Calgary city council approves arena deal (UPD: new deal upcoming?)

Status
Not open for further replies.

CorbeauNoir

Registered User
Apr 13, 2010
928
154
One of the differences between socialism and capitalism today is the capitalists want government to give them the tax money and leave taxpayers with nothing with which to fun key city services.

In a properly functioning socialist system (Which we are a long way from having here) the tax money is invested in government projects and stays within that circle. In Calgary, for example, a socialist government would build an arena (Let's call it Red Banner Arena for kicks and giggles), invite the Flames to become a tenant and then insist that the Flames become a club team run by the government.

(BTW - those old Soviet architects would have built a nicer looking arena than the tin can proposed for Calgary here)

But we live in a world that is living out a messed up version of capitalism where private entities insist on taking all the tax money for themselves. They want zero risk and all the profits. And they don't care what happens to the average person left in the dying cities around them.

The question for me is this - If the billionaires are abandoning Canada why are they insisting that they get free tax money for projects here in Canada?

If Murray Edwards wants to leave he can go and quit bugging us for money. He can let somebody else build an arena and own the Flames.

Okay. And in that properly-functioning socialist system where is that tax money going to come from with all the 'billionaire masters' packing up and leaving? You and me, because there's no other pockets available to pry the money out from. Paying a lower percentage of taxes than they ought to is still objectively better for everyone involved then them leaving (and in so doing paying precisely 0% in taxes) and having everyone else pilfered to make up the difference as we're now stuck doing. The dopamine-bait bread and circuses that is NHL-level hockey should be the absolute least of your concerns in that circumstance.

I agree, they want zero risk - which is why Calgary's corporate real estate is now emptier than it ever has been, and gets emptier every time someone chirps about "tech" or "diversification" magically being our economic saviour. If government at any level were actually bending over backward to accomodate their every whim and desire, they would be staying put and taking advantage of it - the exact opposite of what they're actually doing.
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,527
2,938
Calgary
Okay. And in that properly-functioning socialist system where is that tax money going to come from with all the 'billionaire masters' packing up and leaving? You and me, because there's no other pockets available to pry the money out from. Paying a lower percentage of taxes than they ought to is still objectively better for everyone involved then them leaving (and in so doing paying precisely 0% in taxes) and having everyone else pilfered to make up the difference as we're now stuck doing. The dopamine-bait bread and circuses that is NHL-level hockey should be the absolute least of your concerns in that circumstance.

I agree, they want zero risk - which is why Calgary's corporate real estate is now emptier than it ever has been, and gets emptier every time someone chirps about "tech" or "diversification" magically being our economic saviour. If government at any level were actually bending over backward to accomodate their every whim and desire, they would be staying put and taking advantage of it - the exact opposite of what they're actually doing.
Actually a fully functioning government of any shape or size would institute something called an electronic transfer tax. Whenever a rich person tries to move their assets out of the country they'd have to pay a 0.5% tax. That would actually keep a lot of money in our country and could be used by our governments.

Calgary's problems started when the oil prices dropped and bringing in a government bent on harming the energy sector didn't help. To understand the situation we have to learn more about the old boom/bust cycle and how dangerously incompetent city councils have tried to move us beyond that. It hasn't worked and we're suffering for it. Plus the pandemic didn't help. Why have expensive offices downtown when workers are doing just fine at home?

So yeah - the Calgary economy sucks and we need our tax dollars to keep the fire and police departments running. Plus we need to radically expand our homeless outreach teams (Which would also help us address issues such as addicts and the mentally ill currently living in our streets and away from services that could help them). So no, we don't have any money left over for poor old Murray Edwards. The dear child will just have to sit on a street corner with a tin cup in order to pay for his arena.
 

CorbeauNoir

Registered User
Apr 13, 2010
928
154
Actually a fully functioning government of any shape or size would institute something called an electronic transfer tax. Whenever a rich person tries to move their assets out of the country they'd have to pay a 0.5% tax. That would actually keep a lot of money in our country and could be used by our governments.

Calgary's problems started when the oil prices dropped and bringing in a government bent on harming the energy sector didn't help. To understand the situation we have to learn more about the old boom/bust cycle and how dangerously incompetent city councils have tried to move us beyond that. It hasn't worked and we're suffering for it. Plus the pandemic didn't help. Why have expensive offices downtown when workers are doing just fine at home?

