Skip to main content

football laces
If you want your blood to boil, read this piece on how the NFL fleeces taxpayers. It has shit like this:
Though Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal claims to be an anti-spending conservative, each year the state of Louisiana forcibly extracts up to $6 million from its residents’ pockets and gives the cash to Benson as an “inducement payment”—the actual term used—to keep [New Orleans Saints owner Tom] Benson from developing a wandering eye.
Or this:
CenturyLink Field, where the Seattle Seahawks play, opened in 2002, with Washington State taxpayers providing $390 million of the $560 million construction cost. The Seahawks, owned by Paul Allen, one of the richest people in the world, pay the state about $1 million annually in rent in return for most of the revenue from ticket sales, concessions, parking, and broadcasting (all told, perhaps $200 million a year). Average people are taxed to fund Allen’s private-jet lifestyle.
I am an obsessive follower of stadium news, and one of my favorite blogs, Field of Schemes, tracks these depressing developments on a daily basis. But every once in a while, I learn something that deepens my disgust over public subsidies to asshole billionaires. Like this:
That’s right—extremely profitable and one of the most subsidized organizations in American history, the NFL also enjoys tax-exempt status. On paper, it is the Nonprofit Football League.
The NFL is a non-profit organization. A non-profit that pays its top five executives $60 million annually. A non-profit organization that sucks in public subsidies by the billions, then patting itself in the back when it returns a few hundred thousand back to community groups. A non-profit organization that continues to try and deceive the public that is enriching it, leading to absurd situations liket his one:
The NFL asked Congress to grant pro football a waiver from the disclosure rule. During the lobbying battle, Joe Browne, then the league’s vice president for public affairs, told The New York Times, “I finally get to the point where I’m making 150 grand, and they want to put my name and address on the [disclosure] form so the lawyer next door who makes a million dollars a year can laugh at me.” Browne added that $150,000 does not buy in the New York area what it would in “Dubuque, Iowa.” The waiver was denied. Left no option, the NFL revealed that at the time, Browne made about $2 million annually.
Seriously, what a bunch of assholes.

I love football and the NFL. My other big career move was founding this. But it's way past time cities and states stop getting pillaged by billionaire team owners, building stadiums that host 10 (and maybe 12, if a team is really lucky) games a year. Football is profitable enough on its owns that fans could fund anything a team owner desires. There's no excuse, particularly in these times of austerity, for precious public dollars to be spent on the sports entertainment complex. (And all of this applies to asshole MLB and NBA owners too.)

Sign the petition to the IRS: Revoke the NFL’s nonprofit status.

Originally posted to kos on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:10 AM PDT.

Also republished by The Wide World of Sports, Daily Kos Classics, and Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (297+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cyndiannp, annieli, Huron, Thinking Fella, ontheleftcoast, BenderRodriguez, TDDVandy, burlydee, SME in Seattle, howabout, puakev, Mark E Andersen, TomP, CwV, a2nite, boadicea, Sylv, leeleedee, Actbriniel, Ckntfld, tytalus, Mortifyd, MartyM, gypsytoo, ericlewis0, Glen The Plumber, tampaedski, blue aardvark, marking time, Oaktown Girl, borndem, MKinTN, Brecht, Hey338Too, ColoTim, ScienceMom, poligirl, WisVoter, democracy inaction, Haf2Read, high uintas, MI Sooner, Mother Mags, TracieLynn, Norm in Chicago, LibrErica, notdarkyet, JBL55, Molly Weasley, Tross, mayim, MRA NY, Cassandra Waites, mattc129, Avilyn, PsychoSavannah, gfv6800, Magnifico, undercovercalico, 3goldens, Kevskos, Lost and Found, mconvente, BachFan, mightymouse, Gowrie Gal, kyril, Kobuk Sands, Hanging Up My Tusks, camlbacker, importer, MrBigDaddy, markdd, ZenTrainer, Bob Friend, 1greybeard, jeff in nyc, Catte Nappe, dradams, NMRed, newpioneer, Maudlin, jfromga, Kimbeaux, Deep Texan, OLinda, Superskepticalman, malharden, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, bglv, zmom, Leftcandid, Russ Jarmusch, jabney, eru, Mr MadAsHell, Dave925, AoT, SneakySnu, peteri2, Eileen B, smoothnmellow, wintergreen8694, Tinfoil Hat, old wobbly, GeorgeXVIII, Buckeye54, erratic, Texknight, peachcreek, mikejay611, Statusquomustgo, Tracker, Nebraskablue, stevenwag, WheninRome, kharma, psnyder, Fireshadow, kefauver, mikeconwell, millwood, NJpeach, sdf, peagreen, sillycarrot, S F Hippie, citizenx, Quilldriver, stevemb, thomask, Ed in Montana, Assaf, BlueMississippi, multilee, middleagedhousewife, DreamyAJ, Railfan, rhutcheson, Kristina40, kenwards, GAS, Danno11, zerelda, implicate order, Empower Ink, this just in, where4art, reginahny, Ohkwai, anodnhajo, Rosaura, GDbot, jacey, pitbullgirl65, nswalls, kevinpdx, Trotskyrepublican, TigerMom, BlueJessamine, whenwego, sydneyluv, Simplify, lennysfo, cfm, soarbird, janetsal, Vetwife, nhox42, oceanview, blueyedace2, lasky57, Eddie L, Tod, renbear, CS11, JohnnySacks, tegrat, gof, filby, Scioto, cultjake, Azazello, ruscle, BvueDem, J M F, trumpeter, riverlover, MuskokaGord, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, dRefractor, rambler american, sawgrass727, Powered Grace, Mike08, Nowhere Man, Heart of the Rockies, Matt Z, wishingwell, rat racer, bloomer 101, leonard145b, bbctooman, Shockwave, Rejoinder, vcmvo2, GoGoGoEverton, Chaddiwicker, Liberty Equality Fraternity and Trees, sfarkash, terabytes, cybersaur, petulans, wolf advocate, citizen dan, sobermom, wxorknot, stlsophos, tommymet, Ray Pensador, Stwriley, doingbusinessas, BobTheHappyDinosaur, Got a Grip, FarWestGirl, milkbone, devis1, here4tehbeer, artmartin, KenBee, rapala, rogerdaddy, banjolele, IndieGuy, jennyp, Phoenix Rising, Lily O Lady, slowbutsure, carpunder, wader, flygrrl, ItsSimpleSimon, wdrath, Brooke In Seattle, LordMike, muddy boots, historys mysteries, tidalwave1, spaceshot, CA Nana, Santa Susanna Kid, sonorelli, Ditch Mitch KY, gzodik, JerryNA, susakinovember, imicon, eeff, Hohenzollern, iburl, Yosef 52, blackjackal, hmi, skybluewater, ratcityreprobate, cyncynical, ichibon, Ishmaelbychoice, Teiresias70, Naniboujou, Alumbrados, zinger99, defluxion10, eagleray, BYw, stvnjon, claude, Beezzley, WakeUpNeo, AmazingBlaise, hooktool, NanaoKnows, wheeldog, Curt Matlock, greenearth, skepticalcitizen, ERTBen, Nicolas Fouquet, Black Max, chickeee, denise b, Sonnet, RightHeaded, pcl07, justaHippie, KCBearcat, indres
  •  Most hospitals are non-profit too. Which is (24+ / 0-)

    equally crazy, because the reason that they are allowed to be is because they offer "charity care"

  •  I love football too (25+ / 0-)

    and, really, most sports, but this is ridiculous.

    The fact is it's the result of a "closed" league (as opposed to an "open" league as you find in most European soccer leagues) that has a limited number of franchises, and the teams can always extract these things by threatening to move the team to another city.

    29, white male, TX-07 (current), TN-09 (born), TN-08 (where parents live now)

    by TDDVandy on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:18:18 AM PDT

  •  Anti-Trust, thy name is (not) NCAA/NFL (19+ / 0-)
    Sports teams effectively act as monopolies, with leagues controlling both the number of teams and their locations. The scarcity of teams throughout the country, coupled with increased ability to move franchises at minimal cost, has dramatically impacted the bargaining power of host cities. This power shift has increased subsidies to unprecedented levels and challenged many communities to dig deeper into their pockets than they can perhaps afford. With the heavy structural barriers inherent in the development of competing professional sports leagues and the increasing mobility of our economy, the monopolistic and mobile nature of professional sports teams does not seem to be ready for reversal in the near future.

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

    by annieli on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:18:25 AM PDT

    •  Look at Oakland (22+ / 0-)

      They nearly bankrupted themselves to get the Raiders back from Oakland even while their failing school system got taken over by the state.

      None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

      by gjohnsit on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:38:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  and now sewage flooding at Stadium! (7+ / 0-)

        Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

        by annieli on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:48:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  coliseum is a fucking pit (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Shockwave, annieli, JerryNA, BYw

          and I don't care who owns the sign, it's Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum.

          I plan to be there watching the Raiders on Sunday and sure hope the bathrooms near my section aren't any worse than usual, which is pretty damn bad.

          seriously, the most important issue for the Raiders is where they'll be playing next year, because the lease is up and there are rumors that the league really wants them anywhere else.

          "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" - John Adams

          by esquimaux on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:26:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Both the Raiders and A's play in a dump (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            The same was true for the Giants and the 49ers for a long time. Candlestick is a dump and fortunately this will be the last year the 49ers will play there.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:05:25 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Isn't Santa Clara going to subsidize (0+ / 0-)

              a new field?

              •  The new 49er stadium is privately funded (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                nextstep, JerryNA, BYw

                The City of Santa Clara helped them assemble the parcel and all the permits. The City is also spending some money on infrastructure to facilitate the traffic in and out of the stadium. But the total cost of the actual stadium facility of $1.3 billion, is all privately funded.

                "let's talk about that"

                by VClib on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 01:13:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  So was PacBell Park (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  VClib, BYw

                  Personally if it doesn't cost taxpayers to build a stadium, and fans are willing to fork over $100 a tix, then more power to them.

                  None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

                  by gjohnsit on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:17:43 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I think the county is also putting in (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  VClib, BYw

                  some $$$, mainly improvements to the light rail station closest to the stadium plus maybe additional service/longer trains on game days. (Likely the stadium will be used for concerts as well, especially in spring/summer when the 49ers aren't using it, so it will probably be used more than just 10-12 weeks a year. There was talk about moving one of the Cal/Stanford Big Games there, but that fell flat on both campuses.)

                  There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

                  by Cali Scribe on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:18:11 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  If they take Mount Davis with them (0+ / 0-)

            maybe the A's would be willing to stay (if they improve the damn plumbing). BTW, even Bud Selig called it "a pit" on the John Feinstein Show this morning (he left out the "fucking" for FCC sensibilities). MLB is panicked that there'll be another sewage crisis in the middle of the playoffs, enough so that there are whispers that they should move the games across the Bay to Your Phone Company Name Here Park. (Love the park, but if you're a phone company that has a wireless division, the WiFi should work a hell of a lot better than 3G when you're in the seats.)

            There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

            by Cali Scribe on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:15:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Of course there is no excuse for this, but NFL (29+ / 0-)

    owners are a Who's Who of the richest conservative assholes. (note they almost let limbaugh co-own a team).  They are getting financed by us the same way their colleagues are in the oil industry and the other major too big to fails.  They just happen to be in the football industry.

    Meanwhile, the non-proft status, I believe, is what allowed them to dodge the monopoly and collusion charges in the past, as they employ a hard salary cap, and the owners cooperate for a relatively level competitive "playing field".

    Ayn sucks. Please know I am not rude. I cannot rec anything from this browser. When I rec or post diaries I am a guest at some exotic locale's computer.

    by Floyd Blue on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:18:53 AM PDT

  •  Several years ago the citizens of WA voted (39+ / 0-)

    against funding for a stadium for the Mariners. But the state legislature decided that wasn't acceptable and passed a bill to make it happen anyways.

    On September 19, 1995, King County voters reject subsidy taxes to build a new stadium for the Seattle Mariners Baseball Club. The promise of a new stadium is a bid to keep the Mariners from being sold. After the vote, team owners threaten to sell the team if a new stadium is not approved. The State Legislature then approves new taxes for a stadium, which is completed in 1999.
    The 0.00001% really do run the country. :P

    Spite is the ranch dressing Republicans slather on their salad of racism

    by ontheleftcoast on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:21:26 AM PDT

  •  Fantasy Football needs to add public votes on (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ericlewis0, Lost and Found

    new stadium construction as a variable as well as audience data

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

    by annieli on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:22:18 AM PDT

  •  Stadiums and prisons are the only building (32+ / 0-)

    that our states and localities do, said the Rev. Jackson thirty years ago.

    HEY COGNITIVE INFILTRATORS! I googled "confirmation bias" and Daily Kos raided my house! And and and smashed my hard drives! Ask CNN, it's all truthy!

    by Inland on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:22:49 AM PDT

  •  And concussions are nothing but hype, too. (26+ / 0-)

    As much as I love football, I can't help but admit that there's so much wrong with it -- check out Sports Illustrated's recent five-part piece on Oklahoma State University's football program -- that it makes it almost impossible to enjoy much anymore.

    Fleecing taxpayers? Check.
    Ignoring/covering up horrible injuries? Check.
    Relentless criminal activity by numerous players? Check.
    A college game that's corrupt to its core? Check.

    Plus, my beloved Steelers are 0-3. This helps not in the least. If you had told me in April that at the end of September the Pirates would be going to the playoffs and the Steelers would be winless, I would have laughed in your face.

    How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

    by BenderRodriguez on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:22:56 AM PDT

  •  The fault lies with the states and cities... (7+ / 0-)

    ...who pony up.  I think sports teams are legitimately the property of their owners, and those owners are entitled to threaten to move their teams unless they get X, Y and Z.  It's up to states and cities (or counties or whatnot) to say "cya l8r" or "you're bluffing."  

    You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

    by Rich in PA on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:23:20 AM PDT

    •  For the most part, corporations who do this day in (5+ / 0-)

      & day out run roughshod over city management and the citizens who (typically) volunteer to serve at no- or low-compensation on city council, planning commission, etc. A small city has the prospect of a WalMart? WalMart knows what to ask for, whether it's tax abatement or whatever, and the city manager and council are really rubes for the most part. It's just another situation where a high-information organization fleeces a low-information organization. The high-information organization (whether it's a sports franchise or a WalMart) bluffs, and the low-information organization (small city, large city) folds.

      •  All true, but the solution shouldn't be... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        plumbobb prohibit the ask.  Sure, we don't let people sell themselves into slavery, and we don't let children make high-stakes decisions, but I don't think city and state government officials are children and I don't think tax abatements (or whatever) are slavery.

        You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

        by Rich in PA on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:21:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I live in Los Angeles and I don't miss the NFL (5+ / 0-)

      But they still try.

      Los Angeles still wants an NFL team

      The L.A. City Council's Economic Development Committee has backed a resolution that urges the NFL to bring at least one or maybe two teams to L.A., and the resolution will now go before the full City Council, according to CBS Los Angeles.


      The league continues to monitor the possibility of bringing football back to L.A., 52 years after the Chargers migrated south to San Diego, and 18 years after the Rams headed east for St. Louis while Al Davis returned the Raiders to Oakland.

      But so far, there hasn't been any movement. No matter what the city council does with its resolution, that's unlikely to change for now.


      So far, the wait for a new team has been long and fruitless. And it continues for the foreseeable future.

      Screw them specially because the misleading title by CBS the NFL broadcaster.

      Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

      by Shockwave on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 01:10:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes.....but (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I think the sports club belongs to the fans who show up and pay for the grossly over-priced tickets.

      Some UK football clubs (real football, played with the feet!) are limited companies, but most are non-profit clubs.  The football league has four divisions, and at the end of the season the top four clubs go up, the bottom four go down.  at the very bottom, four clubs go "non-league" and four "non-leagues" are invited into the league.  Of course, this implies a system that rates teams, so within each league every team plays every other team at home and away, and at the end of the season points are totalled.

      But the best part is that any town or city can enter a team into the "non-league" category and theoretically in five or six years be playing against Man U and Aston Villa.  Unlikely, of course, but there are some clubs that have come up that way, particularly new town teams that get an infusion of new fans.

      Could it work in the US?  Unlikely as long as "sport" is a profitable spectable and not a participatory event.

    •  Excellent apology for plutocratic abuse of (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the citizenry.

      Keep up the good work.

      To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

      by UntimelyRippd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:41:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I don't think this is "the NFL" (15+ / 0-)

    per se. I think this is the majority of private business in the US. It's not the revenue or cash flow that creates equity, it's the paper trail of tax subsidies, LLCs, and other accounting methods that don't contribute to the economy that allow high net worth individuals to grow their wealth.

    I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

    by CFAmick on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:24:23 AM PDT

  •  What it would take (12+ / 0-)

    is a coordinated refusal by ALL cities and states to fold to the extortion that Big Sports pull.
    Minneapolis was in the process of spending half a billion dollars on a stadium when the I35W bridge went down for lack of maintenance money.
    The problem is that one or another city WILL fold and someone loses a franchise while taxpayers in the folding city lose other common goods.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:30:13 AM PDT

    •  Eventually, they'll run out of places to move to. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, wishingwell

      There's too much money to be made in big cities... Though, I suppose I should point out that LA has had no team for a long time (I think that's still the case, right?).

      The second tier is more troublesome... there are a bunch of mid-sized cities that might be convinced to pony-up cash to snatch a team.

      Anyway, it's pretty sad... When I was living in Seattle, my apolotical roomate never voted for anything. But, when the Seahawks stadium came up for a vote, suddenly he voted - yes. And he was a Packers fan. And he moved back to Wisconsin a couple years later. I asked him why he did that. He just kind of shrugged and said he loved football.

      Freedom isn't free. That's why we pay taxes.

      by walk2live on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:56:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You know how many tier-2 cities are waiting? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, sebastianguy99

      How do you think places like OKC and Charlotte landed NBA teams?

      Look at the movement going on in the NHL.  With surging oil revenue and a strong Canadian dollar, many cities up there were like hungry wolves prowling around every losing team in the US.

      Atlanta turned out to be the weak elk in the pack since they got packed up and are now the Winnipeg JEts.

      Hamilton, Ontario is still on the hunt and Quebec City is moving forward with a brand new stadium anyway knowing that its just a matter of time before they can step in and make an offer on the Phoenix Coyotes or the Columbus Blue Jackets or the Nashville Predators.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:29:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  35W (0+ / 0-)

      Would not have been saved with increased maintenance money. It was built wrong.

  •  not even the worst outrage (8+ / 0-)

    the teams themselves got a tax ruling that lets them take depreciation deductions for their players, the same deduction that was originally written for livestock owners.  

    Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

    by Loge on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:31:12 AM PDT

  •  I love my football too (and SBNation) (6+ / 0-)

    but I'm with you Markos - the NFL and these teams can and should pay their full share of taxes as a FOR PROFIT corporation.

  •  Our tax dollars support many evil rich people (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kevskos, newpioneer, Jank2112

    because they have the lobbyists; they own all of the Rs and many Dems.

    This country was created by evil rich people to benefit evil rich people; the remainder leaves moldy crumbs for the 99%.

    We have been played for suckers since 1776.

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:34:27 AM PDT

    •  You're saying the founding fathers are (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      "evil rich people"?  I take exception to that.  Sure, they were wealthy (most of them) for their time, but evil?  I don't agree.

      •  Yo slavery & extermination of the native peoples (6+ / 0-)

        & excluding everyone who wasn't a rich land owner from we the people.....

        How did they make their money? They robbed people of their labor and land.

        I don't see any difference between then and now.

        IMO, evil. I understand that my opinion is in the minority.

        nosotros no somos estúpidos

        by a2nite on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:10:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Slaveowners = Evil People (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        newpioneer, Kimbeaux, wishingwell

        Sure, they had some impact that wasn't totally horrible, but the slave owners were evil. As Lincoln said, if slavery isn't wrong, then nothing is wrong.

        And let's not even start with their acts toward Native Americans.  

        The history of music is mortal, but the idiocy of the guitar is eternal. ― Milan Kundera, The Book of Laughter and Forgetting

        by James Earl on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:15:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  & the ones who didn't own slaves had no remedy (0+ / 0-)

          for slavery at all.

          Because it all about the dollars....this country was founded on behalf of slavery and it is trying to go back to the bad old days of slavery and ownership of everyone who isn't a white man.

          nosotros no somos estúpidos

          by a2nite on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:36:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Um, slavery was fairly universal and (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            of ancient origin. (Not right, I hope you realize I'm saying.) Criticizing the FFs for not being able to get rid of it ahead of most countries--our ancestor UK didn't even end it for over 60 years after 1776--is kind of like blaming them for allowing George W. Bush to become President. Yes, it would have been great for them to have done so--and there was a strong movement for them to do it at the time which was defeated roundly--but that they didn't is not proof of their evil, unless you condemn all of mankind for the first 10s of thousands of years of our existence, too. (Which you might, I suppose.)

            "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

            by bryduck on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:41:16 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  But far from perfect being that many were pro (0+ / 0-)

        slavery , slave owners, and they had their faults like all human beings too.  Whereas the right wingers think the founding fathers were all christian fundies and perfect little angels or some fantasy like that.

        Join PA Liberals at

        by wishingwell on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 01:13:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The Vikings owners were found to be (7+ / 0-)

    A racketeering organization in a court of law.   Go figure.  Their main business is real estate.   In New Jersey.   Still scratching my head how it's only civil racketeering.  

    And they used the same tactics to get a new billion dollar palace built in their honor.  Somehow that isn't racketeering though.  

    It puts the lotion on its skin

    by Nada Lemming on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:35:04 AM PDT

  •  I'm ashamed to say I like watching football (5+ / 0-)

    because I know that everything about it goes against my morals.

    None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

    by gjohnsit on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:36:09 AM PDT

    •  I have to admit I have a fascination for (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      it as well -- shock and awe at what those players do is indeed stimulating, and I get an adrenalin high without risking sprained ankles or broken bones of my own.  

      We are SO Roman!

      •  Football isn't even the most violent (0+ / 0-)

        We've got Ultimate Fighting now, with even an actual cage.
          In fact, we've got an Ultimate fighting reality TV show between women. How sick is that?

         Why is it that the rest of the world gets excited over a non-violent soccer match, but we require blood?

        None are so hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. -Johann von Goethe

        by gjohnsit on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:07:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The diary conflates two things (18+ / 0-)

    1) the actual league, i.e., the "NFL" per se.  Which is technically non-profit - and although huge (several hundred million $$s per year budget-wise) - is small potatoes to (2)

    2) the NFL teams, which are owned independently of the NFL, and are "for profit" - they are where most of the revenue - billions and billions of $$s - in the system is at.

    of course, through creative accounting they lose money more often than not, so almost surely don't pay their fair share of taxes.

    •  I was thinking the same thing (4+ / 0-)

      when my wife brought this up a few days ago (after hearing it on the radio).

      So I can see how this isn't THAT big of a deal - so long as those top execs making $60 mil a year are paying their fair share of income taxes.

      •  Wikipedia chips in . .. . (5+ / 0-)
        The National Football League is an unincorporated nonprofit 501(c)(6) association, meaning its league office is not subject to income tax because it does not make a profit. In contrast, each individual team is subject to tax because they make a profit.[28] The NFL considers itself a trade association made up of and financed by its 32 member teams.[29]

        so, it's a rather small part of the overall enterprise that enjoys non-profit status.

        Which is a separate issue from localities massively subsidizing stadium construction .. .

        •  the NFL very definitely makes a profit. (0+ / 0-)

          I'm sure their revenues exceed their expenses.

          Wikipedia is wrong sometimes, and this is one of those times.  Some editor thinks "not for profit" means "you don't make a profit."  

          •  Pretty sure they don't (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            johnny wurster

            I was reading about this 3 or 4 months ago, and forget the fine details, but most years they run at a small deficit (e.g., in the hundreds of thousands of dollars).

            Some blame the $30 million compensation package for the commissioner and similar cushy salaries for other executives for that.

            In any event, I'm sure they have the very best accountants making sure everything is on the up and up.  Even if it means the commissioner's salary will have to be bumped up by another $5 or 10 million next year.

          •  Well, a non-profit is allowed to make a profit. (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            thm, vcmvo2, Chitownliberal7, ElaineinIN

            What it can't do is distribute that profit for purposes other than those specified under the section of the tax code they fall under.  

            Some profit is functional necessity for any sustainable corporation.  If you planned to lose money, you eventually find yourself without resources to operate. If you plan to break exactly even, half the time you end up losing money. So you plan to generate a surplus, even in a "non-profit".  

            So a less misleding term than "non-profit" would be "not-for-profit".

            Now it turns out that non-profits are pretty weakly regulated, so it's not at all uncommon for management to used the organization's resources for purposes that are not entirely kosher.  Very often charities (a subset of not-for-profits) overpay their senior management and indulge them in all kinds of vanity projects, under the pretext that these managers are somehow vital to the organization's mission.  When on occasion the boss gets hit by a bus, he invariably proves to be less than useless.

            I've lost my faith in nihilism

            by grumpynerd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:23:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  You are smart enough to know that (0+ / 0-)

            running a surplus is not the same as making a profit. It's about the semantics.

            To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

            by UntimelyRippd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:46:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  So why do the franchise owners always (0+ / 0-)

          whine about not making any 'profit' when they take in so much money and pay out so much in the form of salaries and services, and how they can't afford to stay where they have to pay taxes like other businesses?  

        •  That's not quite right (0+ / 0-)

          A 501c6 organization is able to make a profit under the tax law.   Under state law, an organization can be "nonprofit" but still make a profit - its what they do with it that matters.

    •  yep... Im glad several of us are pointing this out (5+ / 0-)

      what with being the reality based party and all..

      and, to further clarify, since people are really jumping all over the very wrong meaning of the word non-profit, all the NFL employees (not team employees but people that work for the league itself) all pay full income tax on their salary both to the Federal government and to their state of residence.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:08:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And how do you know they pay full tax on their (0+ / 0-)

        salaries -- are you doing their returns?  

        How about all the banged up retirees that were drawing from social services for survival for all those years -- it was a major scandal a while back when so many great players, old and brain damaged,  were getting publicity about their miserable life styles, and then the teams HAD to come up with better 'retirement' benefits for them.  

        And how many people and social programs were tapped to put together everything after the Michael Vick scandal?   Thousands of dollars, and thousands of hours of volunteer time were put into rehabilitating dogs and finding good homes for them?  

        There's a big cost to society from the life examples of some of the best paid players who make awful choices in the eyes of the public.

  •  What a disgusting display (0+ / 0-)

    of greed, avarice, and entitlement.

    For real Texas Kaos, you want, not .com. Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us

    by boadicea on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:43:45 AM PDT

  •  That's why everyone should be a Packers fan (22+ / 0-)

    Only US professional non-profit sports team publicly owned by the city.

    •  The Packers are not owned by the city (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Altoid77, tundraman

      They're owned by shareholders.  It's all contracted so that nobody can get too much power and move the team, and nobody's entitled to a dividend.  But it's not publicly owned like Yellowstone.  It's publicly owned like Microsoft.

      •  true (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        but the $200 piece of paper hanging on my office wall ensure that the Packers will never have to deal with a Jerry Jones or Art Modell.

        That's well worth it to me :-)

        Seriously - The public stock sales from the Green Bay Packers have been used to fund stadium improvements, rather than soak the residents of north eastern Wisconsin. It's far from a perfect system, but it's a damn site better than across the board tax increases.

        In PackerLand, if you want to help the team out, you can. If you don't want to, you don't have to.

        "It's never too late to have a happy childhood." - Tom Robbins - Political Compass sez: -8.25, -7.90

        by ARS on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:30:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Here's a remedy (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ScienceMom, Jim H, Kevskos, vcmvo2, Lily O Lady

    I, too, dislike this whole racket, and it occurred to me that a legal remedy might be:

    Any pro sports franchise moving the place where it plays its games more than 25 miles must change the team name and loses all rights to any existing logos, uniforms, trademarks, and copyrights based on the prior team name.

    So, you want to move the Saints to Los Angeles? Fine. Choose a new name which is NOT Saints, and every piece of Saints paraphernalia is now in the public domain.

    I'm on a mission! Testing the new site rules.

    by blue aardvark on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:44:58 AM PDT

    •  That just provides a whole new set of (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, Cali Scribe

      marketing opportunities for the new paraphernalia.  IOW, the owners win.

      And the old stuff probably has little value anyways (or why would the team be willing to abandon it?)

      •  If they won, teams would rename themselves (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, vcmvo2, Chitownliberal7

        even if they didn't move.

        No, those trademarks are valuable. A lot of people keep following their team after it moves. Force a rename and watch what happens.

        I'm on a mission! Testing the new site rules.

        by blue aardvark on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:03:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Right, like the Browns name stayed in CLE even tho (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blue aardvark, Roadbed Guy, Ozy

          they still suck.

          I think that was on purpose to screw the city even more.

          nosotros no somos estúpidos

          by a2nite on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:43:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, the Ravens seem to be doing OK (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            with their new name (and "voluntary" abandonment of the Browns name) and merchandising opportunities.

            Although just thinking about it very superficially, a bird (or any type!) has got to be easier to market than a color.  Especially a color like brown . ..

            •  Except it isn't a color, it's a surname. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              wishingwell, Roadbed Guy, ARS

              They are named for Paul Brown, their legendary first coach.

              "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

              by bryduck on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:45:11 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Hmm, the color of their helmets must just (0+ / 0-)

                be a coincidence then?

                Similar to how the Stanford Cardinal motif has a cardinal-like color even though the name refers to the  eponymous type of number (you know, what with them being an academic institution that strives to teach kids math and all . .. ).

                •  No, but it is more of a visual play on words (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Roadbed Guy

                  than an origin story. The color choice is a byproduct of Brown's last name. If his name was Smith the helmets might still be brown . . .
                  And Stanford's mascot is a tree, so go figure.

                  "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

                  by bryduck on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:52:38 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Actually, the Stanford Cardinal (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Roadbed Guy

                  is sort of a play on the Harvard Crimson, Stanford being referred to as "The Harvard of the West" (though I prefer to think of it as Harvard being "The Stanford of the East", having grown up in the shadow of Hoover Tower, aka Hoover's Last Erection).

                  There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

                  by Cali Scribe on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:35:18 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  OK, have fun with that! (0+ / 0-)

                    Personally, I haven't heard all that much about either school - with the exception of some shoddy research coming out of the Stanford of the East being highlight here at DailyKos fairly recently,

                    Regarding the real Stanford, as someone who spent a bit of time at Berkeley, I've been told it's not worth spending time even thinking about.

            •  I wonder if that band is still around for the (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Roadbed Guy

              Baltimore Colts. I remember a few yrs after the Colts left Baltimore and there was still this little band that would go there and play with the theme....

              Until the Colts return home to Baltimore.

              I imagine Baltimore if more than happy with the Ravens but are there some who still miss the Colts or is that a thing of the past considering Ravens have won a few Super Bowls ?

              Join PA Liberals at

              by wishingwell on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 01:23:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Didn't the Colts join the CFL, and then (0+ / 0-)

                fade into total obscurity?

                Just what were they thinking?

                But your point is probably valid, considering that there are still some out there who miss the Brooklyn Dodgers, Boston Braves, and Oakland Seals (note that I might be the only person out there in that category).

            •  B-more was the Colts (0+ / 0-)

              before Irsay packed up the moving vans in the dead of night and hauled ass to Indy. (The younger Irsay seems to be a bit less of a bastard than his dad was -- read a piece about him in a magazine a few years ago, and he's got an interesting Twitter account. Gives away a lot of gear and tickets to fans who follow him.)

              There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

              by Cali Scribe on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:33:32 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Thats a bit disingenuos though (5+ / 0-)

    The NFL is a "league" of 32 individual sports corporations.  Some teams are owned by a single individual, most are a conglomerate of investors.

    All the revenue the NFL makes, minus its operating costs, gets dispersed to the member corporations and those entities are taxed in full.

    The NFL is required to show it has exactly $0.00 by midnight on December 31st or else it is hit with a huge penalty because it is NOT allowed to accumulate revenue.  Leaving revenue on the books of the NFL would be a way for the member/owners to dodge their own income.

    Law firms work the same way.  Teh firm itself takes in all the money, subtracts the operating costs for things like office rent, supplies, IT, employee salaries, health care, etc and then disperses the profits to the partners based on a negotiated proportional system.  Those lawyers then file a K-1 form with the IRS and each pay taxes on their share.

    If New Orleans is paying money to Benson and/or the investment group he leads, that organization will be paying tax on that under Louisiana and Federal law.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 09:55:49 AM PDT

    •  Now to be clear... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      this is no way was intended to rebut Kos' gripe about the fact that cities pay these franchises to remain in their towns.

      That I wholely agree is a bit egregious.  I mean, I suppose there is a calculation to be made that having a team like the New Orleans Saints in your city, with its stadium and all the people it employees, not to mention the spike in business every Sunday for things like food vendors, parking lots, bars, restaurants, hotels etc. is enough of a revenue generator to justify the payment, but I yeah.. its gotten a bit out of hand.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:00:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not exactly right (4+ / 0-)

      They don't have to zero out their income. They are exempt from income taxes to the extent their revenue sources are consistent with their tax exempt status as a business association. Net income they receive from sources unrelated to their tax exempt source is subject to tax.

      •  Are you talking about the NFL or law firms? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coffeetalk, vcmvo2

        Because law firms absolutely zero out their revenue.  I've been there on Dec 31st to be ready for any idiot client that decides to pay us at the last minute to clear something off their books suddenly puts thousands of dollars on OURS.

        Nothing like rushing to the bank to get a proof of deposit and then cutting checks for amounts as low as $75 to junior partners to show it was properly dispersed.

        Yeah, I suppose the NFL isn't required to go to the same extreme since they do retain assets related to their on-going business like NFL Films and merchandise, but there has to be an equity agreement in place to ensure that revenue (particularly the BILLIONS from broadcasting rights) gets transferred to the member-owners in a timely manner so it shows up properly as their taxable income.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:15:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm talking about the NFL (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          johnny wurster

          I've been there for those Dec 31 meetings at law firms, and you're absolutely right on that. They scramble like crazy to collect money the last 2 weeks of the year, and disaster strikes in the accounting department if an unexpected check comes in on 12/31. The difference is that those law firms are not non-profit. The NFL, as a association, is. So they don't have to worry about zeroing out income at the end of the year, so long as the net profits (and yes, they are allowed to have profits), are related to their tax exempt status.

        •  Now I know exactly how to pay a law firm (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          johnny wurster

          30 reasonable payments of $5 paid between 7 am and midnight Dec 31.

          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

          by FrankRose on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:43:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Talk about a sense of entitlement. (0+ / 0-)
  •  This is incredibly misleading (8+ / 0-)

    The Seattle Seahawks are NOT non-profit. The New Orleans Saints are NOT non-profit. NONE of the 32 teams in the NFL are non-profit. (The Packers may be an exception, I don't recall.) They are all (with the possible exception of the Packers) either taxable entities or flow-through entities, where the profit is taxable to the individual owners.

    The league, to which each of the franchises pay dues is non-profit. The league doesn't get the $6 million dollars for the Saints to stay put. The league doesn't get the subsidies for the stadiums, the individual franchise owners do.

    You can make the argument that the league itself shouldn't be eligible for non-profit status, but that's a different argument. As it's written, this is a total bullshit diary.

  •  asshole billionaires (5+ / 0-)

    Nothing ruins NFL Sunday (or Monday or Thursday night) for me as much as the camera shots of the owners up in their suites.

    I love watching the games, but when I see the owners, it suddenly takes all the fun out of it.

  •  The problem is that (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Wisper, Catte Nappe, johnny wurster

    successful sports teams bring in more money for states than the states pay out.

    Certainly, if you added up all the tax money generated by the New Orleans saints (I'm in New Orleans) it far exceeds that $6 million a year. This money comes through not only the income taxes of the athletes (I think that Louisiana collects some money from all the football players who play a game here), the sales taxes of all the goods sold at the games and all the peripheral stuff, the money made when people come here to watch their team play the Saints, not to mention the money generated when we get a Superbowl.  And there are a lot of other people whose jobs are offshoots of the Saints being here.  All told, it far exceeds $6 million a year.  

    Unfortunately, without tax concessions, many teams will just move, because there's always another city willing to give them the tax concession in exchange for all of that additional revenue.  

    As far as the deal with the Saints goes, it was renegotiated in 2009 from the prior deal to one that was more favorable to the state.  You can read about it here.

    A sports franchise is no different from any other big business that, if it locates in your area, brings a lot of jobs and tax money with it.  Therefore, a lot of areas want those businesses, and will make offers to that business in exchange for the business locating there.

    When people evaluate these deals, they sometimes make the mistake of saying, for example, that the state is "losing" so much money because of the tax break given to a business.  That kind of thing is based on the mistaken assumption that the area would have the business and the associated jobs and revenue without making those tax concessions to business.  And that is not true.  It's generally not a choice between having the business with the tax concession, or having the business without having to give them the tax concession.  On these big deals, it's generally a choice between (1) having the business with the tax concession, and (2) no tax concession, and the business goes elsewhere so you lose the revenue it brings with it.  When local government does the math, often option (1) is financially a better choice.  

    Simply saying, "they make enough money, they shouldn't ask for tax concessions" is just not reality.  These are businesses.  They are supposed to make money.  And, like any other business, they look around for the opportunity that makes the most sense for them financially.  The only way to get rid of these tax concessions is to have some kind of universal agreement throughout the country that nobody will give them, no matter what.  And that will never happen.  

    •  Nope. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jank2112, wishingwell, BvueDem, Tonedevil

      Spending tax money on pro sports stadiums just rearranges existing spending.  

      It does not create new spending.

      Teachers, firemen and police officers pay income tax, too.

      A Super Bowl held in a non-tropical place might attract visitors who may not have gone there.  But even a Super Bowl in Miami will just replace one set of tourists with another.

      Which states have the lowest unemployment?  North Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska and some other states with no taxpayer funded pro sports stadiums.

      Even here in Utah, we made the Jazz owner pay for most of his own stadium.

      "states like VT and ID are not 'real america'" -icemilkcoffee

      by Utahrd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:33:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You're wrong (6+ / 0-)

      Here is what the researchers believe.  

      “Our conclusion, and that of nearly all academic economists studying this issue, is that professional sports generally have little, if any, positive effect on a city’s economy,” Humphreys and Coates wrote in a report issued last month by the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. The institute commissioned the professors to study the economic impact of a deal proposed by Anthony Williams, the mayor of Washington, D.C.; under terms of the agreement, the Major Baseball League would move the Montreal Expos to the nation’s capital in exchange for a new, city-built ballpark.

      The professors based their report on new data as well as previously published research in which they analyzed economic indicators from 37 major metropolitan areas with major-league baseball, football and basketball teams.

      Don't want to hear it from the Cato Institute, too conservative?  How about some liberals -


      Few fields of empirical economic research offer virtual unanimity of findings. Yet, independent work on the economic impact of stadiums and arenas has uniformly found that there is no statistically significant positive correlation between sports facility construction and economic development.

          These results stand in distinct contrast to the promotional studies that are typically done by consulting firms under the hire of teams or local chambers of commerce supporting facility development. Typically, such promotional studies project future impact and almost inevitably adopt unrealistic assumptions regarding local value added, new spending, and associated multipliers.
      But according to research published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, having a pro sports team in town may be a net negative for the local economy. Paul Staudohar, professor emeritus of business administration at California State University, found in an examination of last year’s National Basketball Association lockout that shutting down sports leagues can be good for a city’s finances:

      I love sports, love them.  But they aren't profitable for anyone but the owners, players and a few businesses that make their money on fans.  The economic impact of these stadiums, time and time again, has been embellished.  But please, refute the work of economists, sociologists and other researchers who have extensively studied the issue.  

  •  And they lie. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mother Mags, a2nite, BvueDem
    Joe Browne, then the league’s vice president for public affairs, told The New York Times, “I finally get to the point where I’m making 150 grand[," but] at the time, Browne made about $2 million annually.
    I'd alert the media if I thought they gave a tinker's cuss.
  •  Yeah, I read that piece and asked the same (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maggiejean, a2nite, wishingwell, shigeru

    question in a comment last week. A nonprofit? Seriously? When many of the owners are billionaires and enrich their bank accounts by fleecing taxpayers, when players make tens of millions of dollars, when the NFL "contributes" less than 4% of the public money it receives to charities, when Roger Godell makes $30 million a year. Yeah, some nonprofit.

    Here in AZ, the citizens of Glendale will be paying for years for giving away the farm to build the Cardinals' stadium. Glendale thought they'd make a ton of money. Same story: big promises, no delivery.

    stay together / learn the flowers / go light - Gary Snyder

    by Mother Mags on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:03:10 AM PDT

    •  AZ is especially funny given its general (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mother Mags

      anti-tax and anti-welfare stance, especially in relation to education. Wonder how the spending on sports is rationalized?

      I reckon it is just status. In practical terms does anyone really imagine that Philadelphia would fall apart without its mediocre teams or that Detroit fell apart because the Lions could not win?

      “Never argue with someone whose livelihood depends on not being convinced.” ~ H.L. MENCKEN

      by shigeru on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:27:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I am so sick of paying for this (4+ / 0-)

    rich people's toys because that is what these teams are.  I love my Minnesota Twins, but deeply resent paying for a stadium I cannot afford to set foot in and don't get me started on the Vikings stadium we are paying for here.  NOW, it turns out the whole friggin' NFL is "non-profit?"  Pardon me while I go toss my cookies.

    The thing about democracy, beloveds, is that it is not neat, orderly, or quiet. It requires a certain relish for confusion. Molly Ivins

    by MufsMom on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:04:43 AM PDT

  •  This is news? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, vcmvo2, wishingwell

    Really, you write this like it's news. Everybody knows this and they go along with it anyway.

    I was living in Cleveland when the Browns left town. Every other priority of the city and county government was dropped. In a city that had many desperate needs, the only thing that mattered was raising taxes to build a stadium to allow a billionaire to use it for free. Bizarre, I know.

    Everything there was to know was known. The opposition voices were not silenced by the corporate powers, they were heard. They were heard, but they were not followed. The people of the city of Cleveland and the surrounding county agreed: nothing is more important than having an NFL team. It was surreal.

    The history of music is mortal, but the idiocy of the guitar is eternal. ― Milan Kundera, The Book of Laughter and Forgetting

    by James Earl on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:08:46 AM PDT

  •  I know the Green Bay Packers are non-profit (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kefauver, blueyedace2, tundraman

    but I didn't know the NFL was.

    •  The operate like a non-profit (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ozy, tundraman, Mikey

      but technically they are a for-profit corporation because under Wisconsin law non-profits cannot distribute stock.

      They're also the only major leagues sports team to release its financial balance sheet every year.

      remember to use positive affirmations. "i am not a dork" is not one of them

      by Altoid77 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:32:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, it's really not-for-profit, not for-profit (0+ / 0-)

        The Packers in fact are under Wisconsin law a private, not-for-profit corporation. From Wikipedia: "As of June 8, 2005, 112,015 people (representing 4,750,934 shares) can lay claim to a [Packers] franchise ownership interest. Shares of stock include voting rights, but the redemption price is minimal, no dividends are ever paid, the stock cannot appreciate in value (though private sales often exceed the face value of the stock), and stock ownership brings no season ticket privileges. No shareholder may own over 200,000 shares, a safeguard to ensure that no individual can assume control of the club. To run the corporation, a board of directors is elected by the stockholders."

  •  As some have said... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kane in CA, Catte Nappe, wishingwell

    The League is considered a non-profit, but the teams individually are not.

    I guess that's good.

    But there's an issue with a "non-profit" paying people massive salaries.  I don't care if it's the Red Cross or the NFL.  In that aspect the NFL is flaunting it's status by paying it's leader $30 million.

    As much as I enjoy some sports, if all professional leagues just disappeared I'd have no problem filling the void left behind.

  •  So do you think Lew Wolff should get a new stadium (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    for the A's?
      Since he made his $ in real estate development, he knows all about  "leveraging" the most out of local govt.

    My Karma just ran over your Dogma

    by FoundingFatherDAR on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:22:46 AM PDT

  •  Been trying to tell folks (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    around me that non-profits are a huge scam, many have nothing to do with charity or any overwhelming public service need that justifies tax exemption.   As the benefits become more obvious to those who can afford the lawyers and accountants,  more businesses are operating as non-profits all the time.   By cutting out shareholders, keeping a small board with absolute control of the organizations even if it has hundreds or thousands of dues paying members, or contributors out the ying yang, the insiders pay extravagent salaries, perks, etc., and also develop power bases with politicians, constituencies etc.  And of course, ordinary businesses lose out because they pay taxes before they pocket the 'excess income' over operating expenses.

    •  some are scams. Probably most aren't. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Certainly many, many non-profs aren't scams, and if I were a betting man I'd say most aren't.

      •  what's an acceptable number of tax cheats (0+ / 0-)

        ten percent, twenty percent, forty-nine percent?

        It gets back to things like the great IRS scandal that wasn't, where statutory standards of how much non-primary purpose income is allowable are eroded so, exclusive or primary comes down to maybe some to most by enforcement.

        The are real charities, the non-profits that can and do qulaify as  charities,  most of them are legitimate.  Non charitable non-profits (that offer goods and services to the public, ie, compete with businesses),  the legitimates may not be the majority.

        Granted my actual practice is in ad valorem taxation in Georgia that requires 'purely public charity' for a non-profit to get a tax exemption, and that has been blown to hell and back by the courts.   But I see really ugly numbers out of even so called charities on particular projects (and exemption is granted county by county depending on use of a particular property).   But around here, even many charities are sketchy as the devil.   They make money, just not profits.  The best description I can give you is the ltoast from Pirates of the Caribbean  "Take what you can, give nothing back".

        For example, national organization, 501 (c) (3) charity, wants to come into a small county,  do a lease on land from an hospital authority, build a gym/office building, lease the medical offices, require membership and charge for every patron at the gym, accept payment from the hospital for its cardiac rehab patients, not offer any free health screeings, no sliding scale fees based on ability to pay for the general community, no outreach or community programs,  entire facility would be fee based services at market rates (same price as private gym already located in community and market rent on the medical offices) and wanted a tax exemption as a place of purely public charity.  They were told no and they were outraged.The outrage would have been agreeing that the building would have been used for charity.

    •  Plus they have the benefit of owning something (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jfromga, wishingwell

      cool which makes too many people bend over backwards to make them happy.

      Our value system is really screwed up.

      nosotros no somos estúpidos

      by a2nite on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:39:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Fortunately, the future is soccer, globally (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Unfortunately, their governing body looks as corrupt as the NFL.

  •  Targeting Govs, Senators and Reps (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, wishingwell

    in BLUE states, in safe Dem turf to initiate legal change on this whole mess might be a decent place to start.  Change surely will not be spearheaded by the likes of Bobby Jindal but if some changes could sweep out from Blue states perhaps that would be a start?

    •  Yep. Could just one blue Dem tack an (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      amendment on to the next food stamp reduction bill that will require an equal percentage reduction in the value of all government subsidies paid to sports teams?  

      If they had their subsidies at risk for a like amount, they'd undoubted vote for an increase in food stamps!

      Of course, followed by an increase in admission prices the next season.  

    •  Problem: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vcmvo2, LordMike

      NOBODY wants to be "that guy" who's responsible for the local, beloved sports team leaving.

      Message to Dems: We HAVE to start showing up for Midterms.

      by Jank2112 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:17:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's why it has to be federal... (0+ / 0-)

        Actually, there was a bill introduced into congress in the 90's eliminating the federal tax writeoff for sports stadium bonds.  That was introduced by the weakest congressman ever, Martin Hoke, so it went nowhere.  Who's he?  He's the guy Dennis Kucinich beat in 1998.  Hoke introduced the bill as a way to buy some votes after the Browns stiffed the city.  It didn't work.


        by LordMike on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:30:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  From the Department of Stopped Clocks (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PatriciaVa, LordMike

    Their website gives me a headache.

    But do you know who used to have (maybe still has) all kinds of data on how pro sports stadiums are a ripoff for taxpayers?

    The Cato Institute.

    "states like VT and ID are not 'real america'" -icemilkcoffee

    by Utahrd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:36:47 AM PDT

    •  Regrettably, many Dems disagree with you (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, wishingwell, skybluewater, Utahrd

      Especially in Minneapolis, where Dems increased the REGRESSIVE sales and gambling taxes to finance a new stadium for the Vikings.

      Stadiums are a boondoggle.

      And Dems who support publicly-financed stadiums support increased income and wealth inequality.

      It is what it is.

      Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project.

      by PatriciaVa on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:41:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm a huge sports fan, but this is just (6+ / 0-)


    I'm very happy, here in Los Angeles, at the difficulty the NFL has in re-establishing itself here, mostly because folks here don't want to subsidize the construction of a new stadium that they couldn't afford to attend anyway.

    The most violent element in society is ignorance.

    by Mr MadAsHell on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:37:41 AM PDT

  •  It's not a nonprofit in the sense of a (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thm, Mikey, LordMike, ElaineinIN

    charity. It's just an organization that is not set up to generate profits for itself, but rather for its members (the teams) that do pay profits. Labor unions are in the same sort of category -- you can't deduct your union dues from your taxes, but the labor union doesn't itself pay taxes, the members do as individuals.

    You are correctly outraged, however, at the subsidies that are given to NFL teams to move to this or that city. The problem is that it may or may not make sense of any individual city to do so, even though in the aggregate it doesn't make sense for the public as a whole.

    If you're going to get mad about rich people avoiding taxes through tax exemption though, I would suggest looking at universities, hospitals and museums. Billions and billions of dollars shielded from taxation entirely (charitable deductions and tax exempt organizations), and they by and large cater to and reinforce the position of the rich exclusively.

  •  Love Love Love SB Nation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    thanks for that!

    The threat to our way of life comes from corporations, and the solution is to shrink corporations while freeing government from corporate control.

    by gbaked on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:44:15 AM PDT

  •  But.. the more we give to billionaires (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    the less we'll have left over to spend on non-billionaires.

    - the Feature not Flaw of NFL gimmenomics.

  •  College Football (not NCAA) (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, wishingwell, LordMike

    The NCAA big leagues are corrosive. However, college games are interesting, played by mortals, and have an element of region and school affiliation. Your favorite player won't disappear in a flurry of high stats and money. You're not likely to hear of a player shooting his thigh with a revolver in the locker room.

    Tune in to some high academic, low chance college games.

    Leave the mercenary, cash soaked horrors for the 8th level of the Inferno.

    Everyone's innocent of some crime.

    by The Geogre on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 10:47:37 AM PDT

    •  Well said and another reason my dad always (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Geogre

      preferred to attend college sporting events and to watch college sports on TV.

      I am glad he did not live to see the scandal that erupted at the college where his kids went to college and where he worked for a decade.  That would have torn him apart for many reasons.

      Join PA Liberals at

      by wishingwell on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:04:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I got to see the bad too often (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I taught at two BigTimeFooball schools while in graduate school, and I saw juniors who were not eligible for first term freshman English due to not having fulfilled the prerequisites. I also saw (and still see, at a flyspeck of a place) grades transmogrify under the weight of athletic need.

        And then there are the campus crimes. . . . Football especially attracts or creates some bad atmosphere.

        Everyone's innocent of some crime.

        by The Geogre on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 06:10:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I Too Like Football and the NFL . . . (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, wishingwell, LordMike

    But the tax give-aways are ridiculous.

    I am a struggling Titans fan and I remember when Bud Adams and the Oilers came to Nashville.

    Adams is a gazillionaire, yet the state of Tennessee and the city of Nashville footed the bill for (then) Adelphia Coliseum.

    I remember one night, at half time, Bud Adams donated a WHOPPING $5,000 to breast cancer research.

    Way to dig deep, Bud . . .

    I'm a "right-wing freak show," or at least that's what one nobody on DKOS seems to think.

    by kefauver on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:09:30 AM PDT

  •  You really want to get mad? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Archie2227, LordMike

    They're no saints in MLB either.

     Google "Miami Marlins" "Loria" and "disaster" if you don't already know that whole sordid story.

    Message to Dems: We HAVE to start showing up for Midterms.

    by Jank2112 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:21:03 AM PDT

    •  Minnesota just got bilked (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wishingwell, LordMike

      by the Twins and Vikes. Vikes stadium funding is a debacle and it looks like the state will be on the hook. The Twins just got their new shiny digs a couple years ago and have slashed payroll every season since.

    •  Is Loria in Miami really worse than the McCourts? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, Cali Scribe

      That was a freaking trainwreck in LA. Don't get me wrong, Loria is a freaking skinflint who has managed to bilk Miami for an ugly new stadium, but McCourt should never have been able to own the Dodgers in the first place. For that matter, Loria should never have been allowed to own the Marlins after what he did with the Expos.

  •  Publicly-funded stadiums are a scam.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, wishingwell, Mr MadAsHell

    And a particularly egregious form of corporate welfare. Virtually every study done on the subject shows that claims of increased economic activity are bunk. The jobs that are created tend to be part-time, non-benefited, and/or temporary. The opportunity cost is tremendous, and frankly, there is no damn reason for it given the profits of the leagues themselves.

    The only reason the scam has been so successful is that so many politicians (of both parties) play the stupid game with them, allowing themselves to be extorted, and allowing themselves to be played against other cities and regions. You can be sure pockets are being filled as well. It's just a toxic combination of greed, corruption and ignorance.

    I love my Oakland Raiders, but the idea that Alameda County or the City of Oakland should pay upwards of half a billion dollars to fund a facility that will be used a handful of times per year is just an abomination.

  •  So can fans write-off ticket purchases? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, wishingwell

    At least the percentage that goes to the teams?

    Calling other DKos members "weenies" is a personal insult and therefore against site rules.

    by Bob Johnson on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:27:59 AM PDT

    •  Not any more (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Before the 1996 tax law, they could.

      •  That was for entertainment as business expense. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, wishingwell, ElaineinIN


        I'm talking about as a donation to a not-for-profit.

        Calling other DKos members "weenies" is a personal insult and therefore against site rules.

        by Bob Johnson on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:13:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I doubt it (0+ / 0-)

          The NFL is legitimately a "non profit" in the sense that it is a cooperative that supports the teams.  In other words, unlike a franchise like McDonalds, all of its profits go to the teams, who pay tax on it (well, in principle; NFL teams are notoriously tax preferential).

          It's not quite the same, though, as your local charity.  Legally, anything you pay to the NFL is either spent on its own operations (including outrageous CEO compensation), or passed back to the teams, which are for-profit entities.  This does not meet the standard for charitable deductions.

        •  No - no deduction (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          the NFL is tax exempt under IRC section 501c6 - only donations to "charities" under section 501c3 are generally deductible.

          Plus you got a ticket in return so the value of your net contribution would be the sales price minus the property you got in return, which are equal.

  •  2 reasons: football as religion and "circuses" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    1) To (far too) many, Football is a religion.  So it's only fair that football teams get the same deference as churches.

    2) Football is just one of many distractions that keeps people enthralled to frippery and not educated citizens -- allowing criminals to do as they please.  It's money well spent (especially since it isn't theirs) for the 1%.

    Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

    by The Dead Man on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:33:22 AM PDT

  •  I love LA (0+ / 0-)

    Teams are always using Los Angeles as a Sword of Damocles to threaten the hometown crowd with.

    Why do cities let them keep getting away with it?

    The NFL hasn't had a team there in 20 years. And LA has moved on. No offense to anyone, but LA isn't dependent on having an NFL team to put it on the map like some smaller cities are. You can't find a developer willing to buiild a stadium until a team commits to moving. No NFL team will commit until a stadium is under construction with terms and amenities favorable to it. AEG came close, but negotiations broke down.

    So its crazy that people keep falling for that BS. Currently Oakland, San Diego, Minnesota, and St Louis are all making threats to move to the imaginary stadium if they don't get new ones.  Jacksonville, Tampa Bay and Buffalo meanwhile simply have weak fan bases and want out to avoid the embarrassments of blackouts.

    So its crazy that the LA threat still holds any potency.

    Message to Dems: We HAVE to start showing up for Midterms.

    by Jank2112 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:44:12 AM PDT

  •  Well, my Cleveland Browns never make a penny. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, LordMike meant.................

    I'm not an athiest. How can you not believe in something that doesn't exist? That's way too convoluted for me. - A. Whitney Brown

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:48:56 AM PDT

    •  They make plenty... (0+ / 0-)

      Don't worry about the owner Mr. Haslam... He's making plenty.  You can't lose money in the NFL.  It's physically impossible, unless, of course, you are as incompetent as Art Modell.  Of course, he's got bigger things to worry about, since he was caught fleecing his customers in his other business.  Whoops!

      Speaking of fleecing.  Art Modell managed to rehabilitate his image by claiming his betrayal on the fact that the city wouldn't just "give" him a new stadium on demand (which isn't true anyways).  Somehow that exonerates him in the public's eyes it seems.


      by LordMike on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:12:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Football Is A Brutal Sport (0+ / 0-)

    Saying that I still love the saints, and NFL needs to pay their fair share.  They can afford it

    "Don't Let Them Catch You With Your Eyes Closed"

    by rssrai on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:49:50 AM PDT

  •  The NFL isn't the only sports franchise (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, wishingwell

    fleecing taxpayers. David Zirin talked about the links between sports and politics in a recent interview with Bill Moyers. Definitely worth a look.

    “Parties do not lead revolutions. They follow them. And then only when forced to.” Joe Bageant

    by tgypsy on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 11:52:52 AM PDT

  •  Americas Jock worship (7+ / 0-)

    is part of the problem.  Athletes from High School up to the pro leagues not only get away with sexual assault and rape, their victims are blamed for  ruining their lives if they do go to jail.
    Steubenville, Ohio was a perfect example.  Everyone was concerned about the football players who raped that poor girl, and how she "ruined their lives", while she received death and rape threats.

    The Anonymous member who exposed the  incident faces more jail time then the monsters who did this to her.

    "Growing your own food is like growing your own money" Ron Finley guerilla gardener extraordinaire.

    by pitbullgirl65 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:02:39 PM PDT

    •  And also Sandusky and that whole issue too as (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      too many people worshipped him and catered to him and trusted him and gave him free reign because of his position as a football coach.

      Join PA Liberals at

      by wishingwell on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:07:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  My god I forgot about that! (0+ / 0-)

        Sick, sick, sick.  Remember the rioting when the students found out he was fired?  
        Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall the police quelling that. Not like they did Occupy.


        "Growing your own food is like growing your own money" Ron Finley guerilla gardener extraordinaire.

        by pitbullgirl65 on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:38:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Wait, It Gets Worse! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vetwife, LordMike, Ditch Mitch KY

    The NFL has it's own cable franchise and games will soon be unavailable on broadcast television. ABC has already turned over Monday Night Football to its own ESPN. Fox will move its games to Fox Sports.

    If you are a real fan of the sport you will need a cable sports package ($$) to see most of the games. More money for the already rich fleeced from the public.

    The USA and the rest of the world face a dangerous enemy that not only threatens our freedom but our very existence. This enemy is deeply embedded within society and is actively working towards our annihilation. That enemy is ignorance.

    by Ex Con on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:06:42 PM PDT

    •  What I don't understand is (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, Ex Con

      if football teams are such critical public amenities that we have to build them stadiums and highways, why doesn't some state somewhere actually take the local franchise by eminent domain?

      Then the state could set up a public authority to run the franchise, with a board elected by fans.  Think of the boost to voter participation.

      On the other hand, if football teams are not a public good, then why are taxpayers subsidizing them?

      I've lost my faith in nihilism

      by grumpynerd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 01:57:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I don't get (0+ / 0-)

    why ticket prices are allowed to be set at whatever the market will bear. If they get huge public subsidies to build and if their profits are protected from being taxed at appropriate rates, there should bloody well be a policy to allow random distribution of tickets at reasonably capped rates determined by respective states where teams operate.

  •  I am not one bit surprised (0+ / 0-)

    The money the billionaires get from we the poor and austerity life have little clue how much our monies are sent to big  business and corrupted lawmakers.  I have been triying to figure for the last three years why over 100 dollars is taxed on my light bill co op...Brings me to over 400 each and every month....I have reported it and asked for checks and nothing changes....Credo cannot possibly  buy all these utility and big business foks who are financing the top one percent and right wingers.  

    We the People have to make a difference and the Change.....Just do it ! Be part of helping us build a veteran community online. United Veterans of America

    by Vetwife on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:12:13 PM PDT

  •  Seriously? You started SB Nation? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Markos, you rock.

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you:

    by FischFry on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:17:12 PM PDT

  •  non-profit, in the US, doesn't mean what most (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    people think it does. In most cases it causes an organization (like a hospital, for example) to engage in completely unnecessary spending such as outrageous salaries and capital assets that are severely underutilized. NFL fits the profile perfectly. In defense of non-profit hospitals, they do have better health outcomes than their for-profit counterparts, in general.

  •  Go Green Bay Packers! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, tundraman

    Too bad the League makes fan ownership illegal -- but the Pack is grandfathered in.   Stories like this make it clear why  the League won't allow it to happen again.

    "If there is no sufficient reason for war, the war party will make war on one pretext, then invent another . . . after the war is on." -R.M. LaFollette

    by Spirit of Fighting Bob on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 12:54:54 PM PDT

  •  The Romans built a lot of taxpayer funded... (0+ / 0-)

    ...stadiums as well.  And they were free from worry about concussions and other injuries since the participants were slaves and often died.  So, the Romans probably had it worse in many respects than we do.

    The difference is, though, the government actually ran the facility and "leagues" that they paid for.  Oh, and they gave away the tickets for free.  That's a big deal.  I'd have little problem with financing these professional sports leagues if the cities actually owned the teams... or at least we got a nice fat discount on the tickets for our contribution.


    by LordMike on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:09:11 PM PDT

  •  In Atlanta two historic black churches have (0+ / 0-)

    agreed to move so that a new stadium can be built for the Atlanta Falcons. One dissenting church member remarked that she was appalled that these two historic churches were required to move to accommodate a "second-rate football team."

    The construction is supposed to be financed by the city's hotel/motel tax, but the final bill is yet to be seen. Those in opposition to the deal believe that taxpayers will find themselves on the hook for at least some of the costs.

    "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

    by Lily O Lady on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:17:47 PM PDT

    •  Yep, they held out for top dollar. Atlanta has no (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lily O Lady

      ...problem building over historic property if need be. This isn't always a bad thing as there are , or were, some small towns that still had remnants of the platforms that transacted in human beings.

      The politicians may be bought, and the system corrupt, but it is our duty to fix these things.

      by sebastianguy99 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:44:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It looked like the stadium would have to (0+ / 0-)

        be located on the north side of the Georgia Dome as the churches initially tuned down the offers to buy. It took the mayor getting involved to re-open the bidding for church property. I think the air of inevitability finally took over.

        "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

        by Lily O Lady on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:19:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Just absurd (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lily O Lady

      The Georgia Dome is 20 years old, and they say it's obsolete. There are plenty of buildings from the Roman era that are still in use today.

      Small varmints, if you will.

      by aztecraingod on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:21:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yep, yet here we are. The owners want it (0+ / 0-)

        or they'll take their football & team to another more deserving city at won't play with Atlanta any more. So there! Pbthhh!!!

        "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

        by Lily O Lady on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:28:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  more corporate welfare... (0+ / 0-)

    disguised as something else. It's outrageous when highly profitable entities which have no need for public money whatsoever...are given preference to people who need food stamps by elected officials.

    We progressives need to start doing a better job of educating the American people about how atrociously horrid our budget priorities are in this country. Especially by those alleged "fiscally conservative" Republicans, who are constantly squandering massive amount of taxpayer dollars on their rich patrons, while telling people on food stamps to go take a hike.

    We spend a hundred billion dollars a year on corporate welfare in our federal budget alone, we spend nearly three-quarters of our entire annual federal budget on the military, including on weapons systems the Pentagon doesn't even want. And Republicans have the gall to cut money from the food stamp programs?

    Our budget priorities in this country are absolutely perverse.

  •  there are tons of non-profits that aren't (0+ / 0-)

    benevolent and charitable orgs.

    I am tired of laughing at the irony of their stupidity.

    by stagemom on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:34:27 PM PDT

  •  that same issue of the atlantic (0+ / 0-)

    told of a texas school district which eliminated sports.
    refocusing on academics.

    whozeyerdadi now ?

    @Hugh: There is no Article II power which says the Executive can violate the Constitution. * Addington's perpwalk? TRAILHEAD of accountability for Bush-2 Crimes.

    by greenbird on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:37:35 PM PDT

  •  In fairness to Paul Allen, I doubt that taxpayers (0+ / 0-)

    are affecting his lifestyle in the least.

    He certainly doesn't need nay taxpayer money.
    He's a Microsoft multi-billionaire.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:42:43 PM PDT

    •  Doesn't need it -- yet, demands it. (0+ / 0-)

      Think about that.

      To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

      by UntimelyRippd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:02:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What's the threat? That he'll move the team (0+ / 0-)


        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:10:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  with sufficient power, you don't need threats. (0+ / 0-)

          people simply do as you demand.

          To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

          by UntimelyRippd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 07:12:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've never seen that in real life. (0+ / 0-)

            The power generally implies either

            a) a threat that can be carried out, or
            b) a favor that can be bestowed.

            People who aren't threatened or people who don't care what you have to offer aren't going to do shit for you.

            LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

            by dinotrac on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 08:02:16 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  people, in the main, do what they are told to do (0+ / 0-)

              by those who have higher social rank.

              there's no good reason for it, in a modern, complex, dynamic society of hundreds of millions of individuals -- it's just how we evolved, back when we were societies of a dozen or so individuals.

              To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

              by UntimelyRippd on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 08:41:59 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Don't know many rednecks, do you? ;0) (0+ / 0-)

                LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                by dinotrac on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 05:54:11 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  they just have a different scheme for measuring (0+ / 0-)

                  social rank.

                  To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                  by UntimelyRippd on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 04:09:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Don't know many rednecks, do you? (0+ / 0-)

                    And really, your thesis doesn't need rednecks to fall apart.

                    The world is awash in "fuck you"s.

                    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                    by dinotrac on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 04:49:49 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The next time a bunch of rednecks get (0+ / 0-)

                      to decide whether Paul Allen gets what he wants, I'll remember to care about whether rednecks observe the same hierarchies that billionaires do.

                      Nonetheless, if you don't think rednecks submit to social hierarchies, you either aren't as familiar with redneck society as you suggest, or you haven't been paying close enough attention. Yes, in every hierarchy, people at different levels of the hierarchy can and do wield practical power -- the ability to threaten or reward -- but most of the time most people do what they're told to do by the most important person in the room, regardless of the particular room, and without being threatened or rewarded, implicitly or explicitly. Perhaps you've never noticed someone bossing a bunch of people around with nothing but force of personality, but it is what happens all around you all of the time. Paul Allen doesn't have to threaten anybody. He's important, it's understood that he's important, and so most people do what he tells (or "asks") them to do, wherever, whenever, however it happens.

                      To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

                      by UntimelyRippd on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 10:35:26 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Hmmm. You just repeated what I said a couple of (0+ / 0-)

                        posts up.

                        You may, however, have noticed this concept of speaking truth to power, which is very close to a redneck "up yours".

                        But we may be talking past each other on the notion of social hierarchy.  If you just mean that in terms of self-defined groups, then you're probably right.  In a broader sense, some people will simply submit to power and some won't.

                        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                        by dinotrac on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 08:18:37 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

  •  If the taxpayers want a football team then who (0+ / 0-)

    ..are we to tell them otherwise?

    Reading many of the comments in this diary makes it clear that there are too many people on the Left who are snooty and look down on people. This is a large reason why we continue to get beat in states we should be more competitive in.

    This kind of thing is akin to when the Right argues that we should cut assistance because poor people buy beer and cigarettes. People in cities and states are emotionally invested in their sports teams at different levels. Deal with it and move on to real issues.

    The politicians may be bought, and the system corrupt, but it is our duty to fix these things.

    by sebastianguy99 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 02:53:13 PM PDT

  •  nascar get tax dollars too (0+ / 0-)

    don't let them off the hook !

  •  Has anyone asked why baseball is the only (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    sport controlled by Congress?

    It's not as if our congress critters have anything else to do with all the filiblustering happenings.

    In the time it took Adam Lanza to reload, eleven children escaped. What if...

    by Sixty Something on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:00:38 PM PDT

    •  I believe it is because of the anti-trust (0+ / 0-)

      exemption.  Because baseball alone is exempt from anti-trust law, the only oversight comes from Congress's direct involvement.

      To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

      by sneakers563 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:09:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks for your reply. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        But it still doesn't clear up why the Congress of the United States is wasting its time regulating baseball.

        I guess you are going to have to spell it out for people like me who just don't get it.

        In the time it took Adam Lanza to reload, eleven children escaped. What if...

        by Sixty Something on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:19:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not saying it's right (0+ / 0-)

          but I believe the reason is that MLB was made exempt from anti-trust and interstate commerce laws in 1922.  Justice Holmes wrote that "personal effort, not related to production, is not a subject of commerce" and that therefore baseball wasn't subject to the regulations that other businesses were.  

          Consequently, because baseball has this special legal status, Congress took it upon themselves to be directly involved. Basically, they're trying to make up for the fact that there's this regulatory hole as far as baseball is concerned.  The idea being that without Congressional oversight, the exemption would give MLB too much power.

          To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

          by sneakers563 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:52:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  the same reason Congress does anything (0+ / 0-)

          Baseball successfully lobbied them for the exemption.

          Money talks.

          "It's never too late to have a happy childhood." - Tom Robbins - Political Compass sez: -8.25, -7.90

          by ARS on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:20:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  End Non-Profit Tax Exemptions (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    UntimelyRippd, Couchsachraga

    If the people want to subsidize some businesses, we should send them checks under programmes that ensure they meet policy requirements.

    Tax exemptions are just a way to game the system. Rich people avoid taxes, while the people pay for rich people's lives.

    Simplifying the tax code would start with eliminating every single exemption.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:01:20 PM PDT

    •  Couldn't agree more (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Do away with the whole concept of nonprofits altogether. If you're a legal entity, and you're using public resources, then you should pay taxes. Period.

      I am on the board of a nonprofit and my fiancee is on the payroll of another. Sadly, nonprofits are typically undemocratic and opaque. By not paying taxes, they are shifting the tax burden from themselves to...the rest of us. To my mind, that's taxation without representation. Didn't we fight a war for that? Where's the outrage?

  •  LA is lucky to not have the (0+ / 0-)

    NFL inflicted upon its citizenry; although there are several billionaires scheming how to get a free ride and more billions from the folks who can't afford it.

    “Never argue with someone whose livelihood depends on not being convinced.” ~ H.L. MENCKEN

    by shigeru on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:15:27 PM PDT

  •  Why are the destructive NRA & NFL nonprofits? (0+ / 0-)

    Look at the best school systems around the world, like Finland, Singapore, Poland, South Korea. They spend very little money or time on sports. I played football and loved it - my high school sent us out of state for games when there were many high schools within 50 miles. Too many Americans worship the rich, the violent and the powerful, like Andrew Jackson. De Toqueville commented on this, but you don't find that in any of our approved history books who feel obligated to exaggerate American virtues and conceal our many faults.

    When is the last time that you heard a person campaigning for city council or state legislature asked if they would support using tax money for these stadiums? The Dallas Cowboys pay no property tax on their opulent stadium - whether they will pay property tax on their new practice facility hasn't been disclosed.

    We get what we ask for, we just don't want to admit it.

  •  Another Gloating Packers Fan... (0+ / 0-)

    We don't worry about new stadiums being built in LA.  We don't worry about the team being sold to an owner that cares about new stadiums being built in LA.  The Packers exist for one reason and one reason only, and that is to win championships.
      Visit Green Bay.  You'll quickly realize how vital they are to the economy.  Without the Packers, Green Bay is just another dying milltown in the midwest.

    I agree with most of the above about the evils of professional sports in general, but have to asterisk my beloved Pack.

    "What is being noticed is only an indication of what is being done." Albert Einstein 1954

    by tundraman on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:30:24 PM PDT

  •  what was needed, about 60 years ago, was.... (0+ / 0-)

    ... a federal law utterly banning the use of ANY (* ANY*) public money for the construction or maintenance of any professional sports facility, anywhere in the United States.

    •  Why? (0+ / 0-)

      If a state or local gov't decides that it's in the public interest to use public dollars to partially fund a sports facility, why should the federal gov't prevent it?

      Stadiums bring prestige and attention to states and locales, not to mention business and tax dollars. I personally travel from CA to AZ a few times a year to see professional football games, and when I do AZ and local businesses get a lot of money and taxes from me for hotel, restaurants, etc, that they wouldn't get ordinarily. Why should the federal government prevent them from being able to lure and retain professional teams by assisting in stadium costs?

      That being said, getting special federal tax breaks and statuses  is inexcusable. It should be up to the state and local governments alone to decide whether to use state and local tax dollars to subsidize teams if they choose so, and the voters can act as they see fit.

      "No children have ever meddled with the Republican Party and lived to tell about it." - Sideshow Bob

      by ThinkerT on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:47:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Well, it's not really a business. (0+ / 0-)

    It is an organization of separate businesses (the teams). The NFL does bring in revenue but it is distributed to the individual businesses which are taxed as businesses.  Think of it more as a marketing organization.

    To me, the outrage is low taxes on the rich, low effective corporate income tax and the damn subsidies. Man, I hate the subsidies. Why is it outrageous to tax people for schools but a-okay to tax people and give it to successful businesses?

  •  Here in LA, even as a football fan (0+ / 0-)

    (whose family had season tickets to the Rams for 40 years), I'm fine without a team.  I have a pick of the best games on TV every week.

    I now have a soft spot for the Packers: they can't move, they're owned by the City.  Perhaps thats the best model for pro sports.

    The most violent element in society is ignorance.

    by Mr MadAsHell on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 03:55:30 PM PDT

  •  kos Misses the Point... (0+ / 0-)
    Seriously, what a bunch of assholes.
    Yes, but the NFL is just one example of hundreds of corporate welfare/tax avoidance SCAMS.

    who allows and enables all of these scams?



    does kos or anyone actually believe these greedy jagoffs are going to avoid all of the tax loopholes congress created for them?

    Hah Hahhhh hahh!!

    "The 1% don't want SOLUTIONS; they've worked very hard the last four decades to get conditions the way they are now".

    by Superpole on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:05:00 PM PDT

  •  The NFL is non-profit, but... (0+ / 0-)

    ...each individual franchise is most certainly a profit seeking entity.

    But seriously: the stadium shakedown has got to be arrested. This is crowding out of other needed investments in most cities.

    Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. --Martin Luther King Jr.

    by Egalitare on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:11:01 PM PDT

  •  So what do we do about it? n/t (0+ / 0-)

    "We need institutions and cultural norms that make us better than we tend to be. It seems to me that the greatest challenge we now face is to build them." -Sam Harris, neuroscientist

    by MarthaPeregrine on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 04:13:11 PM PDT

  •  This stuff has been going on for a long, long time (0+ / 0-)

    Long enough that research has been published reporting that all this government cash used to support pro sports teams and their construction projects amounts to a great waste of tax dollars.

  •  Star a new league (0+ / 0-)
    Louisiana forcibly extracts up to $6 million from its residents’ pockets and gives the cash to Benson as an “inducement payment”—the actual term used—to keep [New Orleans Saints owner Tom] Benson from developing a wandering eye.
    How much does it cost to start a new league?
    6 mil. could be a start.
    Cut all the current owners and the NLF free.

    I would tell you the only word in the English language that has all the vowels in order but, that would be facetious.

    by roninkai on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 06:48:59 PM PDT

  •  All of this money.... (0+ / 0-)

    and the players still don't have guaranteed contracts. What is with the NFLPA???

    "I asked a man in prison once how he happened to be there and he said he had stolen a pair of shoes. I told him if he had stolen a railroad he would be a United States Senator." Mary "Mother" Jones

    by cg2482000 on Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 08:32:26 PM PDT

  •  Paul Allen (0+ / 0-)
    Average people are taxed to fund Allen’s private-jet lifestyle.
    1. That man gives back a BOATLOAD to the community. Yes, he's known for having his toys but you would too if you were worth as much as he is.

    2. I am pretty sure he could live his "private-jet lifestyle" without the NFL.

    3. Paul Allen could spend his days snuffing out puggle puppies on his front porch and he'd still be the most loved person in Seattle.

  •  Mr Browne was making $150 grand (0+ / 0-)

    (a month)

  •  Taxfree NFL (0+ / 0-)

    I realize a lot of people think of NFL football as a religion, but it is NOT, dammit!......... Baseball is.

  •  Me no like (0+ / 0-)

    Murcan football and the NFL and it has conjured the Roman Coliseum for as long as I can remember. Cheer when an opposing gladiator hits the Astrturf with a career-ending injury! It cannot go away quick enough. We need to use our tax dollars to advance our civilization not regress it.

  •  And the American Middle Class? (0+ / 0-)

    There isn't a word in the English language strong enough to describe my absolute disgust at this state of affairs.  If anyone should qualify for non-profit status it would be the American middle class.  I am livid!  I am furious!  I am enraged!  (No that's not it.)

  •  NFL's a non-profit, as much as it has toiled... (0+ / 0-)

    ...for decades to prevent debilitating injuries among its players, especially concussions!

  •  Could this posibly mean... (0+ / 0-)

    that football games are free? See ya at the Super Bowl!

    If they are non-profit, where does all that ticket money go? How do they pay those players?

    Trina L.C. Sonnenberg: Author Work is not work when you love what you do.

    by tlcpro on Thu Jan 29, 2015 at 10:31:54 AM PST

  •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

    And they are tax exempt!!  Why??

  •  Always thought Non-profit meant no one gets paid (0+ / 0-)

    I belong to a Non-profit Arts Council which is staffed by volunteers; no one gets paid a salary or a stipend of any kind. We operate by membership fees and provide many and various artistic exhibits along with workshops and helps to provide a scholastic scholarship to graduating High School Senior.
    This is my understanding of Non-Profit.

    So why then, do all the athletes and coaches get paid?
    Someone is pocketing the revenue without paying a dime in Federal Income Tax.

  •  David Cay Johnston (0+ / 0-)

    David Cay Johnston in "Free Lunch" diagrammed how virtually every penny the four major sport leagues in the U.S. made over the past decades was equaled by subsidies and gifts they received from local and state governments.  

    In other words - they broke even, but made billions of dollars from taxpayers.

    I love football, hockey, and baseball (basketball = "meh"), but cannot comprehend any scenario in which that situation is right.

  •  NFL Tax Free (0+ / 0-)

    I've read before that the NFL is tax-free.  Why?  I'm not a football fan but that's not why I oppose the tax-free status.  The NFL makes so much money!  The players make lots of money and the government pays them money to stay in their particular state or city?   Cut me a break!!!  The Tea Party, neo-Conservative chatter is rife with whining about government handouts.  Why haven't they &itched about this?

    I think football could be stopped.  The players' helmets could be donated to the police.  I always thought police should wear helmets in addition to bullet-proof vests.  Footballs could be repurposed as tires.  Crops could be grown on the football fields or the fields could be made into playgrounds.  Concerts and plays could run in portions of the stadiums.  

    That's my little dream for today.  I don't hate football but I think the NFL should pay taxes.

  •  Hence this petition (0+ / 0-)

    NFL Petition

    I signed it, indeed.

  •  The greed knows no bounds... (0+ / 0-)

    The NFL has decided that starting this year the halftime acts for the Super Bowl will have to pay them for the opportunity. No more expensive Prince or Bruce Springsteen for their fans, just whichever pop star that a label is willing to shell out for the publicity.

  •  Snopes says "yes and no" on this: (0+ / 0-)
    The key to understanding that exemption is realizing that it applies only to a small part of the NFL, the NFL League Office, and not to the dozens of individual teams who are football's primary money-makers.
  •  NFL petition - meh (0+ / 0-)

    this comes down firmly in the "DUH!" column, and to push for this is a cop out.

    If you want to rally for something, petition to change the DEFINITION of "not for profit":

    Add "No FAMILY can receive more than $200K in total compensation and benefits OF ANY SORT from ANY organization and retain it's "not for profit" status"  to include stock options, private jet rides, housing compensation etc.

    This would catch the NFL and all but the smallest most honest "churches".  Even many of the classically accepted "nonprofits" fail this simple test with their over a million per year CEOs.  If they are TRULY non profit, even their CEOs  would be more interested in their supposed purpose!

    •  Not so sure about this. (0+ / 0-)

      After all, many nonprofits are absolutely huge organizations.  Take the American Red Cross, for example.  Are you really saying we should limit the pay of its CEO to $200K in total compensation?  People who are qualified to run organizations that large will generally be able to secure other, more highly compensated positions elsewhere.  I get where you're coming from, but I'm wondering whether you're not setting the ceiling a bit low.

      Welcome to Daily Kos. If you have any questions about how to participate here, you can learn more at the Community Guidelines, the Knowledge Base, and the Site Resource Diaries. Diaries labeled "Open Thread" are also great places to ask. We look forward to your contributions.
       ~~ from the DK Partners & Mentors Team.

      "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

      by FogCityJohn on Fri Jan 30, 2015 at 04:08:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What Is Jindal Thinking (0+ / 0-)

    Louisiana is a poor Southern State. New Orleans is probably the poorest large American City. Just where does he get off spending a large sum on Entertainment? I pity any residents of the Lawless South who are on a giant slide back into the Third World. He is the Poster Boy of Bad Governance.

  •  Like the AAs (0+ / 0-)

    Like the media groups who want to use their money for something that they would as usual use it for. But make an outfit for it that they call non-profit to get out of taxes.
    So the individuals teams can funnel their money into this separate entity to pay for things they are going to pay for, pretend they aren't paying for it, and get out of taxes on that money. I used to love football. When my kids wanted to watch it with me and we couldn't go 15 minutes without seeing an advertisement for pills to get a guy hard, I decided I had watched enough.

  •  When I found out a few years ago that.... (0+ / 0-)

    the NFL was a "non-profit" organization, I totally quit watching their games.

    It makes me physically ill just thinking about it.

    I have signed every possible petition demanding the end to this foolishness.

    I have called and written to my Congressional representatives.

    It is you and me who are paying all those millions of dollars for these prima-donnas who beat up their wives, murder their friends, and cheat by letting the air out of the footballs.

  •  Non profit organization? (0+ / 0-)

    They got it even better than the Indian casinos.  

  •  Spell check (0+ / 0-)

    Great article - don't let the typo weaken your position.

    leading to absurd situations liket his one:

  •  Nonprofit ??? (0+ / 0-)

    Isn't this illegal?  Aren't there rules for becoming a Nonprofit organization?  Can't we just erase them off the Nonprofit list of Nonprofit organizations?  If I tried to become a Nonprofit organization, say, because I write good blogs, the Nonprofit people would just laugh at me.  Why are we so helpless when it comes to fixing this?  How did this happen in the first place?!!?  I know, I know, I just sound naïve.

skybluewater, Andrew Lazarus, SME in Seattle, claude, Alumbrados, Superskepticalman, Angie in WA State, buffalo soldier, Sylv, DeminNewJ, vicki, From the choir, Bill in Portland Maine, scribeboy, Odysseus, copymark, teacherken, Maudlin, misscee, Maxlongstreet, Danno11, Powered Grace, peglyn, greenbird, Shockwave, Wintermute, OLinda, eeff, xynz, frisco, RFK Lives, gjohnsit, Bob Friend, dpeifer1949, Creosote, agoldnyc, cfm, 88kathy, kalihikane, susakinovember, whenwego, undercovercalico, ehavenot, boadicea, mrblifil, farmerhunt, Rujax206, oceanview, Cedwyn, dylanfan, lirtydies, wader, Texknight, NMRed, kharma, tidalwave1, psnyder, TexDem, mrkvica, coconutjones, Tracker, Eyesbright, LordMike, wdrath, defluxion10, Catte Nappe, betson08, chickeee, riverlover, 2dot, sandyknauer, imicon, Oaktown Girl, nswalls, zerelda, Curt Matlock, WisVoter, ScienceMom, Black Max, sbg, rambler american, Josiah Bartlett, Longwing, sawgrass727, Gowrie Gal, weelzup, vcmvo2, historys mysteries, 3goldens, Tinfoil Hat, denise b, Ckntfld, ichibon, blueyedace2, caul, democracy inaction, wallys son, kefauver, stagemom, Brooke In Seattle, Left Coast Resident, Laurence Lewis, Kevskos, Claybow, eru, lennysfo, where4art, Inland, skyounkin, stevemb, markdd, lasky57, jeff in nyc, kaliope, SBandini, Tunk, Savvy813, sodalis, jilikins, Hannibal, mightymouse, Land of Enchantment, xaxnar, Mother Mags, third Party please, tarheelblue, tommymet, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, cybersaur, mr crabby, Gorette, cookseytalbott, AoT, KenBee, flygrrl, Knighterrant, Magnifico, greenearth, global citizen, erratic, twigg, gpoutney, Rosaura, el cid, middleagedhousewife, justiceputnam, BlueMississippi, CA Nana, Persiflage, lastamendment, doingbusinessas, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, suspiciousmind, kurt, Ian Reifowitz, Statusquomustgo, NancyWH, bstotts, nhox42, markthshark, Little, janetsal, NonnyO, BentLiberal, ladypockt, tegrat, old wobbly, FlamingoGrrl, walkabout, peagreen, oklacoma dem, camlbacker, devis1, ColoTim, Positronicus, Stwriley, puakev, FishOutofWater, Matt Z, terabytes, Dave in Northridge, mommyof3, newpioneer, malharden, MI Sooner, cyncynical, Fireshadow, millwood, carpunder, Got a Grip, leonard145b, TDDVandy, Assaf, Ralphdog, thewhitelist, TomP, Empower Ink, fb, stoneboat, MKinTN, rogerdaddy, seriously70, mconvente, gzodik, gfv6800, weegeeone, GAS, wayoutinthestix, poligirl, Sixty Something, mikeconwell, Lujane, rssrai, Cassandra Waites, Hanging Up My Tusks, carver, bakenjuddy, petulans, shigeru, mattc129, BYw, JamieG from Md, Quilldriver, rhutcheson, watercarrier4diogenes, tuckerm, JBL55, BvueDem, postalblue, bluebelle7, maggiejean, multilee, bluemoonfever, artmartin, MufsMom, J M F, Rick Aucoin, emboyo, banjolele, Nebraskablue, Norm in Chicago, imchange, indres, rbird, LibrErica, DefendOurConstitution, TheOpinionGuy, borndem, kevinpdx, Munchkn, DreamyAJ, stevenwag, sfarkash, jfromga, rebel ga, Larsstephens, Words In Action, ruscle, Railfan, rb137, LaughingPlanet, NJpeach, David Harris Gershon, piers, CS11, BenderRodriguez, Lost and Found, Garfnobl, NM Ray, Eddie L, ItsSimpleSimon, