- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Creationist Ken Ham blames atheists and ‘fake news’ for failing Ark Encounter theme park
Posted on 6/25/17 at 10:10 pm to Cold Drink
Posted on 6/25/17 at 10:10 pm to Cold Drink
No they are not. Had to argue with people in Livingston Parish about this when they built Bass Pro. Bass Pro wanted a tax break on the taxes they collected to pay for part of the building cost. People flipped their shite claiming that the schools were going to lose money. But what actually happened is that the EXTRA money generated a smaller amount of EXTRA tax revenue for the first ten years. Sure, the revenue would have been even higher had Bass Pro just not been given the tax breaks, but they probably would've built elsewhere; which would've caused a zero increase in tax revenue.
We can argue the merits of government incentives as it pertains to economic growth and development (I'm more against it than I'm for it, by the way), but that is a wholly separate issue than the question I originally asked.
We can argue the merits of government incentives as it pertains to economic growth and development (I'm more against it than I'm for it, by the way), but that is a wholly separate issue than the question I originally asked.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:17 pm to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
No they are not. Had to argue with people in Livingston Parish about this when they built Bass Pro. Bass Pro wanted a tax break on the taxes they collected to pay for part of the building cost. People flipped their shite claiming that the schools were going to lose money. But what actually happened is that the EXTRA money generated a smaller amount of EXTRA tax revenue for the first ten years. Sure, the revenue would have been even higher had Bass Pro just not been given the tax breaks, but they probably would've built elsewhere; which would've caused a zero increase in tax revenue. We can argue the merits of government incentives as it pertains to economic growth and development (I'm more against it than I'm for it, by the way), but that is a wholly separate issue than the question I originally asked.
Respectfully, I think you are missing my point. Again - I know neither of us are opining as to the wisdom of any particular tax break/spending - so we're good there. What I am saying is that a city not collecting certain taxes is the exact same as the city collecting those taxes and writing a check. Therefore, tax break = spending.
I'm not saying that the spending wasn't a good deal or that the city somehow has less money than they otherwise would; I'm saying that a tax break and spending look the exact same on a balance sheet.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News