Midweek Reading

The strongest case for urban density isn’t aesthetics, it’s math

Union membership at Wisconsin private employers declined 69% from peak in 1984

The Lasting Legacy Of Redlining

Amy Coney Barrett served as a ‘handmaid’ in Christian group People of Praise

Want to make money? Become a mathematician. Seriously.

Eight Charts that Explain the Market

“The Richest People on the Planet are Criminals”

“If You’re Getting a W-2, You’re a Sucker”

Gun deaths were the leading killer of US children in 2020

The Amazonification of the American workforce

Choice School Must Pay Property Taxes

How Conservatives Fell in Love With Judicial Activism

The Lie About the Supreme Court Everyone Pretends to Believe

Are Performance Improvement Plans Just Code For 'You Should Quit'?

Brewers Cost Taxpayers $1.56 Billion

63% of State’s Corporations Pay No Taxes

Milwaukee deemed 'climate haven' for resistance against climate disasters

Sunday Reading

Popularity Of CBD Oil Vexes Regulators & Researchers
The Great Dismantling Of America's National Parks Is Under Way
Trump's Economy Is An Absolute Disaster For People And The Planet
Is Venture Capital Worth The Risk?
Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?
Innovation, At University And In Industry
Union Density: Yet Another Low
Tax Incentives: The Losing Gamble States And Cities Keep Making
'Skills Gap' Arguments Overlook Collective Bargaining And Low Minimum Wages
Making Excuses For Unemployment: The Myth Of A "Skills Gap"
5 Companies Make Up 18% Of The S&P 500. Should Investors Care?
Bitcoin Is The Greatest Scam In History
The Wile E. Coyote Of Stadium Consulting Takes On Brewers' Stadium, Gets Crushed By Anvil
About That Miller Park Economic Impact

Weekend Reading

California Scientists Unravel Genetic Mystery Of World's Tallest Trees
Record U.S Trade Deficit In 2018 Reflects Failure Of Trump's Trade Policies
How Rich Are The Bucks And Brewers Owners Getting Off Public Subsidies? Not As Much As You'd Think
Walker's Costly War On The Poor
Why American CEOs Are Worried About Capitalism

Wisconsin Reading

Taxpayers Make Bucks, Brewers Rich
Gov. Tony Evers Wants To Renegotiate Foxconn Deal
Wisconsin Republicans Are Yucking It Up About AOC's Green New Deal While Trade Wars Crush Dairy Farmers
7 Numbers That Explain The Election
Committee Questions Grand Avenue Deal
Canadian National Investing $120 Million In Wisconsin Rail Infrastructure
True Colors Show In State Capitol

Wisconsin Reading

The Property Tax Scam for Brewers, Bucks
Beloit Billionaire Posts String of Zeros On State Returns
State Continues to Lag Behind Nation in Job Creation
Ballpark Commons Could Get $26 Million in City Funds, Study Suggests
The Radical State Supreme Court?
Wisconsin No Longer Has Electoral Competition

The Toys Go Winding Down

James Causey, of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, is the latest to jump on the 'Milwaukee must build the Bucks a new basketball stadium or else' bandwagon. He opines, The clock is winding down for the Bucks.

Local taxpayers should not expect Kohl to foot the entire bill for a new or renovated facility. No owner will take on such a task. But, remember, taxpayers didn't pay for the Bradley Center. The facility was a $90 million gift from the late philanthropist Jane Bradley Pettit. And although everyone groaned about the stadium tax — that we all still pay — most of us are glad we have Miller Park.

"Everybody was bitching about the tax, but the stadium is pretty, so everything is OK." That's not a justification for spending millions of taxpayers' dollars.

Plus, most of the taxpayers probably never even go to a Brewers game. The majority of residents paying the stadium tax most likely never attend a game.

