Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

How the Mega-Rich Treat Our Treasury Like a Buffet (And Stick You With the Bill)

By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!. Posted January 21, 2008.


Political connections are worth their weight in gold for America's wealthy.
Advertisement

Amy Goodman: Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston has been closely tracking the nation's income gap in the pages of the New York Times. David Cay has just published a new book. It's called Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (And Stick You With the Bill). Explain the wealth transfer.

David Cay Johnston: We have created in the United States, largely in the last thirty years, a whole series of programs -- a few of them explicit, many of them deeply hidden -- that take money from the pockets of the poor and the middle class and upper middle class and funnel it to the wealthiest people in America. And among the biggest recipients of these subsidies are the wealthiest family America, the Waltons; George Steinbrenner; Donald Trump; a whole host of healthcare billionaires. And these are policies that either have not been reported on or the news reporting on them generally has not informed people about what they really are.

Democracy Now! Co-Host Juan Gonzalez: You have numerous chapters in the book on the various aspects of this transfer, but I was especially struck by your material on the New York Yankees and Steinbrenner and Joyce Hogi, who you mention in the book, who I know well, and this whole issue of sports teams across America and how the public is subsidizing them. Could you elaborate on that part of it?

Johnston: Sure. George Steinbrenner is getting over $600 million for the new Yankee Stadium in New York. The New York Mets are getting over $600 million. In fact, the City of New York gave them money to lobby against the taxpayers to get more money. Rudy Giuliani gave $50 million to the two teams for that purpose.

The new owners of the Washington Nationals baseball team in Washington, D.C., paid $450 million for the team. But, in fact, they got the team for free, because the subsidy they're getting for the new stadium is worth $611 million. We actually paid these people to buy the team.

Now, in this country right now, we are spending $2 billion a year subsidizing the big four sports: baseball, basketball, football and hockey. It accounts for all of the profits of that industry and more. Now, there may be individual teams that make money, but the industry as a whole is not profitable. And that's astonishing because the big four leagues are exempt from the laws of competition. By the way, irony is not dead, because here are people who are in the business of competition on the field who are exempted by law from the rules of economic competition.

If you go to England and you want to start a soccer team, they have to let you join the soccer league. There are thirteen commercial soccer teams in the London area. New York City, the biggest city in the country, there are two baseball teams, because there's no free entry into the market. In Los Angeles, there's no football team. And the owners use this power to prevent others from owning teams, to prevent municipal governments from owning teams, to prevent nonprofits from owning teams, to extract money from the taxpayers to build them new stadiums.

At the same time that we're doing this, we are starving our public parks for money. And I show in Free Lunch how the rise of urban gangs and now suburban gangs is connected to this. We used to have all sorts of programs in this country after World War II for young men and young women on Saturdays and during the summer and school holidays, where even if you didn't have any money -- didn't matter that your parents didn't have any money, because -- and I know this because I did it as a child -- you could go to any one of a half-dozen different places, and there were organized activities to keep you out of trouble. After all, idle hands are the devil's workshop is not exactly a radical new idea. Well, we've cut and cut and cut those programs to fund two different subsidies: one to sports teams' owners, one that goes to Tyco, General Electric, Honeywell and some other big companies. And, lo and behold, we've had a big rise in urban violence because of the vacuum being filled by young people who no longer have these organized activities.

Goodman: Speaking of sports teams, talk about President Bush and where you believe, really, ultimately, he got his wealth.

Johnston: Well, it isn't a function of belief, Amy. I've got the documents. President Bush, who will go down in history as the great tax cutter, owes almost all of his fortune to a tax increase that was funneled into his pocket. What happened is, an oil man named Eddie Chiles wanted to sell his money-losing Texas Rangers baseball team. They played in a little stadium, smaller than the one we have here in Rochester, New York, and of course couldn't make any money. So George Bush put together a group of very wealthy investors to buy the team. He put up himself $600,000 of borrowed money. The partners then gave him a 10 percent stake as the managing partner. That's a very common arrangement in business. Then they held a special election in January of the year in question to increase the sales tax in the town of Arlington, Texas, by one half-cent. That money was used to build a new baseball stadium. It's an incredibly nice baseball stadium.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: wealth, public wealth, taxes

Amy Goodman is the host of the nationally syndicated radio news program, Democracy Now!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
David Cay Johnston is an American Hero and a Republican !
Posted by: mmckinl on Jan 21, 2008 1:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That is how bad our tax system has become. Courageous people stick up for the truth and fight injustice. David Cay Johnston is one of those people.

