• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Cuyahoga County Sin Tax

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

joebialek

Banned
Joined
Mar 23, 2014
Messages
11
Reaction score
5
Points
0
This issue is the absurdity of absurdities. Let me get this straight: the purpose of the Sin Tax is to gouge those who purchase alcohol and cigarettes not because anyone is trying to discourage consumption but rather so the County can use that money to pay for sports stadiums that do not produce anything but a fleeting moment witnessing the passing of a football, the dribbling of a basketball and the throwing of a baseball so that such a minute tidbit of diversion can be enjoyed by all. The stupidity of this proposition is enough to make your head spin even though the spin doctors advocating passage of this nonsense are already doing a pretty good job of hypnotizing the voters to actually consider supporting it. At least the Robber Barons of the previous centuries provided something tangible such as oil, steel, railroads etcetera. These team owners do not even provide one tangible thing that could ever be considered with the term “value added.” Almost everyone discusses this “enterprise” as though it is the same thing as industry {which it is not}. The price of admission is essentially a voluntary tax paid by those who can afford it to pay those who don’t need it. If this isn’t a transfer of wealth I don’t know what is.

The real outrage here is the fact that taxes on alcohol and cigarettes will not be used to aid in the reduction of addiction {hence the reference to “sin”} but rather to stuff the pockets of all three teams who could easily afford to pay for the repairs themselves. The vote was rammed through the last time {under somewhat suspicious circumstances} and hear we go again. But this time...not so fast!!! We the voters of Cuyahoga County are going to fight the proponents on this one and we don't care if the teams up and go somewhere else {please see my views on entertainment below} because quite frankly there are simply more important things than sports and the unearned money that comes with it. Those in public office who are too stupid and lazy to find other ways to grow a major American city need to resign and leave their self-seeking political ambitions on the scrapheap of history. Don’t ever let it be said that this was time when the tide ran out on Cuyahoga County but rather was the time when the voters rose up to welcome the rising tide of change and rebuked this pathetic paradigm our previous elected leaders embraced. Let the battle be joined.
 
I know, right! Why should I have to pay sales tax on a used car? You know, the sales tax was already paid when it was bought new.

I HAS OUTRAGE!
 
Hi Joe,

Welcome to RCF. And welcome to the modern era or as most call it the 21s century. I understand your point of view. But in the grand scheme of things if pennies on every drink I have paid for since I turned 21 would probably add up to upper deck Ken Griffey Jr gem mint ten rookie card.
It's a privilege, especially nowadays, to have pro sports teams in your city. As someone who grew up here and still lives here I have no issue supporting this tax.
I may regret not ever getting that baseball card, but at least I have some teams to support and fun venues to go to.
 
I think it's hilarious when people say the teams could pay for it themselves like they have the books in front of their face to back that up.
 
Hey! Smoke up Johnny!

johnbender.jpg
 
This issue is the absurdity of absurdities. Let me get this straight: the purpose of the Sin Tax is to gouge those who purchase alcohol and cigarettes not because anyone is trying to discourage consumption but rather so the County can use that money to pay for sports stadiums that do not produce anything but a fleeting moment witnessing the passing of a football, the dribbling of a basketball and the throwing of a baseball so that such a minute tidbit of diversion can be enjoyed by all. The stupidity of this proposition is enough to make your head spin even though the spin doctors advocating passage of this nonsense are already doing a pretty good job of hypnotizing the voters to actually consider supporting it. At least the Robber Barons of the previous centuries provided something tangible such as oil, steel, railroads etcetera. These team owners do not even provide one tangible thing that could ever be considered with the term “value added.” Almost everyone discusses this “enterprise” as though it is the same thing as industry {which it is not}. The price of admission is essentially a voluntary tax paid by those who can afford it to pay those who don’t need it. If this isn’t a transfer of wealth I don’t know what is.