The Bucks averaged 15,035 people per home game last year. The five counties paying the stadium tax have a combined population (as of 2012) of 1,761,778. That's less than 1% of the five-county population per game attending a game. If we assume no person in the five-county area saw more than 1 game over the course of last season, based on last years attendance, that would still be less than 35% of the five-county population that went to a Bucks' game. [(15,035 * 41 home games)/1,761,778]

The Milwaukee Brewers' attendance in 2013 was the lowest its been since 2006. Miller Park is a lovely stadium...it should be, it was  built in 2001. The primary reason for increased attendance was not the new stadium, it was fielding a competitive team. Hence, the Brewers are back to their losing ways and less people are showing up.

In 2013, the Bucks had the 4th worst attendance and the 13th worst record. If the public must fund stadiums, can we at least have a clawback provision which assures that teams spend a certain amount on payroll? If they don't, they need to repay the subsidy. If we have to fork over cash to fund a private operation, we need some assurances that we'll be getting a competitive team (or at least a team trying to be competitive) for our investment.

Causey concedes stadiums are a low priority, "Milwaukee has a number of problems more pressing than a new sports arena. Our schools could use more funding, poverty is a very real problem and some of our roads and streets have so many potholes that you have to play dodge ball with your car. These issues will still exist with or without a new Bucks facility."

Or we could take the money to address those real problems instead of spending it on a sport stadium.

Yet, we really need this stadium?

For Further Reading:
Buck The System
Buck You
Big League Confusion
Stadium Swindle
More Bradley Center Bull
The Time Is Now?
Is There Anything A Stadium Can't Solve?
The Legalized Bribery That Is Sports Subsidization
It's A Scandal! It's A Outrage!
Bradley Center Boosters Keep Pounding That Drum
Overblown Bradley Center Impacts

Milwaukee Brewer "Destination" Delusion

A recent OnMilwaukee article proclaimed, "Attanasio has made the Brewers a destination."

For evidence, the following player signings were offered as proof:

• Kyle Lohse [34 years old, 4.45 career ERA]
• Zack Greinke [no longer with the Brewers]
• Ricky Bottalico [retired]
• Jeff Suppan [played for San Diego in 2012]
• Randy Wolf [no longer with the Brewers]
• Aramis Ramirez [34 years old, .280 career hitter]

The article also offers up the qualifier, "Yes, CC Sabathia and Prince Fielder walked away – the Brewers will never be in that financial stratosphere – but the signings of the last few years are more impactful than bringing in likes of Chris Coste, Scott Sheldon, Brooks Kieschnick, John Vander Wal and Tony Fernandez."

If the article were titled or was implying, "Brewers turn things around with good management, keen minor league development, and workable role-player signings," I'd agree. But to say the Brewers have become a destination among sought-after free agents, that's quite a stretch. 

According to the MLB Network (2013 season projections), the Brewers currently have only 3 of the top 100 players in baseball: Yovani Gallardo, Aramis Ramirez and Ryan Braun. Gallardo and Braun were both draft picks of the Brewers.

It's nice to see the Brewers are competitive again. But lets not put the cart ahead of the horse. 

Go Brewers!

Brewing Up An Inflated Impact

Major League Baseball recently released a study claiming a large economic impact due to Miller Park. Distant Brewers Fans Have $263 Million Annual Economic Impact.

A link to the study is not included in the article, nor could I find a copy of the study on the Institute for Survey & Policy Research's website.

[Coincidentally, this comes alongside the push for a new Milwaukee basketball arena.]

For starters, the study claims over 45% of fans come from outside the five-county Milwaukee metropolitan area. Yet, as I wrote in April 2012, "The UWM-Center for Economic Development notes in a study of another one of the Milwaukee development community's white elephants (PabstCity), "No venue in Milwaukee draws anything close to 30 percent of its visitors from outside the region. The Calatrava, with all its national and international publicity and iconic status, draws substantially less than 30% of its visitors from outside Milwaukee. Events such as the Wisconsin State Fair and Summerfest draw close to that figure, but these are once a year “special events,” with state-wide and civic participation and sponsorship."

