Today's installment of the Phoenix Laff Riot begins with Tuesday's truly pathetic story in the Arizona Republic headlined "Big game proves a winner for state economy." Ordered up, no doubt, by the "say something positive about the community" bosses, here's the gist:
celebration of the Arizona Cardinals in the Super Bowl, giving the
state's ailing economy an unexpected shot in the arm. Fans bought hats, T-shirts, televisions, snack trays and beer. They
partied at sports bars and in homes around the state, cheering on the
Cardinals.
Let's apply a little critical thinking not allowed in news meetings. The story has no data to back up this claim. And even if people spent more on beer and chips for the game, it simply changes the shape of the water balloon. In other words, that consumer spending was diverted from other areas; the Big Game didn't represent an increase in purchasing power or living standards. That would require, oh, a diverse economy with well-paid jobs and an educated workforce. In any event, even Super Bowl economic impact reports by real economists are always suspect, requiring a skepticism that was once required of journalists.
What's even more reprehensible is ASU economist Jay Butler allowing himself to have a boostergasm about the "obvious" economic benefit of the Suburban West Glendale Cardinals' Super Bowl appearance. "It was certainly good for the state's image, and a lot of times image helps," he said. Hmmm. Again, fifth-grade critical thinking: Super Bowls held in "the Valley" and the D-Backs World Series win didn't provide any long-term gains, as Arizona continued to fall further behind by all credible measures of a quality, competitive economy. (And no, a lot of jobs in Wal-Marts and on framing crews don't fit into those categories). Yes, deals get done at Super Bowls, but that's predicated on actually having an economic base that can attract and sustain them. There was, of course, the benefit to the team owners and developers from taxpayers building the stadium in the cotton field; the story didn't get into that.
I understand Arizona's constant neediness to feel good about its self-inflicted failures. Partly, it's the mindset of selling crapola subdivisions — name it after what the bulldozers destroyed and then say a bunch of lookalike tract houses are palaces. Always be selling. But it gets in the way of a few realities, one being the economic depression gripping the state and Phoenix, and the very deep hole state policies keeps digging.
Want a "shot in the arm"? Increase education funding for public schools. Raise real educational attainment, especially in the poorest districts. Fund an economic-development strategy to attract and grow high-paid jobs. Increase university funding and tech transfer. Increase international ties and grab foreign direct investment. Make a crash push to make the Phoenix biomedical campus succeed. Provide ladders up for the immigrant underclass. Deal with the water issue. Ah, reality is not positive.
It's not positive that the state will likely close eight of its twenty-seven priceless but long-underfunded state parks. That news was relegated off the front page. Arizona can't tax the real-estate barons or the rich leeches of north Snottsdale, so cut cut cut. This action will only increase the looting and damage to the state's heritage, including to some truly important sites.
Yet now I worry that the Kookocracy is going wobbly…going moderate. After all, if you're a true Kook, what the hell is the state doing in the parks "business" at all? Government should provide freeways for your speeding SUV and cops to put the screws to the Mexicans — anything else is socialism. (Or as it's cast in the emails I get, SOCIALISM!!) Privatize the state parks. If they can't turn a profit in the free market — sell 'em for subdivisions. C'mon, "Goldwater" Institute — get me a report on this with your usual unbiased, peer-reviewed "scholarship," echoed by your leaden sock puppet on the editorial page. Arizona elected these people, and it deserves the full dose of their convictions. Then Arizonans can decide if they really like Kook Konservatism.
Finally, comes news the Republic chose to ignore (the Web site is so boring and poorly edited, who really knows? — Maybe this was hidden on the mom news page). Apparently there was a big dust-up in the Leg over an attempt by True Kooks to raid/eliminate the state's pitifully small 21st Century Fund, one of the competitive half-measures of Saint Janet. This from the Arizona Guardian, a site bring run from former EV Tribune journalists. Go Kooks! Don't let me down.
For more reality-based news on Arizona and Phoenix, check out Rogue's Arizona's Continuing Crisis page.
I’ve never understood the “big time sports franchises are good for the economy” argument. I can’t see that they actually create any jobs except for T-shirt printers, beer vendors and maybe hotel maids. Do we really need growth in those sectors? Will that really turn the local enonomy around?
I’ve also been told that you can’t be considered a world-class city without sports. have you ever turned down an otherwise good job opportunity because there was no team? Have you ever taken an otherwise below average job because they did have a team? (I’m tempted to think that they have cause and effect reversed)
I suppose that there might be some captains of industry (other than actual team owners, of course) that choose their new home-base with a sports team in mind, but is it an actual game-changer? How many CEO’s would rank an NFL team higher than the tax base? How many would rank NBA ahead of a cheap transportation hub? Baseball ahead of available workforce? Donald Trump and Richard Branson come to mind, but even with Jon’s well-deserved criticism of MBA’s I don’t see it as a primary driver. It is at best a tertiary consideration.
I just don’t get it. And, it seems to me that they are claims without evidence, like the news story Jon quoted.
The Arizona Guardian has been around for only about a month and it already outshines the meager Republic reporting.
You underestimate the power of beer!
Two years after Bank One Ballpark opened, an analysis of sales tax receipts in downtown Phoenix indicated that 90 percent of the increased sales occurred INSIDE the stadium. There was little to no trickle down. The multiplier effects of stadia and big events like the Super Bowl are largely myths, especially compared to the looting of the public purse to build them, maintain them, secure them. I recall that passenger totals at Sky Harbor actually fell during January and February during one Super Bowl in the Valley. People who normally would have come during peak tourism season were staying away because they didn’t want to deal with the hassle of a bunch of Super Bowl goons. Here’s a story about the magic economic engine that was BOB:
https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2000-03-09/news/bob-s-a-bust/