I have felt this way about Johnston since reading his last book : Perfectly Legal. In that book he exposed a multitude of loopholes and tax gimmmicks aimed right at business and the mega rich. Loopholes and gimmicks anyone worth less than 10-20 million will never hear about ... except from David Cay Johnston.

And why isn't he featured on conservative media and in conservative print ? Well you know why ...

We all owe a debt of gratitude to David Cay Johnston. Buy his book 'Free Lunch' if you can manage the anger you'll generate once seeing how the Public Good has been legally cheated out of trillions.

from a progressive no less ...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Only Edwards and Kucinich are on this!
Posted by: mark_proulx on Jan 21, 2008 5:32 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Johnston addresses the problem in what used to be "our" government. Note that I didn't say "a" problem - I said THE problem. When you have two parties who slavishly serve the uber-wealthy, you have no meaningful party distinction and no menaingful government.

The fact that no Democrats outside of Edwards and Kucinich are addressing the problem is disgraceful.

If either Clinton or Obama get into office, expect no change. We're migrating toward a modern-day feudal system. The only industry we'll have left is the one that makes the sticks that the serfs will use to till their meager plots.

Oh, by way...spare me the drivel about how Clinton or Obama would still be better than any Republican. The only improvement I can see in this regard is that a Democratic "president" will use a little KY before sticking it to us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wonks for Edwards Posted by: A. Servant
Woah, Nellie
Posted by: Emily on Jan 21, 2008 5:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the matter of kickbacks to real estate agents by title insurance companies. My husband is a realtor. He has sold many properties and has never even been offered a "kickback" for steering a customer to them.

We seem to be missing out on some legitimate "graft and corruption" charges and I, for one, want a rebate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Woah, Nellie Posted by: GarrisonPayneLeonard38H
» RE: Woah, Nellie Posted by: eddief
Welfare Fraud
Posted by: US Citizen on Jan 21, 2008 5:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If only all those people out there who oppose welfare opposed rich person welfare like that George W. Bush received. The huge problem with rich person welfare is that it doesn't cost us a few thousands of dollars like welfare for poor people does, but millions and millions of dollars. And none of these rich people get put in prison for welfare fraud.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Welfare Fraud Posted by: GarrisonPayneLeonard38H
» RE: Welfare Fraud Posted by: Joe
» RE: Welfare Fraud Posted by: polyquat50
Bush and Bernanke push corporate socialism
Posted by: cognitorex on Jan 21, 2008 5:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The financial types made, packaged and sold huge numbers of poor mortgages. As they traded these shoddy assets back and forth amongst themselves they, (Wall Street) paid themselves $25 billion in bonuses for 2006 and $32 billion for 2007.
Now Bernacke and Bush recommend a stimulus to replace the missing equity capital in the financial system. How can this not be called socialism? Or is socialistic tinkering with the system to protect the rich called a stimulus package while providing health care is oh so unAmerican.
The nation's debt has skyrocketed from six to nine trillion dollars under Bushco and as a legacy for his last year he will oversee spending a couple hundred billion dollars we don't have to bail out his cronies.
Meanwhile a useful scorecard to watch is that the Pound and the Euro continue to soar against the dollar even while Europe provides a social net for the health and retirement of their workers.
We get to inject billions into the economy in an act of corporate socialism; Wall Street meanwhile takes home $57 billion and yet helping the poor with medical bills and heating costs remains a danger to the American psyche.
As the accountants say: "Go figure."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Time for "Seep UP"!
Posted by: GrannyBgood on Jan 21, 2008 6:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Time for "Seep UP" instead of "Trickle DOWN" !
(which has been more like "Piss on your leg")

