- 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: Are you happy your tax dollar subsidize the Saints and the NFL??
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:19 pm to doubleb
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:19 pm to doubleb
quote:
Quick check
Saints players make roughly 160 million a year. Half the games are played in NO so its all not taxable in La. But even if it were all taxable at a 6% rate it still wouldn't bring in ten million dollars.
The away team would also have to pay income tax in Louisiana when they play the Saints at the Superdome.
3
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:22 pm to Anfield Road
quote:
The away team would also have to pay income tax in Louisiana when they play the Saints at the Superdome.
This is true. Apparently, pro athletes' income taxes are a nightmare to prepare.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:25 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
Are you happy your tax dollar subsidize the Saints and the NFL??
Tax dollars subsidize all pro sports. All ways have always will.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:37 pm to Anfield Road
quote:
The away team would also have to pay income tax in Louisiana when they play the Saints at the Superdome.
Though that money is dedicated back to tourism in the NO area.
So it's a subsidy out of the general fund coffers, but the tax proceeds go to NO. (of this one specific tax revenue).
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:46 pm to ShortyRob
It is rather amusing to watch people attempt to justify having the government take money from hard working taxpayers to give it to their acceptable special interest.
I wish that taxes going to special interest were optional and that every tax payer could direct their taxes to the spending they favor. That would be interesting.
I wish that taxes going to special interest were optional and that every tax payer could direct their taxes to the spending they favor. That would be interesting.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:25 pm to ShortyRob
I find it odd that you are acting as if I started the thread, I think it's odd that you'd challenge me to prove something to myself, and I'm wondering if you really care or you are just stirring the pot.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:28 pm to Anfield Road
Yes they would so it balances out if all things are equal, and it is still less than 10 million.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:30 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
It is rather amusing to watch people attempt to justify having the government take money from hard working taxpayers to give it to their acceptable special interest
I haven't done that. I've merely asked for data that would support the OP assertion that the state is a net loser on the deal
That seems a perfectly reasonable request. Everything else is emotional claptrap
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:35 pm to BigJim
Does NO receive the revenues from the state income taxes visiting players pay?
Jim, you earn your keep here everyday!!!
How did this start?
Jim, you earn your keep here everyday!!!
How did this start?
This post was edited on 9/12/17 at 5:02 pm
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:46 pm to ShortyRob
I was not directing that directly to you.
I will ask you this--does it really matter if the state wins or loses? isn't the point that the government is making people pay for something for a special interest?
If this is OK then what is the limit to how much the government should be allowed to take?
Should the state be allowed to take $1000 from every household in give it to the Saints if it makes the state government money? $10000?
I will ask you this--does it really matter if the state wins or loses? isn't the point that the government is making people pay for something for a special interest?
If this is OK then what is the limit to how much the government should be allowed to take?
Should the state be allowed to take $1000 from every household in give it to the Saints if it makes the state government money? $10000?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:53 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
I will ask you this--does it really matter if the state wins or loses?
By definition, yeah. I mean, if it wins, then the thread title is false.
quote:
If this is OK then what is the limit to how much the government should be allowed to take?
Um. Math. You need to apply it. There's no "take" if the state net wins
quote:SMDH
Should the state be allowed to take $1000 from every household in give it to the Saints if it makes the state government money? $10000?
Are you fricking with me?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:03 pm to doubleb
Well technically it goes to the superdome.
And even more technically, it goes to the owner of the stadium, so if some other professional team plays in some other stadium it would go that stadium. But basically this means the Saint's opponents.
R.S. 39:100.1
LINK /
And even more technically, it goes to the owner of the stadium, so if some other professional team plays in some other stadium it would go that stadium. But basically this means the Saint's opponents.
R.S. 39:100.1
LINK /
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:12 pm to I B Freeman
quote:It may be.
isn't the point that the government is making people pay for something for a special interest?
The question is "to what end?"
Attempts at attracting business with tax manipulation seems to be a pet peeve of yours. It is all a question of ROI.
So when you ask . . . "Should the state be allowed to take $1000 from every household in give it to the Saints if it makes the state government money?" you seem to ignore mode of ROI.
How would the state government make money?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:16 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
then the thread title is false.
In what way?? it is still a subsidy.
quote:
There's no "take" if the state net wins
How twisted is that? If the state takes $1000 from you and the state gives it to the Saints and get $1100 back do they give you your $1000 back?? Of course not.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:20 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
How would the state government make money?
That's half the question, the other half of the question is which services should the state supply.
This post was edited on 9/12/17 at 6:04 pm
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:20 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
It is all a question of ROI.
So when you ask . . . "Should the state be allowed to take $1000 from every household in give it to the Saints if it makes the state government money?" you seem to ignore mode of ROI.
Does any state have in their Constitution the right to take money from taxpayers simply because of the ROI they may receive from that money? Do any of them give it back to taxpayers?
I certainly do not think the role of government is to take money from me to give to other people simply because they may have a positive ROI on that money.
Should they take it from you?
This post was edited on 9/12/17 at 5:22 pm
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:25 pm to I B Freeman
quote:Yes. But your tax dollars aren't doing the subsidizing. Math is your friend.
In what way?? it is still a subsidy.
quote:The state never has to take the $1000.
How twisted is that? If the state takes $1000 from you and the state gives it to the Saints and get $1100 back do they give you your $1000 back?? Of course not.
How do you not get this? For frick's sake.
If the state needs a total of X dollars to run a state........and they are net WINNERS in a deal, then they need a total of X MINUS.........repeat MINUS the net winnings.
Dude. Math. It's your friend. And, in this case, you only need about 4th grade math to accomplish the task.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:25 pm to I B Freeman
quote:Again, you are talking past the point. Where does the ROI come from?
Does any state have in their Constitution the right to take money from taxpayers simply because of the ROI they may receive from that money?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:28 pm to NC_Tigah
I feel almost like he's got to be fricking with us.
If last year, I was taking 1000 dollars from you every year because I needed 1000 to fund my efforts.......then, I figured out how to give some other guy $100 and got a return of $150 back on that 100, from now on, I only need to take $950 bucks from you.
I mean, this is pretty basic shite that IB seems wholly incapable of comprehending.
If last year, I was taking 1000 dollars from you every year because I needed 1000 to fund my efforts.......then, I figured out how to give some other guy $100 and got a return of $150 back on that 100, from now on, I only need to take $950 bucks from you.
I mean, this is pretty basic shite that IB seems wholly incapable of comprehending.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 5:30 pm to I B Freeman
quote:Don't conflate the principle regarding a state selecting winners and losers with the financial discussion here. Two separate issues.
I certainly do not think the role of government is to take money from me to give to other people simply because they may have a positive ROI on that money.
Let me ask you a simple question. If you were funding your child's college to the tune of $20K per year and then one day, your kid says, "dad, last year, I figured out a deal where next year, I only need $15K per year from now on to fund college"...........financially speaking, do you give a frick HOW your kid accomplished that?(legally of course)?
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News