So yeah - the Calgary economy sucks and we need our tax dollars to keep the fire and police departments running. Plus we need to radically expand our homeless outreach teams (Which would also help us address issues such as addicts and the mentally ill currently living in our streets and away from services that could help them). So no, we don't have any money left over for poor old Murray Edwards. The dear child will just have to sit on a street corner with a tin cup in order to pay for his arena.

None of which speaks to a city comfortably able to support itself as an NHL market going forward, regardless of how you want to carve up tax revenues by fractions of a percentage one way or another or institute unsustainable one-and-forever-done cash grabs while the province's economic backbone walks out the door.

It's a minor economic miracle that a province the size of Alberta has been capable of hosting 2 major-league teams for as long as it has. Miracles, however, eventually end.
 

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,626
5,234
Brooklyn
At the same time though many bigger markets have multiple arena. New York has 4 major league arenas in a 20 mile radius, Chicago has 2 18 miles apart, LA is about to get its 3rd (not including the college venues which can hold the smaller venues), etc.
Thats true.

But I still can't find any examples of 100% privately funded arenas in a market the size of Calgary. Closest is Vegas but, Vegas is you know, Vegas.
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,527
2,938
Calgary
None of which speaks to a city comfortably able to support itself as an NHL market going forward, regardless of how you want to carve up tax revenues by fractions of a percentage one way or another or institute unsustainable one-and-forever-done cash grabs while the province's economic backbone walks out the door.

It's a minor economic miracle that a province the size of Alberta has been capable of hosting 2 major-league teams for as long as it has. Miracles, however, eventually end.
Calgary still has people and companies interested in paying for things like season tickets and team clothing, etc. There are probably more people per capita interested in paying for Flames things than other markets and that's probably what makes the difference.
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,527
2,938
Calgary
Thats true.

But I still can't find any examples of 100% privately funded arenas in a market the size of Calgary. Closest is Vegas but, Vegas is you know, Vegas.
It doesn't really matter. We can't afford an arena where we don't get any meaningful revenue or an opportunity to recover our initial investment. The only option is an arena paid for with private money (Team owners and their funding partners like banks and individuals).
 

popo

Registered User
Aug 9, 2005
498
148
City has their post mortem on the colasped arena deal.

Then votes unanimously to keep going and re established the assessment committee.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6312864

Will see if a 3rd party can work with them and CSEC.

Check back on March 8

The saga will continue

Taxpayer money hard at work with the savants at City Hall.
Sour a relationship with CSEC. Then write a big cheque to a third party consultant to take over for your blunders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burke the Legend

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,626
5,234
Brooklyn
It doesn't really matter. We can't afford an arena where we don't get any meaningful revenue or an opportunity to recover our initial investment. The only option is an arena paid for with private money (Team owners and their funding partners like banks and individuals).
Agreed
 

aqib

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
5,302
1,355
Thats true.

But I still can't find any examples of 100% privately funded arenas in a market the size of Calgary. Closest is Vegas but, Vegas is you know, Vegas.

Vancouver was but it depends on how you draw the lines for the market size same Columbus (the city had to bail them out later). The thing is that late 90s arenas tended to cost around $160-$170 million which is like $250-270 million in todays dollars but now arenas cost over $400 million
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
26,629
10,025
Vancouver was but it depends on how you draw the lines for the market size same Columbus (the city had to bail them out later). The thing is that late 90s arenas tended to cost around $160-$170 million which is like $250-270 million in todays dollars but now arenas cost over $400 million
Canucks also have put in around $100 mill in renovations into the arena since it was finished. Same with the other 90's arenas in STL, Bos, Phi in recent years.
 

Burke the Legend

Registered User
Feb 22, 2012
8,317
2,850
Actually a fully functioning government of any shape or size would institute something called an electronic transfer tax. Whenever a rich person tries to move their assets out of the country they'd have to pay a 0.5% tax. That would actually keep a lot of money in our country and could be used by our governments.

This is crazy. Who would invest in a place that does this kind of thing???
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,527
2,938
Calgary
This is crazy. Who would invest in a place that does this kind of thing???
It's far from crazy - especially in this day and age. It's been talked about for a while now and the theory is pretty sound.