Vote Edwards/Kucinich
...oh wait, they've already been written off by the Bootlickers in the Media!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What Do We Do?
Posted by: Southern Gal on Jan 21, 2008 7:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Edwards and Kucinich are still trying to participate in the election process. They don't get the commercial media coverage to show the people that they are viable candidates with real solutions to problems and they have been marginalized as candidates. The corporate media have annointed either Hillary or Obama as the winners of the Democratic nomination. The people understand that we are either in a recession or heading into a recession. What the people don't seem to understand is that the finanicial policies of this government have put us in this recession. It seems that what we will get is a Democratic Whitehouse with pretty much the same policies. The Democrats inherit this mess of an economy and the people in power will work to see that they are taken care of and the rest of us can get by as best we can. What chance do the working people of this country have in this scenario? What power do the people have? If we stop spending money except for necessities the economy will suffer. We may see some piece meal solutions as we are seeing right now with Bush's stimulus "tax" idea. How bad does it have to get to see some real solutions and how far are we will to go to get real solutions? We could defintely impact the economy by not spending. However, if we stop spending our fellow Americans in the service and retail industries and spinoff industries will get laid off and their families will suffer. There don't seem to be any solutions without pain to this mess. Okay fellow progressives on Alternet, what do we do? What can we do? Our futures and our country are at stake.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What Do We Do? Posted by: Trazom
Time To Eat The Rich
Posted by: rgoalierob on Jan 21, 2008 7:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They taste like chickenhawk.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rigged Game
Posted by: DrgonzoSB on Jan 21, 2008 7:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You have to marvel at how well the rich and well-connected have rigged the American economy for their own benefit. It's really remarkable that they use government power to corner a market and eliminate competition, then go around bragging about the glory and fairness of the free market system. The American media slavishly repeat the myth, the myth becomes accepted as fact, and, well, here we are, with a denuded middle-class, crummy low-wage jobs, no universal health care, and a tottering system of public education...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

$15,000 average income?
Posted by: eddief on Jan 21, 2008 8:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with almost everything Mr. Johnston says. But I have trouble with his statement that the bottom half of taxpayers earn an average of $15,000.
If he said the bottom 25 pct. or thereabouts, I might agree. But 50 pct., in my opinion, is much to high.
Please comment

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: $15,000 average income? Posted by: carcinoid112
» RE: $15,000 average income? Posted by: eddief
The Approaching (if you don't realize it's here, your not paying attention) Feudal Age.
Posted by: Spock on Jan 21, 2008 8:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I started predicting what has been happening since World War Two and the military industrial complex coup d'etat that was beginning then while still in high school. Years later - 1973, at a symposium - I titled my talk "The New Feudal Age," and again predicted what we have now - in detail. I have been writing about it for years, in several books and on my website www.judoknigherrant.com Essentially, I have merely been the voice of "one crying in the wilderness. That's largely because of Operation MOCKINGBIRD (to better understand, you ought look it up), the taxpayer-funded program created by the then new C.I.A. to co-opt the nation's news media and control the public's information and mind. It's also, and concomitantly because the media and their corporate masters control who is heard by the public. While I speak of predictions, let me also predict a massive effort by the corporately owned government to gain control the Internet. We mustn't be permitted to create another Ron Paul, you know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Why? Posted by: Iconoclast421
kafka
Posted by: kafka, f on Jan 21, 2008 9:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your comment on GW evading taxes was interesting. However, he actually did commit tax fraud when he sold the Rangers not take advantage of a loop hole. Whenever a partner sells a partnership interest under provision 751 of the tax code the partner is required to treat a portion of the sales proceeds as ordinary income. GW treated none of the sales proceeds as ordinary income and tricked the IRS by including such income on a shell "S" corporation tax return. All of this information is publicly available and the tax authorities are well of aware of the tax fraud committed by GW. In fact, GW's tax evasion goes back even futher to 1992 when he converted a recourse loan to nonrecourse from a company he was board member, Harken Energy, clear tax evasion. See Harken Energy publicly available financial reports from 1992.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Baseball's been very good to me..G.W. Bush..
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Jan 21, 2008 9:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We all know it was Ken Lay and Enron cronies that set G.W. Bush up in the Texas Ranger deal and then Ken Lay got to pick Bush's Attorney General of Texas who went on to become arguably the worst Attorney General in American history..Alberto Gonzales who was an Enron shyster hand picked by Ken Lay..!

