Pawsox now the Provsox?? (Providence, Pawtucket: lawyer, move to, relocate to)

[ormari]

^Do you think this was orchestrated by Providence and Rhode Island leadership to steal the team from Pawtucket?

[AlfieBoy]

^ No, I think the new owners are acting out of greed. But I don't think our leaders should promote or subsidize that habit.

[Snowball7]

AlfieBoy do you realize you are out of step with the average Rhode Island voter ?
The majority of RI voters applaud spending of any kind.
I refer you to the Referendums passed recently by a large majority which include
borrowing to pay actors and choirists, for example.
http://sos.ri.gov/documents/election...dbook_2014.pdf

Said one party-pooper:
“Despite its alluring name, this Creative & Cultural Economy Bond would give preferential treatment to organizations in the arts industry by handing to them hard-earned taxpayer dollars, while other industries are left to survive on their own during these difficult economic times.”

[Hollytree]

Originally Posted by Snowball7

AlfieBoy do you realize you are out of step with the average Rhode Island voter ?
The majority of RI voters applaud spending of any kind.
[/url][/i]

No we don't "applaud spending of any kind". We applaud spending of certain kinds.

Just because you think arts and culture are worthless, doesn't mean we all agree.

[AlfieBoy]

Originally Posted by Snowball7

AlfieBoy do you realize you are out of step with the average Rhode Island voter ?
The majority of RI voters applaud spending of any kind.
I refer you to the Referendums passed recently by a large majority which include
borrowing to pay actors and choirists, for example.
http://sos.ri.gov/documents/election...dbook_2014.pdf

Said one party-pooper:
“Despite its alluring name, this Creative & Cultural Economy Bond would give preferential treatment to organizations in the arts industry by handing to them hard-earned taxpayer dollars, while other industries are left to survive on their own during these difficult economic times.”

I think that is money well-spent. $120 million for a AAA baseball stadium that the state will not even own? Not so much.

[ormari]

Originally Posted by Snowball7

AlfieBoy do you realize you are out of step with the average Rhode Island voter ?
The majority of RI voters applaud spending of any kind.
I refer you to the Referendums passed recently by a large majority which include
borrowing to pay actors and choirists, for example.
http://sos.ri.gov/documents/election...dbook_2014.pdf

Said one party-pooper:
“Despite its alluring name, this Creative & Cultural Economy Bond would give preferential treatment to organizations in the arts industry by handing to them hard-earned taxpayer dollars, while other industries are left to survive on their own during these difficult economic times.”

I support wise investments in arts and culture.

[Snowball7]

Originally Posted by AlfieBoy

I think that is money well-spent. $120 million for a AAA baseball stadium that the state will not even own? Not so much.

The state doesn't own Trinity Rep either. There were quite a few other
entertainment-based free millions in that referendum also. I don't think
artists should be on the state payroll. Anyway, spending referendums of
any kind always seem to pass here. That's just how it is.

[AlfieBoy]

Originally Posted by Snowball7

The state doesn't own Trinity Rep either. There were quite a few other
entertainment-based free millions in that referendum also. I don't think
artists should be on the state payroll. Anyway, spending referendums of
any kind always seem to pass here. That's just how it is.

Would you agree that any state or city "gimmes" to the Baseball Billionaires should be placed for a vote by the city/state voters?

[Snowball7]

Originally Posted by AlfieBoy

Would you agree that any state or city "gimmes" to the Baseball Billionaires should be placed for a vote by the city/state voters?

I'd rather not see it put to a referendum because I know the referendum would pass.

[ormari]

^Not a chance it would pass. The vast majority of Rhode Islanders are against corporate welfare to build an overpriced hotdog factory for the exclusive benefit of wealthy businessmen.

A key difference between the arts and culture bonds and what the new ownership of the PawSox are demanding is that the arts and culture bonds were put to a voter referendum, which is not likely to happen with the PawSox deal. This ownership group has put an accelerated timeline on the city, state, and people in order to cram this thing through quickly to their distinct advantage. They've had a long time to calculate and strategize, and are trying to use time and threats to get what they want.

Another key difference is those arts and culture bonds went to prop up some basic cultural attractions operated by non-profits (in at least one case, as I understand it, to meet building codes imposed on them ex post facto by the government). The PawSox, on the other hand, really don't need to 'upgrade' their stadium and function just fine as is. It is explicitly in search of profit that these new baseball owners seek corporate welfare. The purpose is to line their pockets with further profit than they would otherwise acquire. Profit is a good thing in capitalist society, but they don't need taxpayer funding to make the business profitable. They want it to make it more profitable, at taxpayer expense.