Another odd caveat mentioned in the article, "The study did not consider spending by fans within the five-county metropolitan area in summarizing the economic impact of Miller Park. The reason is something economists call the "substitution effect," or the argument that local fans would be spending their money on other entertainment if the Brewers were not here."

When we're trying to decipher the economic impact a sport facility has on a region, you want to make sure you don't consider how the spending patterns of the majority of attendees affect other businesses in the area. WTF?

Next, we find that, "In estimating economic contributions of fan spending, Leib said the UW-Milwaukee study team used a reasonable multiplier of 2.1, though he usually does not use a multiplier higher than 2. This means that for every $1 spent by a distant fan, the study multiplied it by 2.1, arriving at an impact of $2.10 in the regional economy.  This summarizes how many more times - 2.1 - that dollar is spent in the region, according to Leib."

So, multipliers are usually under 2, but in this case, for some unexplained reason, a higher multiplier was used. Hmmm, I wonder why. 

Dennis Coates and Brad Humphreys found, "The multiplier for spending on sports in a city may be substantially smaller than the multiplier on other forms of entertainment spending, perhaps the most plausible explanation. The majority of the revenues from professional sports go into salaries for players, managers, coaches, trainers, scouts and to income for the ownership. Most of these individuals, especially the more highly paid ones, do not live full time in the city where the games take place. Unlike the wages and salaries paid to employees of local restaurants, movie theaters, car dealerships, department stores, etc., the large salaries earned by players and coaches leak out of the local economy."

Here, again, we have the media proclaiming quantitative evidence of a substantial impact from sport stadiums by merely regurgitating the bullet points of the latest "study." But upon further inspection, this "study" can hardly be taken seriously.

It was also disappointing (although expected at this point) to see that the Journal Sentinel didn't even attempt to find a few counterpoints to interview for the article. Onward with the media-enabled corporate welfare bonanza.

The Legalized Bribery That Is Sport Subsidization

A great article on the "system-gaming moocher class, an entitled, irresponsible, parasitic piglet subset, lazily suckling from the public teat, pulled up by shiny new bootstraps purchased with government giveaways, forever hiding in plain sight," otherwise known as sport subsidies.

As Patrick Hruby writes, "According to Harvard professor Judith Grant Long and economist Andrew Zimbalist, the average public contribution to the total capital and operating cost per sports stadium from 2000 to 2006 was between $249 and $280 million. A fantastic interactive map at Deadspin estimates that the total cost to the public of the 78 pro stadiums built or renovated between 1991 and 2004 was nearly $16 billion."

How does all this (continue to) happen? Especially considering our supposedly pinched budgets and ever-burgeoning fiscal constraints, why do we continue to subsidize sport millionaires? Hruby explains, "Team owners ask for public handouts and threaten to move elsewhere unless they get them, pitting cities against in each other in corporate welfare bidding wars -- wars rooted in the various publicly granted antitrust exemptions that effectively allow sports leagues to control and maintain a limited supply of teams to be leveraged against widespread demand."

Sound familiar? These are the same tactics (build us a stadium or we're leaving town) which were applied to Miller Park for the Brewers and which are being used to strong-arm the public into supporting a new Bradley Center for the Bucks. 

Go read the entire article - Cut Welfare To Sports - to find out more about the land giveaways, infrastructure freebies, tax breaks, and other government handouts the public provides to sport millionaires.

Adversely Impacted

"Major League Baseball has commissioned a study that will look at the direct and indirect economic impact of Miller Park," reports Don Walker, of the Journal Sentinel.

"This study, presumably, would produce evidence of tangible economic benefits of a stadium."

It's not much of a study if you already know what your outcome and conclusions will be. Let's study Miller Park. Miller Park has a big economic impact. Our study will show Miller Park has large economic impact.

Sophisticated analysts have reached a consensus on the impact of stadiums - and it's nothing close to the glowing, overblown claims of stadium boosters and promoters. In fact, most studies have shown that money spent subsidizing stadiums would be better spent on other, more pressing and more stimulative investments.

For Further Reading:
An Examination of Sporting Event Impact Studies