So far the most popular sentiment expressed is that we don't hate New Orleans as much as we hate New Orleanians. That's not something that I considered... You are aware of the significant portion of the state budget to which New Orleans contributes, correct? Losing such a large chuck of tax revenue would definitely impact Grant Parish. Yes, but will they be laid off because of the deal with the Saints? The answer is, "No. They will be laid off regardless if the Saints pulled up roots and left tomorrow." If the taxes or incentives invested into the Saints break even for the state, it's worth the cost in civic pride and free publicity alone. In a perfect world, no government would ever intercede into a business. We are far from a perfect world, so it's extremely important maintain the numbers of jobs that we now have. Why no demand that LSU researchers produce something that justifies and covers their costs?
I know that you think that, but the folks in Grant Parish don't think so. Most of the economic impact of the Saints is in New Orleans and most of the taxes collected are for New Orleans. Asked and answered by yourself. :dis: You think those millions saved couldn't be spent to cover losses elsewhere? You assume anyone gives a chit about that during hard times. It ain't just numbers. Jindal has chosen to keep transient millionaire football players and transient, minimum-wage chicken packers employed and lay off middle-class career university researchers. Well, they do! University researchers don't have civil service status, they "serve at the pleasure of the Board of Supervisors" and can be let go for any reason or no reason at all. It's a competitive business. They have to bring in research contracts, produce deliverables, and publish or they aren't retained very long. Yet, many have been around for decades, won major awards, and have established careers at their schools. Many of them will survive these cuts exactly because they have enough outside funding to cover themselves and their operations. But many others are working on university-sponsored research, also, and if it is cut, they lose their position and their benefits. Not because they failed in any way, but because the Legislature can't manage a budget from year to year. They either have a surplus and squander it or they have a deficit and they make bad decisions on cuts. The state can't afford to subsidize a private professional football team when they can't protect their own university faculty. If the Saints can't make it pay, . . . tough!
i love La and have much of my family there and obviously i love LSU, but I'd have to be real hard-up to take a job at LSU just because of this. im a researcher and the history of state actions at the university is the first question we have when looking for a job. LSU and La will definately lose out because of this one----and for many, many years. this is tough coming considering how high jindal was on higher ed and biotech.
I'm certain that demographic surveys aren't done on either Saints or LSU season ticket holders, but I can tell you that people will get their football season tickets before eating in many cases. I see that it's finally hitting close to home for you, Red. I'm just glad that grant money for my position in CCT dried up unexpectedly back in 2005.
Hmm.... I'm a big proponent of eliminating unnecessary spending, but I don't think the value of the Saints is so cut and dry. Louisiana is behind the 8 ball and it seems like we're always trying to just catch up. Politics in this country, not just Louisiana, will make that difficult. Who would do a better job right now than Jindal? Was anyone in recent memory better?
What people in Grant Parish think is secondary to reality. If they did indeed feel this way, they're satisfied to think that as long as the tax revenue keeps coming. Absolutely not because were the Saints to leave, there would be a much, much larger budget deficit. Then it really would be hard times. A season ticket waiting list of 25,000 strong makes a pretty convincing argument that people do indeed give a chit about that during hard times. Ah, so only middle-class people deserve the money? Everyone else can just suck it? It's a difficult decision and one I'm glad I don't have to make because regardless, someone is going to be upset and unemployed. You obviously have reasons for feeling the way that you do, but there would be a much greater negative impact if the Saints were to pull up roots and leave Louisiana than some University researchers losing their jobs. Much, much, much greater negative impact. It's not even close, really.
That's pretty arrogant of you. And people wonder why the rest of the state hates New Orleans. Prove it. That's right. 0.006% of the state population are really big fans, mostly New Orleanians . . . You completely missed the point. Millionaire football players are transients, they only live in Louisiana for a few years and then they return to their homes. Minimum wage chicken pickers are transients, too. I'll be willing to bet that most are illegal aliens. Career university employees have lived in Louisiana for decades and will continue to do so, paying taxes, for as long as they have jobs and will likely retire here as well. On New Orleans . . .
That statement caught my attention. I know WWL has occasionally made reference to Saints players tending to settle in NOLA more frequently than players in other NFL cities. Right off the top of my head, Archie, Pat Swilling and Ricky Jackson are "foreigners" who stayed in NO, and in each case, are players who actually finished their NFL careers elsewhere. (Jackson retired as a Saint, but never actually played for them after returning from Frisco) A full list of Saints alumni who settled in NO would be interesting to see.
ive no proof, but ive heard of more than one study commissioned by various (usually civic or local govt) entities about the economic impact of pro sports teams. all the ones ive heard of say the impact is negative. now, those studies are about a new team coming and include the cost of a new facility. i dont know the new deal, but its not a guarantee that the saints benefit N.O. or La.
here's one i found to get a rough idea, and from what i gather it is not considering cost of facilities. " UW Geography Professor Bill Beyers stood in front of 250 football fans and gave them a quiz he knew they would fail. Beyers is an expert on economic impact studies. He's done them on "high tech" industries, the arts, the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and for both the Seattle Seahawks football team and the Seattle Mariners baseball team. Last fall, the UW invited him to give an insider's view of sports economics as one of several free lectures held prior to home games. To warm up his audience, Beyers held a "pop" quiz. "I'm going to give you three different percentages for the economic impact of sports on the local economy, and you raise your hand for what you think is the right answer," he said. "Ten percent." (A good number of hands rise.) "One percent." (A majority of hands are held high.) "One-tenth of one percent." (Hardly a hand in the air.) "The correct answer is 1/10th of one percent, and even that is probably overstating it," Beyers told the crowd. His listeners were shocked. To justify the expenditure of public money on sports stadiums, politicians across the nation have pointed to the economic benefits of professional sports." Only a Game: Economic Impact of Pro Sports
