The Observation Deck

I have no idea what to expect...this will be the most interesting local election since at least 2007.

Considering that smoking and drinking has and will continue to decline - this tax is not workable for the long run. I am completely fed up with the major sports leagues having tax exempt status and the public being told "pay up or we leave". We have to start somewhere and my vote is NO NO NO

Good news for the pro-Sin Tax side:
A group of alcohol and tobacco dealers are buying anti-tax TV ads.

The group (not affiliated with the better-known local graasroots group) includes some Kasich Republicans and other outsiders.

The injection of beer and tobacco money will actually undermine the anti-tax effort.
The original anti-tax group didn't have much money, but they at least seemed like sincere people.


http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-count ... rt_m-rpt-1

sell the stadiums

Based on the patented "Stan Austin Yard Sign Index" political indicator, I predict the issue will fail.

I have only seen three yard signs supporting the issue (two in Lakewood, one in Cleveland).
I haven't see any "No" signs, but I think that is because none have been printed.

[quote="Michael Deneen"]Based on the patented "Stan Austin Yard Sign Index" political indicator, I predict the issue will fail.

I have only seen three yard signs supporting the issue (two in Lakewood, one in Cleveland).
I haven't see any "No" signs, but I think that is because none have been printed.[/quote]


Really? I think when push comes to shove, more will vote to stay with the status quo ... I'll call it 55-45 to pass. The debate will make it closer than it would have otherwise been, but not push it over the top.

Michael Deneen wrote:Would your vote be different if the teams had greater on-field success?

Mike,

Regardless of how I will cast my vote, I believe that the finally "yes" votes would be greater if the teams had greater on-field success.

Matt

No doubt in my mind that this will pass. People realize that what they are now paying will not go away if the issue loses since the store owners will certainly not drop the extra pennies they now charge if that happens.

Matthew John Markling wrote:Mike,

Regardless of how I will cast my vote, I believe that the finally "yes" votes would be greater if the teams had greater on-field success.

Matt

There is some truth to that, although I think there are larger factors in play.

I remain completely convinced that the Browns are leaving after the 2028 season (which isn't as far away as it sounds....1999 wasn't that long ago).
If they remain bad, that might actually be a GOOD thing...it will make it easier to say goodbye.
By then there won't be too many people left that can remember 1964.....even the Bernie Years will be ancient history.

"People realize that what they are now paying will not go away if the issue loses since the store owners will certainly not drop the extra pennies they now charge if that happens."

Again, I - and most people I talk to - would much rather those pennies and nickels and dimes ($250+ million worth) go to the hundreds or thousands of mostly local businesses than to the NFL, MLB and NBA.

The rich and powerful may have convinced some people to turn over their pennies, but hopefully more people will have seen through that nonsense. These millionaires know that a penny saved is a penny earned and when they have access to literally billions of pennies from either individuals or small establishments, the rich get richer while telling you that you're not missing much.

these venues are heavily patronized by residents of adjacent counties. If these venues are to be supported by sin taxes, it would be sensible to extend this sin tax to adjacent counties.

A novel, innovative way to fund improvements to these venues would be....raising the price of tickets...and advertising...that these venues sell......!

but the hypothetical free market would not bear increases in ticket price. it would eat into the budgets of the professional teams. If they had to lower their payrolls by several ten million dollars, they would become less competitive in the professional sports leagues. Then the sports would become much less entertaining. It might even be as bad as the 1970s.

This issue is the absurdity of absurdities. Let me get this straight: the purpose of the Sin Tax is to gouge those who purchase alcohol and cigarettes not because anyone is trying to discourage consumption but rather so the County can use that money to pay for sports stadiums that do not produce anything but a fleeting moment witnessing the passing of a football, the dribbling of a basketball and the throwing of a baseball so that such a minute tidbit of diversion can be enjoyed by all. The stupidity of this proposition is enough to make your head spin even though the spin doctors advocating passage of this nonsense are already doing a pretty good job of hypnotizing the voters to actually consider supporting it. At least the Robber Barons of the previous centuries provided something tangible such as oil, steel, railroads etcetera. These team owners do not even provide one tangible thing that could ever be considered with the term “value added.” Almost everyone discusses this “enterprise” as though it is the same thing as industry {which it is not}. The price of admission is essentially a voluntary tax paid by those who can afford it to pay those who don’t need it. If this isn’t a transfer of wealth I don’t know what is.

The real outrage here is the fact that taxes on alcohol and cigarettes will not be used to aid in the reduction of addiction {hence the reference to “sin”} but rather to stuff the pockets of all three teams who could easily afford to pay for the repairs themselves. The vote was rammed through the last time {under somewhat suspicious circumstances} and hear we go again. But this time...not so fast!!! We the voters of Cuyahoga County are going to fight the proponents on this one and we don't care if the teams up and go somewhere else {please see my views on entertainment below} because quite frankly there are simply more important things than sports and the unearned money that comes with it. Those in public office who are too stupid and lazy to find other ways to grow a major American city need to resign and leave their self-seeking political ambitions on the scrapheap of history. Don’t ever let it be said that this was time when the tide ran out on Cuyahoga County but rather was the time when the voters rose up to welcome the rising tide of change and rebuked this pathetic paradigm our previous elected leaders embraced. Let the battle be joined.

And now to the real underlying issue at hand:

One of the most disturbing facts about our capitalist nation is the misappropriation of funds directed to the salaries of entertainers. Everyone should agree that the value an athlete, movie star, talk-show host, team-owner, etcetera brings to the average citizen is very small. Granted, they do offer a minuscule of diversion from our daily trials and tribulations as did the jesters in the king's court during the middle ages. But to allow these entertainers to horde such great amounts of wealth at the expense of more benevolent societal programs is unacceptable. They do not provide a product or a service so why are they rewarded as such?

Our society is also subjected to the "profound wisdom" of these people because it equates wealth with influence. Perhaps a solution to this problem and a alternative to defeated school levies, crumbling infrastructures, as well as all the programs established to help feed, clothe and shelter those who cannot help themselves would be to tax this undeserved wealth. Entertainers could keep 1% of the gross earnings reaped from their endeavor and 99% could be deposited into the public coffers.

The old ideas of the redistribution of wealth have failed, and it is time to adapt to modern-day preferences. People put their money into entertainment above everything else; isn't it time to tap that wealth? Does anyone think this will reduce the quality of entertainment? It seems to me that when entertainers received less income, the quality was much higher.

sell

I heard Kevin Kelley say that even if they were offered for $1 each, the teams/leagues would not want to buy the stadiums. That speaks volumes to just how bad of a deal the public is getting.

From CAST:

"Here's a post on the rather jaw-dropping news out of Pittsburgh that the Steelers have managed to pay for $40 million in stadium improvements without a dime of public money. Shockingly, city leaders in Pittsburgh were willing to engage in "legal wrangling" when the Steelers claimed that the public was on the hook for the improvements, and as a result of that legal battle, the Steelers decided to implement ... wait for it ... a ticket surcharge (i.e., a facility fee) to pay the costs instead of getting into taxpayers' pockets any further.

Somehow the Plain Dealer didn't see fit to print a word about this Pittsburgh Stadium deal, even after campaigning relentlessly on behalf of leaders in Cleveland who told us that a similar deal was not only impossible but also crazy."

http://www.clevelandfrowns.com/2014/05/ ... lic-money/

Lack of real leadership all over this area.