MP Rob Moore is way offside about the economics of hockey stadium
During last weeks Conservative caucus meeting in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, MP Rob Moore was asked about his support of taxpayer money being used to build a state of the art $12-million dollar NHL-size rink and hockey stadium (they call it a recreation facilty) in Quispamsis. Here is part of Moore's response:
Frankly, Rob Moore is suffering from what is better known as the famous broken window fallacy. (sorry eugene, I had to mention it again) In other words, sports stadiums or hockey rinks are rarely, if ever, the economic engines the politicians claim. While some people will work [temporary] construction position to build the arena as Moore said, what he fails to mention here is that had the taxpayer's money gone towards something else to build a stronger and more viable economy, than other more sustainable jobs would have been added from that money, likely leading to even bigger economic growth in the province and region.
This is what French economist Fredric Bastiat referred to as "what is seen and what is not seen." For example, suppose that money had been spent on more police facilities in Quispamsis. The region could have upgraded the RCMP facility, which also require construction jobs. Or hired additional police. Or what if the money had never been taken from the taxpayers in the first place, allowing them to spend it as they wished (even on Saint John Sea Dog tickets) rather than have government take it to build a stadium which creates very little longterm economic growth (or jobs) and gets used 7 to 8 months of the year. Plus, the upkeep of these facilities usually leaves taxpayers on the hook for additional cash down the road.
I know that these facilities can be the lifeblood of a community, I'm not disputing that claim, but to tout them as strong economic engines is a little much (and wrong), don't you think? For example, Tantramar Regional Civic Centre in Sackville, NB was built a few years back and it has done nothing to curtail outmigration of educated youth, or better yet, encouraged more economic growth in the region. Let's call 'em what they are, a great place for youth to learn to play the game hockey on their way out the door to another province. We need real economic solutions in this province folks. And building hockey arenas isn't it.
The completion of this project will provide an outstanding recreational centre we can all be proud of. This project will benefit the entire region", concluded Moore.He went on to say on 91.9 FM that there would be positive economic benefits to the project as it would put a whole bunch of New Brunswick folks to work, create strong labor jobs, and at the same time, create an enormous opportunity for economic growth throughout the town of Quispamsis. And as he said above, that's good for the entire region.
Frankly, Rob Moore is suffering from what is better known as the famous broken window fallacy. (sorry eugene, I had to mention it again) In other words, sports stadiums or hockey rinks are rarely, if ever, the economic engines the politicians claim. While some people will work [temporary] construction position to build the arena as Moore said, what he fails to mention here is that had the taxpayer's money gone towards something else to build a stronger and more viable economy, than other more sustainable jobs would have been added from that money, likely leading to even bigger economic growth in the province and region.
This is what French economist Fredric Bastiat referred to as "what is seen and what is not seen." For example, suppose that money had been spent on more police facilities in Quispamsis. The region could have upgraded the RCMP facility, which also require construction jobs. Or hired additional police. Or what if the money had never been taken from the taxpayers in the first place, allowing them to spend it as they wished (even on Saint John Sea Dog tickets) rather than have government take it to build a stadium which creates very little longterm economic growth (or jobs) and gets used 7 to 8 months of the year. Plus, the upkeep of these facilities usually leaves taxpayers on the hook for additional cash down the road.
I know that these facilities can be the lifeblood of a community, I'm not disputing that claim, but to tout them as strong economic engines is a little much (and wrong), don't you think? For example, Tantramar Regional Civic Centre in Sackville, NB was built a few years back and it has done nothing to curtail outmigration of educated youth, or better yet, encouraged more economic growth in the region. Let's call 'em what they are, a great place for youth to learn to play the game hockey on their way out the door to another province. We need real economic solutions in this province folks. And building hockey arenas isn't it.
6 Comments:
The conservatives are just trying to buy votes with our money. This is all this is.
It may very well be true that new up to date hockey rinks and sports facilities are not direct engines of the economy, but try attracting any sort of decent new industry to you area without them.
If you were responsible to relocate or start up a head office or branch plant where would you go? If the taxes, energy costs, transportation costs and labour costs were neutral in comparison with all the places you could go (which sadly in NB there are not) then the discriminator becomes the standard of living for your employees and management. Rinks, arenas, sports fields that drain, and good recreation programs are a big part of that standard and quality of life.
And besides... after about thirty years its time for a new rink for those of us who already live here, and who cares if its Tory or Liberal government help?
Rather the rink than a Caisse Populaire or meat Processor bailout.
You make a good point regarding Caisse Populaire or meat Processor bailout as Bastiat's theory of "what is seen and what is not seen" definitely comes into play on those two extremely poor deals.
But you're right, state of the art infrastructure is essential in communities if they are to attract ppl away from areas or regions with similar facilities. I just think, in some instances, our money and tax-dollars could be spent much more wisely.
Don't recreation facilities like these promote better health?
There are many ways to engage citizens into a healthy lifestyle. That is just one.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home