Here's my point interesting how Kenny boy just happened to kick the bucket just when he might have to testify..isn't it..?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Never mind
Posted by: willymack on Jan 21, 2008 10:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How rich scumbags and crooked politicans screw us over. These are just symptoms of a disease brought on by PERCEPTION, the idea that some people are inherently BETTER than others, and therefore deservilg of more wealth and special consideration. As long as we continue to "look up" to those scoundrels, we'll be screwed over, over and over again, and we'll have crooked politicans, preachers, and peddlars of things we really don't want or need.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TO: GrannyBgood
Posted by: luckypuck on Jan 21, 2008 10:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You’re right. I wrote about this around 18 months ago although I called it the "Percolate Up" theory (as opposed to the “Trickle Down” theory). How is it when Reagan proposed this plan no one spoke out against it? Oh, wait a minute. Someone did. Guess who? Poppy Bush did. He called it “Voodoo Economics.” And it was, but that didn’t stop him from perpetuating the blood sacrifices when HE got into the White House. And every president thereafter either embraced the voodoo or were unable or incapable of changing it.

Dubya Bush's current attempt to deflect our attention from his failed economic policies is to propose to give tax rebates to everyone (another tax cut . . . boy, he just doesn't get it). His rationale (yeah, right) is that the lower income citizens will spend that money and give a boost to the economy. Sort of like the "Percolate Up" or "Seep Up," theories. But his version is all so wrong in so many ways. First, not quite everyone gets a rebate. Only people who pay taxes. That means the lowest income people, i.e., those below the poverty level, the ones who don't pay any taxes, but are suffering the most from Bush's incompetence, won't get ANYTHING.

But let's look on the bright side: Those wealthy folks who pay their lawyers a percentage of the taxes the lawyers figure out how to avoid, THEY don't pay any taxes either. However, those lawyers make it look on paper as if they do. And what would you bet that those porkers somehow will quietly qualify for bigger tax rebates than they pay in taxes. Way bigger.

Next, because there is a perception that big box stores have lower prices, that’s mostly where low income folks will spend the rebates. And as Mr. Johnston points out, in the long run, Walmart et. al., will only get all the low income rebates AND the tax giveaways that local governments kickback to the Boxes. Of course, this is money that WON”T go to local programs that serve local lower income citizens. And the immoral, unjust, ironic hypocrisy of the Bush plan is that he is always shouting out about “entrepreneurship” and how it’s the spirit and backbone of America. So, he shovels all our tax money at big business so they can afford to kill the competition. Go figure.

Is there a more sinister term we can apply to all this criminality? Catch-22 is too wimpy. Maybe Catch 2,222? Nah! How about, “Fuck all the little people, they’re exploitable cannon fodder for enriching the only people who count in America.” Nah! Catchy, but too long to come trippingly off the tongue.

mark_proulx above has the right idea. Let’s all campaign for Edwards (my own personal preference). I don’t have anything against Kucinch except he has less chance to win than Edwards. I’m both discouraged and encouraged by what’s happening to Edwards. He’s not getting the numbers he needs, but one-on-one, face-to-face matchups against each of the Republican candidates, he polls higher than Hillary and Barack. I don’t trust polls too much, but when they tell me what I want to hear, I like them a little better.

But we’re getting ahead of ourselves. Edwards potential is just a little less than a year away. What’s needed first is to IMPEACH BUSH/CHENEY. . . NOW!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: TO: GrannyBgood Posted by: paulmagillsmith
» TO: Paul Posted by: luckypuck
Relating to George W.
Posted by: CatDad on Jan 21, 2008 12:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we are spending $2 billion a year subsidizing the big four sports
------------------------
The only "success" George W. had in business was conning voters in blue-collar Arlington, Texas to vote in a tax increase to subsidize building a new baseball stadium...Of course Bush and his buddies got all the benefits...the poor saps in Arlington got a sales tax increase....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good article
Posted by: ot on Jan 21, 2008 12:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hats off to David Cay Johnston for his work in bringing this issue to light.

I see the asymmetrical distribution of wealth as one of the biggest problems facing Americans in the future, and perhaps the entire world.

True divisions have never been about race or gender, but about wealth, power and influence.

