Cleveland sports teams wanna crap on the city's head again: asking for extension of "sin taxes"

Yup, it's the new world where having a drink or two is a "sin", but pillaging the public treasury is not.

From The Plain Dealer

Voters and fans supported the sin tax in 1996 to help build a new stadium to ensure a football team return to Cleveland.

But since the Browns returned, the team has struggled on the field changing coaches and quarterbacks, routinely leaving fans frustrated with a last place team. Still the Browns are owed the money for repairs per the sin tax and lease agreement with the city under the Mayor Mike White administration.

Monday afternoon Browns officials and city leaders met to talk about how to pay for $5.8 million in repairs to seats, ramps and concrete at Browns Stadium.

Well, it's better than in Pittsburgh, where people voted against the stadiums and got them anyway.

The irony here is rich since these were no doubt sold as investments that would help the local bars, clubs and entertainment venues. Instead, they are being driven under by taxes.

The Browns want credit for the money they have given to local charities. Scumbags--you are a charity living on the dole.

Rumors are flying that The Indians and Cavs will join the lobbying effort for a tax extension.

From The Cleveland Leader

The sin tax was originally approved by Cuyahoga County voters in 1990 for a term of 15-years to pay for the construction of Progressive Field (formerly Jacobs Field) and Quicken Loans Arena (formerly Gund Arena) through what was known as the Gateway project. Then, in 1995, voters approved extending the tax for another 10 years to help build Cleveland Browns Stadium. The sin ax put a tax on cigarettes of 4.5 cents per back, 16 cents per gallon of beer, 32 cents per gallon on wine and mixed beverages, and other spirits at $3 per gallon.

By the end of 2015, bonds issued by the city of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County to pay for their shares of the construction of all three projects will have been repaid. Each of the three professional sports teams has 30-year leases that put the burden of capital repairs on the city and county governments.

Please Cleveland, respect yourself and stop being kicked around and treated like garbage.

No Surprise, The Cleveland City Council approved another give away to the Cleveland Browns

When Cleveland's mayor was begged by small music clubs and musicians to cut back an 8% admissions tax he shot back- "I have a city to run.".

From The Cleveland Plain Dealer

Today, we got an idea of the kind of spending the city considers vital. Cops? Education? Street repairs? No, another give away to a favored sports team.

"City Council voted 16-2 Monday to let the team take the money from a city-administered tax on alcohol and tobacco sales. Cleveland, which leases the stadium to the football team, is required to provide only $850,000 a year for major improvements."

My guess is we will see some of these scumbags in a puppet theater show soon.

Should Obama Use Billions In Scarce Tax Dollars To Subsidize Broadband In Rural And Exurban Areas?

We all know that a very high Obama/Democrat agenda item will be massive, most likely multi trillion dollar set of policies to lower the America's greenhouse gas emissions which they assure us pose a threat to our very survival.



Perhaps, they should think about the logic behind at the same time engaging in huge new programs to use tax dollars, regulations and subsidies to speed up broadband in America's rural areas--at the same time.

The real answer to rural poverty, used to be pretty clear--move to a town or city, where the cost of infrastructure is more easily supported by a larger number of people. The "right" to free roads, airports and other infrastructure is a vast hidden entitlement that actively harms those who live in urban areas, by forcing them to subsidise the very sprawl that is destroying our cities.

Face it, it ain't the Amish who are demanding things ike this.

Quest Communications a huge telecom firm for example is now asking for a 350 million dollar "stimulus" grant to speed up rural "broadband". Nice to know the visitors to many of the country's wealthiest resort communities will be getting higher speed Internet connections. They seem happy.

"There is no reason that tax payers should be forced to subsidize rural internet services. It is nice for farmers and other rural dwellers, but it is not really fair that they should pay less than the cost of service to them at the expense of the taxpayer. If they want this service than the only fair and right thing for them to do is either pay a premium and make it worthwhile for providers like Qwest to provide service in their area or to create a community co-op type of arrangement to get service by pooling resources with other rural people living nearby. the answer is not to turn to welfare to subsidize relatively well off people, and relatively rich corporations like Qwest. Besides the need is diminishing as wireless broadband becomes more widespread. This just becomes a gift to Qwest so their wireline service can more easily compete with wireless services in rural areas without really adding much benefit to the rural dwellers. "