (there are tons of acres developed all around the property) that have probably generated many times the cost to taxpayers for the roadwork, not to mention the thousands of year round jobs in the shops/restaurants/hotels/function rooms/offices/health care sites/etc etc that are all on Kraft's property surrounding the stadium, paid for with private money

...while 98.2% of the NFL's owners hold guns to the heads of local citizenry and threaten to move if they don't pay for virtually every seat.

The road improvement was likely a pittance, we aren't even talking about a new exit ramp from the existing route 95...but actually good old 2-lanes each way route 1.

wicked smaht move by the taxpayers. and Kraft did not behave like any other owner.


Not really,

John Oliver: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcwJt4bcnXs

Reason TV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1LDjTgMEGU&t=3s

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-the-truth-about-football-stadiums-20160219-column.html?barc=0

https://psmag.com/economics/america-has-a-stadium-problem-62665

Mr. Jones Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,421
I know nothing about the NFL or stadium funding.

Have at it boyeeeees.
TMCTLT Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733

Yup....F*ck the NFL and it's players. It's one thing for the State / City / Counties to bare the cost initially but then IMHO based on cost of venue...it gets rented to the teams to recoup the costs to the taxpayers.

Don't miss watching them @ all, amazingly I easily found other things to bide mt valuable time. After all we only have So Much Time here....why give it away wantonly to an organization that cares NOTHING for / of it's viewers short of what's in their wallets.
MACS Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,774
Forgive me, Frank... I'm not kicking Kraft, or Blank, or even Jerry Jones for that matter. Those three seem to be doing what the others won't - investing in the team, community, and sacrificing some profits for the fans. I see it.

I'm happy San Diego told the Spanos' to kick frickin' rocks instead of adding yet another tax to Californians.
frankj1 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
MACS wrote:
Forgive me, Frank... I'm not kicking Kraft, or Blank, or even Jerry Jones for that matter. Those three seem to be doing what the others won't - investing in the team, community, and sacrificing some profits for the fans. I see it.

I'm happy San Diego told the Spanos' to kick frickin' rocks instead of adding yet another tax to Californians.

we are in total agreement.
Spanos is one of the worst. He deserves what he is currently getting.
The Vikes threatened to leave in recent years, others do the same.
dstieger Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
What's the fed tax angle?

Shouldn't the fed allow state and local governments to **** up without Congress working some sort of forcing function using fed tax code? I imagine it has something to do with fed tax implications of bonds, but ...huh? Seems like the R's should be all over states' rights...even the right to make stupid ass decisions
shaun341 Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 08-02-2012
Posts: 8,826
frankj1 wrote:
I know, I know. But most of you guys here incorrectly assume normal libs hate capitalism. I am all in. I am not unusual that way. Most here do not get it.

Most of youse guys speak for "the other side" in your arguments rather than reply to the reality and have no idea why there is an other side that also loves our system.

This particular billionaire used his own money, made a deal for the locals to kick in a fraction of the cost to create what we all claim is how it should work...that is: give something to the 1%ers and the rest will happen. And now the farthest righties here kick the one owner who does it in the teeth?

Kick the other owners in the teeth!


I am with Frank, he was simply stating that the NFL owners can build their own stadiums with minimum help from tax dollars and the other side of the argument seems to have misunderstood because of the red they see when NFL and money are mentioned in same sentence.

I think it is a disgrace to this country and every hardworking blue collar American that politicians allow the NFL to dictate government funding. This is not what a democracy was supposed to be and I can see why other governments and realist say that it will fail over time. We made it last for a long time but there is too much interest in money with politics today then there is in doing the right thing for the people.

I get it the NFL is a hot topic right now but this mentality of you don't believe in the right thing because your a conservative, liberal, or whatever other category they use today boggles my mind. We preach open minded mentality in concerns with gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity but not with politics. It is like we are rooting for a team instead of the best thing for the country anymore with politics. No longer do we have candidates with different beliefs but parties with a goal. We are losing the power in this country and nobody seems to care anymore as long as their team wins.


Just Relax Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 09-26-2016
Posts: 587
TMCTLT wrote:
Yup....F*ck the NFL and it's players. It's one thing for the State / City / Counties to bare the cost initially but then IMHO based on cost of venue...it gets rented to the teams to recoup the costs to the taxpayers.

Don't miss watching them @ all, amazingly I easily found other things to bide mt valuable time. After all we only have So Much Time here....why give it away wantonly to an organization that cares NOTHING for / of it's viewers short of what's in their wallets.


It sure is easier now that our colts suck.... Now Indy is also dealing with the cost of repairs for the state of the art facility so we have to pay more big bucks to fix a building that is still financed Frying pan
TMCTLT Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
shaun341 wrote:
I am with Frank, he was simply stating that the NFL owners can build their own stadiums with minimum help from tax dollars and the other side of the argument seems to have misunderstood because of the red they see when NFL and money are mentioned in same sentence.

No we are seeing RED because they are NOT funding their very profitable ventures...because they've decided that the FAN is the biggest " user " of their uhm...product and thus should foot the bill going forward.

I think it is a disgrace to this country and every hardworking blue collar American that politicians allow the NFL to dictate government funding. The government is QUITE happy spending OUR money on entertainment that apparently MANY just don't seem to think they can do without and @ the same time helps keep the PEOPLES attention away from THEIR corrupt behavior. It's a WIN WIN for our seedy elected officials.

This is not what a democracy was supposed to be and I can see why other governments and realist say that it will fail over time. We made it last for a long time but there is too much interest in money with politics today then there is in doing the right thing for the people.

I get it the NFL is a hot topic right now but this mentality of you don't believe in the right thing because your a conservative, liberal, or whatever other category they use today boggles my mind. We preach open minded mentality in concerns with gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity but not with politics. Are you sh*tting me here? These things have become POLITICS.....
It is like we are rooting for a team instead of the best thing for the country anymore with politics. No longer do we have candidates with different beliefs but parties with a goal. We are losing the power in this country and nobody seems to care anymore as long as their team wins. The power has been STOLEN from us....slowly over time while we watched the NFL. fog





Just Relax wrote:
It sure is easier now that our colts suck.... Now Indy is also dealing with the cost of repairs for the state of the art facility so we have to pay more big bucks to pay for a building that is still financed Frying pan


I stopped watching after the drunken drug abuser and spoiled rich kid Jimmy Irsay was picked up yet again. And their separate laws they enjoy from the rest of us put him right back in his comfy drug addled place in line. And almost unbelievably that stadium was being REPAIRED right out of the gate @ a significant cost to taxpayers, and on top of that the long term overview doesn't look very positive. ( and thatwas before the kneelers started their sh*t.

http://www.theindychannel.com/money/lucas-oil-conseco-draining-millions-from-city-officials-say
victor809 Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Gotta say i dont understand why anyone here would want a federal law regulating what sort of deals a local government can make with a private company...

I understand many here don't like the NFL. I could care less about football myself... but this group here is supposed to be all about states rights and lower federal oversight.

Seems like this philosophy shifts a lot depending on politics....
dstieger Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
Victor....^20

I'm not sure I care enough to look into it, but I venture a guess that it has to do with the way earnings on municipal 'stadium' bonds get treated in fed tax code...nonetheless, I agree that this seems like it should be a local-rights issue more than a federal case

victor809 Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Yep... I agree with you. This seems like an odd stance to take for the republicans...

Almost as if they don't really care about the Republican ideals and just want to score political points on a hot button social issue.
TMCTLT Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
victor809 wrote:
Gotta say i dont understand why anyone here would want a federal law regulating what sort of deals a local government can make with a private company...

I understand many here don't like the NFL. I could care less about football myself... but this group here is supposed to be all about states rights and lower federal oversight.

Seems like this philosophy shifts a lot depending on politics....



Perhaps when / if those in the business of managing state tax dollars feel compelled to INCLUDE taxpayers in Big Ticket Items such as the building of entire football stadiums for professional teams....the Feds won't have to get involved.
The NFL IMHO is the modern day equivalent of the Coliseum during roman times...something to entertain the masses while the governing bodies steal the taxpayers blind.
shaun341 Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 08-02-2012
Posts: 8,826
TMCTLT wrote:
I stopped watching after the drunken drug abuser and spoiled rich kid Jimmy Irsay was picked up yet again. And their separate laws they enjoy from the rest of us put him right back in his comfy drug addled place in line. And almost unbelievably that stadium was being REPAIRED right out of the gate @ a significant cost to taxpayers, and on top of that the long term overview doesn't look very positive. ( and thatwas before the kneelers started their sh*t.

http://www.theindychannel.com/money/lucas-oil-conseco-draining-millions-from-city-officials-say



I get what your saying and agree that tax dollars have no place in the NFL, especially when they were a nonprofit up until a few years ago. The thing I am saying is Frank pointed out that owners can build their stadiums without tax dollars or minimum at best but are chosen not to. He simply stated that Kraft did it so why can't all the other owners, basically. Again it is such a hot topic that logic goes out the window it seems.
victor809 Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
And more importantly... if your local government is building a stadium without including the taxpayers then vote them out of office. If you are unable to vote them out of office then perhaps more people in your local area want said stadium than dont... If it isn't your city/state then butt out of other people's business.

This is kind of hilarious to me (someone who would be happiest with zero stadiums)...determining spending of public money is one of the few things we can usually all agree is a function of politicians. Yet here they are doing their job... and if they do it in a way that you're not personally happy with you run to try to get a federal law.

If you don't like the job they are doing vote them out. If you can't vote them out then going up a few levels to a level of politics where you may currently have a majority and getting them to dictate alllllll the way down to the local level is a really dumb thing to do.
TMCTLT Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
shaun341 wrote:
I get what your saying and agree that tax dollars have no place in the NFL, especially when they were a nonprofit up until a few years ago. The thing I am saying is Frank pointed out that owners can build their stadiums without tax dollars or minimum at best but are chosen not to. He simply stated that Kraft did it so why can't all the other owners, basically. Again it is such a hot topic that logic goes out the window it seems.



Gotcha bros. and I agree completely....there is no reason why these owners / players can't build their own facilities. What they have become is a NON PROFIT ( as in NO PROFIT ) for the cities that have been put on the hook for the stadium. I'm certain it does to some extent depend on " the market " in which said team resides and the mindset of THOSE taxpayers on rather or not they find it a " good value "
teedubbya Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Victor republicans haven’t been acting like republicans for a long time.

The irony is the new “republicans” call the traditional republicans RINOs or liberals lol.

The party of small government and fiscal conservatism is gone. They still throw the words around when it’s convenient but it’s no longer really part of their fabric especially when inconvenient. I’m talking in here as well as out politicians which reflect the public no matter how much we scream they don’t.

teedubbya Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
And Rand Paul is a pvssy who reminds me of beaker from the muppets lol.

Sounds like he tried to clean his lawn in to a neighbors and got his clock cleaned lol.

I know unrealated but I amuse myself.
ZRX1200 Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
Attacked from behind and ^ this is what you post.

teedubbya Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Dude it was humor.

And yes.
teedubbya Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Rand Paul is a lightweight
victor809 Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Attacked from behind is no excuse to break 5 ribs getting tackled by a 160lb guy.
Gene363 Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
victor809 wrote:
Gotta say i dont understand why anyone here would want a federal law regulating what sort of deals a local government can make with a private company...

I understand many here don't like the NFL. I could care less about football myself... but this group here is supposed to be all about states rights and lower federal oversight.

Seems like this philosophy shifts a lot depending on politics....


WE want to run rampant in our states, not the other way around.
ZRX1200 Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
For someone who comments on the lack of reason by posters and their lack of depth I find your post ironic.

And your humor lacking pizazz.

Somewhere behind a sandwich Drafter is even mocking you.
ZRX1200 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
Yet Victor regularly got his starfish bruised by 160 pound guys in scrums.
teedubbya Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
What I posted about Rand Paul wasn’t politically correct and was insensitive.

I’m sorry.

But he’s still a pvssy.
ZRX1200 Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
https://youtu.be/yJoJSp7PtLo
ZRX1200 Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
https://youtu.be/yJoJSp7PtLo
teedubbya Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Can’t do Youtube easily from here. Maybe later.

But I’m sorry for making fun of beaker and stuff no matter how bad he got his ass kicked.
victor809 Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Gene... you should be able to. If you feel you can't then vote out your local representatives. If you can't vote them out then maybe it's because the majority in your locality likes what they are doing.... none of that is a reason to go crying to the federal govt.
teedubbya Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
And it sounds like he truly got it handed to his candy ass.
Gene363 Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
victor809 wrote:
And more importantly... if your local government is building a stadium without including the taxpayers then vote them out of office. If you are unable to vote them out of office then perhaps more people in your local area want said stadium than dont... If it isn't your city/state then butt out of other people's business.

This is kind of hilarious to me (someone who would be happiest with zero stadiums)...determining spending of public money is one of the few things we can usually all agree is a function of politicians. Yet here they are doing their job... and if they do it in a way that you're not personally happy with you run to try to get a federal law.

If you don't like the job they are doing vote them out. If you can't vote them out then going up a few levels to a level of politics where you may currently have a majority and getting them to dictate alllllll the way down to the local level is a really dumb thing to do.


True, but you might be shocked at how low voter turnout is at for local elections. The sheep keep electing the same idiots over and over, from both parties. Our town of North Augusta is building a minor league baseball stadium. People that don't pay property taxes directly think it's great, property tax payers think it will be obsolete about the time the tax exemptions run out. We are on the highway to hell and picking up speed.
victor809 Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Z... 300lbs... in multiples... and yet my ribs never broke.

Rand Paul needs to look into osteoporosis.
victor809 Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Gene... if voter turnout is low then they get the representation they deserve.
teedubbya Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I bet his hair was still perfect though
teedubbya Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I am interested in what actually happened when more info comes out. What we know now it pretty limited.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages123>