The real outrage here is the fact that taxes on alcohol and cigarettes will not be used to aid in the reduction of addiction {hence the reference to “sin”} but rather to stuff the pockets of all three teams who could easily afford to pay for the repairs themselves. The vote was rammed through the last time {under somewhat suspicious circumstances} and hear we go again. But this time...not so fast!!! We the voters of Cuyahoga County are going to fight the proponents on this one and we don't care if the teams up and go somewhere else {please see my views on entertainment below} because quite frankly there are simply more important things than sports and the unearned money that comes with it. Those in public office who are too stupid and lazy to find other ways to grow a major American city need to resign and leave their self-seeking political ambitions on the scrapheap of history. Don’t ever let it be said that this was time when the tide ran out on Cuyahoga County but rather was the time when the voters rose up to welcome the rising tide of change and rebuked this pathetic paradigm our previous elected leaders embraced. Let the battle be joined.

I enjoyed your post. I was curious if there are any statistics about economic changes after a major sports team leaves a city. In my subjective head, I don't count the browns leaving bc it seemed to spill into the Indians attendance. Perhaps that could be a good example for you: less taxes w one less team but no material economic drop off.

If your thesis is not that a team will leave, but that the sin tax dollars should go to something more productive, especially things like addiction "caused" by sin, that's something for the voting public to decide. I appreciate your enthusiasm for your position, I just think you will be outvoted. There's too much invested in the downtown revitalization w the teams, and that's the angle that will sway the ambivalent voter.
 
WOW.

I'm extremely disappointed in RCF's general reaction to the Sin Tax.

If you ask me, this is one of the most backwards taxes that could possibly be imposed on a population... and here many of you are, blindly supporting it. Think about it, people:

- Saying that this tax is "only a few cents" per drink or pack of cigarettes is incredibly short-sighted. This tax is intended to generate between $260-$320 million dollars over its lifespan. This is a ton of money we're talking about here.

- Proponents of the sin tax make thinly veiled threats insinuating that if the people of Cuyahoga County don't agree to pay the tax, the teams will leave. Before taking this as reality, take a look at what happened in Miami when taxpayers refused to give the Dolphins hundreds of millions of dollars:

http://deadspin.com/dolphins-offer-to-pay-majority-of-sun-life-stadium-upgr-1540748237

- Multiple studies show that public funding of sports facilities overwhelmingly ends up as a raw deal for a given city/area:

The economic rationale for cities' willingness to subsidize sports facilities is revealed in the campaign slogan for a new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers: "Build the Stadium—Create the Jobs!" Proponents claim that sports facilities improve the local economy in four ways. First, building the facility creates construction jobs. Second, people who attend games or work for the team generate new spending in the community, expanding local employment. Third, a team attracts tourists and companies to the host city, further increasing local spending and jobs. Finally, all this new spending has a "multiplier effect" as increased local income causes still more new spending and job creation. Advocates argue that new stadiums spur so much economic growth that they are self-financing: subsidies are offset by revenues from ticket taxes, sales taxes on concessions and other spending outside the stadium, and property tax increases arising from the stadium's economic impact.

Unfortunately, these arguments contain bad economic reasoning that leads to overstatement of the benefits of stadiums. Economic growth takes place when a community's resources—people, capital investments, and natural resources like land—become more productive. Increased productivity can arise in two ways: from economically beneficial specialization by the community for the purpose of trading with other regions or from local value added that is higher than other uses of local workers, land, and investments. Building a stadium is good for the local economy only if a stadium is the most productive way to make capital investments and use its workers.

In our forthcoming Brookings book, Sports, Jobs, and Taxes, we and 15 collaborators examine the local economic development argument from all angles: case studies of the effect of specific facilities, as well as comparisons among cities and even neighborhoods that have and have not sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into sports development. In every case, the conclusions are the same. A new sports facility has an extremely small (perhaps even negative) effect on overall economic activity and employment. No recent facility appears to have earned anything approaching a reasonable return on investment. No recent facility has been self-financing in terms of its impact on net tax revenues. Regardless of whether the unit of analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus.
Source: http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/1997/06/summer-taxes-noll

- As Joe so passionately but ineloquently mentioned above, this money is being used to fund sports stadiums mostly used to generate revenue for billionaire owners, while doing nothing to help the very same (sometimes addicted) people who paid up in the first place.

- A very large % of of the people who visit these stadiums (possibly as much as 50+% come from out of Cuyahoga county. Yet, the tax is only imposed on those living in Cuyahoga county.


...Take a look at the reasons (below) the sin tax is being opposed and give me a logical argument why it should go through this year, as currently constructed.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/213686330/Coalition-Against-the-Sin-Tax-Talking-Points
 
I think it's hilarious when people say the teams could pay for it themselves like they have the books in front of their face to back that up.

I think it's hilarious when people say they can't pay for it themselves like they have the books in front of their face to back that up.
 
You don't want to support the sin tax... Stop smoking. Stop drinking. I mean its called the sin tax for a reason. Stop sinning or you shall be cast out into the darkness you heathens!

But you gotta suck down heaters and binge drink on the weekends, amirite? I mean, what would life be like without lung and throat cancer and cirrhosis of the liver?
 
I smoked a pack a day for ten years and I recently quit. I haven't had a cigarette in four or five months. And I will never had one again.

During that ten year span I learned one inconsolable fact. There is no easy way to quit. No one can help you... because no one is around you 24/7 besides yourself. Substitutions don't work, because every time you chew that piece of gum, you are still submitting to the addiction mentally. You are saying, 'I'm not strong enough to quit.'

Until someone legitimately wants to quit, they won't.

By the way... the taxes aren't going up either. They are being extended.
 
I think Deezus' larger point is that the government should not levy a consumption tax of any form to subsidize billionaires. Think about that..

If we are to pay hundreds of millions to build stadiums, we may as well own our sports teams outright :)eek:, heaven forbid!). Appoint a local commissioner to oversee the team in the same capacity an owner would, i.e. hiring and firing GMs to run the team. Instead of enriching the already super-wealthy, let the proceeds go back into the community directly? Seems like a more efficient use of tax dollars if you ask me, and no one would ever need to worry about their team "leaving."

Here's an interesting excerpt from Huffington Post on the matter, it's worth the read.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-frederick/forget-mark-cuban-cities-_b_688992.html

Forget Mark Cuban -- Cities Should Own Their Sports Teams
...

Forget about Mark Cuban or any other wealthy owner. What if the people of Kansas City owned the Royals?

Initial reactions to this question probably range from "Hell, yeah, let's run David Glass out of town on a rail" to "That sounds like socialism to me." To be clear, we are a long way from the day when cities can actually buy the teams they love. And if you're concerned about socialism, it's already occurring in baseball -- it's just benefiting David Glass and the other owners. These owners get massive tax dollars to build and renovate stadiums that only end up making them richer.

As Dave Zirin, author of Bad Sports: How Owners are Ruining the Games We Love, explains it, the current ownership system "socializes the debt of sports while privatizing the profits."

Just look at baseball's antitrust exemption, which allows only the current baseball owners to monopolize the baseball market.

And if a city ever did try to buy a team, the owners would prevent it, even if the city offered the most money. How's that for the triumph of capitalism?

But let's consider for a minute, however, that it was possible for the people of Kansas City to buy the Royals.

Glass purchased the Royals for $96 million in 2000. The franchise is now estimated by Forbes to be worth $341 million, making it the 24th most valuable franchise out of 30.

Now, it's clear that the franchise is not worth three times as much 10 years later because of anything that's happened on the field.

As Forbes put it, and everybody else knows, "Few franchises have squandered the fortune they have gotten from baseball's revenue sharing system as much as the Royals."

The team is worth a lot more now, in part, because of the $250 million in renovations to Kauffman Stadium. Those renovations were not paid for by all of Kansas City, but by the people of Jackson County.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top