I have no problem insisting that people pay $5,000 to the federal government for every million they ship out of the country. It's the least they can do. The very least.

Check out the book Tax Is Not A Four Letter Word. It's all in there and makes a lot of sense.

Link: Tax Is Not a Four-Letter Word
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pandemonia

aqib

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
5,302
1,355
Calgary downtown office space hits new vacancy milestone | Calgary Herald

I can't speak to the parts of the country that actually matter in elections, but I have doubts that the O&G sector is abandoning Calgary in favour of the likes of Montreal.

Its not a news flash that Calgary is dependent on the energy sector and as a result is a boom and bust town. There have been years everyone was telling me to move to Calgary and there were years everyone was leaving. Every city is facing uncertainty these days and no one knows what the future of work/cities is.
 

CorbeauNoir

Registered User
Apr 13, 2010
928
154
Its not a news flash that Calgary is dependent on the energy sector and as a result is a boom and bust town. There have been years everyone was telling me to move to Calgary and there were years everyone was leaving. Every city is facing uncertainty these days and no one knows what the future of work/cities is.
An entire third of Calgary's economic lifeblood vacating the city over a near decade isn't a boom-or-bust cycle, that's a Rust Belt-tier existential knife to the throat. No other city in the country "facing uncertainty" is dealing with anything anywhere even close to those kinds of numbers, and no other bust cycle in Calgary has produced this much depletion over this long a period of time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knights2017

Pandemonia

Registered User
Aug 30, 2020
769
1,322
An entire third of Calgary's economic lifeblood vacating the city over a near decade isn't a boom-or-bust cycle, that's a Rust Belt-tier existential knife to the throat. No other city in the country "facing uncertainty" is dealing with anything anywhere even close to those kinds of numbers, and no other bust cycle in Calgary has produced this much depletion over this long a period of time.

The first time I skimmed your message, I thought it said "rust bustier" right after the bust cycle. Skims makes a great one that's rust colored.

On second reading, however.....
 

CorbeauNoir

Registered User
Apr 13, 2010
928
154
It's far from crazy - especially in this day and age. It's been talked about for a while now and the theory is pretty sound.

I have no problem insisting that people pay $5,000 to the federal government for every million they ship out of the country. It's the least they can do. The very least.

And then next year when you need a new round of tax revenue then what? It's a short-sighted panic move, and would be an especially insidious and cynical one if employed by a federal government that is simultaneously doing everything it possibly can to strongarm certain industries out of the country altogether.
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,527
2,938
Calgary
And then next year when you need a new round of tax revenue then what? It's a short-sighted panic move, and would be an especially insidious and cynical one if employed by a federal government that is simultaneously doing everything it possibly can to strongarm certain industries out of the country altogether.
It's actually a very sustainable tax and doesn't really put up that much of a barrier for people moving money back and forth. People are moving money all the time so the revenue stream should be pretty steady. The feds could even invest that money in an interest bearing fund that pays for infrastructure.
 

hockeyguy0022

Registered User
Feb 20, 2016
352
185
This whole Coyotes ordeal 100% makes leverage in the city of Calgarys favour, Bettman loses big time credibility now with this 5K ASU rink deal going on.

Murray Edwards/CSEC not gonna be happy at all. They probably pay an extra 50-100 mil that they weren't before.

I am VERY surprised they didn't cover the measly 10 million extra to keep the current deal alive.

As they say tripping over loonies to get to a penny.

Calgarys mayor is obligated to go for the throat now IMO.
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,527
2,938
Calgary
Calgarys mayor is obligated to go for the throat now IMO.
What's she supposed to do - build an arena where the Flames get everything and we get nothing? That's what the last deal was.

No - what she needs to do now is tell Flames owners to build their own arena and not to forget paying their taxes to the city when it's done.
 

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,626
5,234
Brooklyn
What's she supposed to do - build an arena where the Flames get everything and we get nothing? That's what the last deal was.

No - what she needs to do now is tell Flames owners to build their own arena and not to forget paying their taxes to the city when it's done.
I agree with this in principle. But they need to tread lightly. NBA/NHL/NFL/MLB are not afraid to rip out teams from a good market just to send a message.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad