ATTENTION GETTER - Opening Statement: If during a period from 2000-2010, state and local governments had spent approximately $10 billion dollars on something, you would expect it to be spent on something important. What was so important that this money was spent on? It was spent on arenas for professional sports teams.

Central Idea/Specific Purpose Statement: After hearing my presentation, you will realize the downside of publicly financed stadiums for professional teams and oppose funding for them now or in the future.

Relate the Topic to the Audience: I’m certain that you all like your money, and you would like to keep more of it. At the very least, you don’t want it forcibly going to a very wealthy owner of …show more content…
The public financing stadiums pools money away from other areas of the economy. More money on stadiums means less money spent on stores and restaurants.
5. What about all those tourist from out of town that will contribute to the local economy? Actually, only ten percent of those that attend games come from out of town.

2. Argument #2 and supporting evidence. It is not morally acceptable to take money from citizens and funnel it into the construction of an enormous stadium.
1. Lucas Oil Stadium for example, is beautiful, and I like to stop and admire it from time to time. However, when one thinks about how it was financed, it’s a little ridiculous.
2. The stadium itself cost $720 million dollars, and the Colts paid for only $100 million of it. That means the rest of the $620 million was paid for by citizens. How was it paid for? A new food and beverage tax was imposed on residents of counties surrounding Indianapolis.
3. That seems fair right? Poor and middle-class people pay more in taxes so a billionaire can have a bigger toy and make more profit. I hope you picked up on the sarcasm.
4. This is not just an Indianapolis problem. The average pro sports facility in the U.S. is paid for by 78% percent public money and only 22% private …show more content…
VISUALIZATION:

The future on non-subsidized stadiums can be bright. There are no new taxes to pay for a shiny new stadium on some rich guy, and you keep more of your money.

Transition to Step #5: What can be done about this problem?

CONCLUSION

V. ACTION: Whenever this issue arise in the future, be sure to call and email your local state senator and representative. The more often you contact them the better. Yelling at the T.V. will not do anything.
VI. Summary: Let’s recap.

1. Stadiums do not create new jobs. They take money from other sectors that would have created just as many jobs and shuttle to pay for a rich guy’s new stadium.
2. It also seems slightly immoral to pay for this by taxing people that make far less than the owner of a sports teams.
3. To make a private stadium a feasible investment, teams should considers sharing them and making them less extravagant.

Concluding or Final Statement: I will finish with a quote from the University of Chicago economist Allen Sanderson. “It would be better to drop money from a helicopter than invest it in a