America is one of the countries in which sports take a great importance on a regular bases.
A great part of the population have some relationship to sport-related activities, it being either as a participant or as an expectator. So, when sport stadiums are built, people consider this as a positive change for the city that is going the be built on because it is going to spark jobs and new activities for the people. However, many don’t know that when new sports facilities are being built and remodeled they can cost millions of dollars in state and city money. In this research paper, the benefits and the disadvantages of building sport facilities will be discussed, mostly in terms of money and the effect on the community.Benefits.
When sports centers/stadiums are being built, or renew, they can cause a good amount of improvements on the town the facility is going to be built on. During the period of construction, there will be a growth in the labor force. The construction would need architects to plan and lead the process, and of course construction workers doing the manual work.
Once the facilities are completely done, jobs will also be created for the stadium’s staff. These jobs can vary from ganitors to concession workers.Another thing that would be boosted up, would be the economy. With this new facility whenever there are big events held in the stadium, like the famous Super Bowl, sports lovers would be attracted to visit from other cities of the U.
S to that particular city for that particular event. This attraction will most likely bring more tourism to the particular city, and therefore help local business with outside consumers.Disadvantages.
Although there are many ways in which the construction of stadiums are beneficial to boost the economy, there are also many factors that are not necessarily good for the economy. Even with the amount of jobs and economic boost that the stadiums could cause the “states and cities that help pay for new stadiums and arenas rarely get their money’s worth” (PBS News 2016). The jobs provided by the construction are short-term jobs, and the ones provided after the construction is done are part time job, for the most part.
Adding to that instability of the jobs income, the money that is taken from the government to pay for the stadiums’ construction cause immense debt. People who are owners of stadiums are often wealthy, and are more than capable to pay for the building with their own money. However, the profit that these stadiums could create, are not worth the immense amount of money that the stadiums will cost (News Stanford 2015). So the owners don’t pay the the complete cost, or don’t pay at all for the stadiums. Since 2000, more than 45 sports stadiums have been invested on in some kind of way. The average cost to build or renovate a stadium during this time was $412 million” and from the 1960s to now, government and local fundings have been used to build 91 stadiums, from which 22 were completely paid with those public foundings (PBS News 2017).
Other stadiums can be, or are often paid with hotel taxes, sales taxes, and even lottery/gambling revenues. The money that is spend on the stadiums more than often is never fully recovered with the earnings that the stadium might have. Threat of Leaving.But why do the cities give them public funds? There are many economic experts that can clearly point the flaws in building them, so why can’t the see it too? Well, teams often threat to move somewhere else if they don’t have a stadium paid for. “Cities have very little bargaining power with an NFL team” (Rogel Noll), and would much prefer to pay for it than let their team go.
For this reason many local governments end up paying most of the construction, if not completely.It is, however, disencouraging when the teams end up leaving at some point and the stadiums are not left vacant and with a huge debt behind. Conclusion.Although the construction and renewal of stadiums does give money to cities that have them, and provide jobs, the cost is way too high for cities to pay them with public funds.
These funds should not be use by governments to subsidize