I also believe that the solution rests with the American people themselves. We cannot stop at placing blame and congratulate ourselves for seeing through the obvious corruption and abuse. Nor can we expect those who trumpet change yet affiliate with the same status quo political parties to be our saviors.

But, unfortunately, I see no evidence of the fundamental shift in consciousness at the grass roots level necessary to abolish the practices Johnston has researched. The catalyst for such a thing is usually pain. And conditions aren't that bad yet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You can bitch and moan all you want, nothing will change.
Posted by: billwald on Jan 21, 2008 2:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nothing will change unless we have a shooting revolution and start from scratch and that isn't going to happen because our owners keep us happy with cheap beer and the sports channel.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is new?
Posted by: aka_bozo on Jan 21, 2008 4:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What, exactly, do you think the PURPOSE of a huge unmanageable ORGANIZATION is? Government organizations are big and unmanageable on PURPOSE. Corporate organizations are big cash machines for MANAGEMENT. The stockholders get what’s left AFTER management rips-off the customer and pockets their outrageous fees (commonly called bonuses and stock-options). That’s how things work, and that’s how they’re designed to work.

And, whom do you think runs BIG organizations and WHY do you thing they want to run big organizations? The smartest sleaziest assholes run them because that’s where the uncontrolled cash is.

This is like reviewing a book about the world being round. Like DUH!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The forever rich
Posted by: Doubtom on Jan 21, 2008 9:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Instead of forever talking about this ongoing scam against the people, why not just mount a good old-fashioned revolution? Or do you really think that the rich will willingly step aside? Especially with our Senate being labelled the "Millionaire's Club"?

Outlaw all lobbying in America as being at cross purposes to the interests of the citizens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Eliminate the Income Tax
Posted by: gellero on Jan 21, 2008 9:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And this might never happen.

Funny, though, most all the big cities with stadiums are under Democratic Party control.


Told ya....not a dimes worth of difference between them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WEALTHY-fare, WEALTHY-fare, RAH, RAH, RAH!
Posted by: GarrisonPayneLeonard38H on Jan 23, 2008 5:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Huge economy, huge problems, more problems coming...if you have a heavy load to haul, would you choose a team of large healthy oxen, or would you opt for a three-legged chihuahua?

When our MBA Prez-Dint brought his all-singing-all-dancing CEO Revue to Washingtoon, he promised smaller government: What he gave us was a three-legged chihuahua with a gut so big its three legs can't touch the ground.

Many -- not all, but many -- of the problems of full-service democratic government have been engineered by those who want to see government by the people and for the people fail in this country. These operatives may hide themselves in the ranks of legitimate fiscal conservatives, but they are not true conservatives: They are what many of us now call Cons. They have their own Orwellian lingo, where "reform" means either "corrupt" or "disable" and words like "clean", "healthy" and "wise" become punchlines even David Broder can't utter without wincing.

The Cons get elected, or selected, by posing as sober "small gub-mint" conservatives while touting their credentials as buddies of Jerry Falwell and James Dobson. They are Cons because they con their constituents, they are Cons because they oppose pro-people policies, and they are Cons because, increasingly, they are being tried and convicted for all manner of crimes.

Finally, Cons from Reagan through Fratboy have built the biggest confidence scam in history: They may have cut staffs and funds at the FCC, the FDA, the SEC, and HHS, but they have privatized so many services and thrown so many no-bid billions at everything from drug manufacturers to the flourishing Disaster Capitalists, that we now have a shadow government dedicated to Wealthy-Fare ripoffs instead of an elected government dedicated to government for the people.

If you want full-service democratic government to function, you must work to expose the Cons when they try to lie their way into power. Otherwise, regardless of how "big" or "small" our government is, you can brace for more "heckuva job" moments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Big government Posted by: luckypuck
Nothing New
Posted by: cherylholmes on Jan 25, 2008 7:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The subsidizing of sports teams has been going on forever. The Spurs have had 2 new stadiums in I believe 2 years. I wouldn't be surprised to learn a 3rd is in the works. The Alamodome was built after voters turned it down by floating an additional tax on the VIA bus system. Who rides the bus? The poorest of the poor.

Trump and others made their entire fortunes using OPM, others people's money. We let them. We let everyone screw us. I guess that makes us common ho's...because prostitutes get paid to get screwed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]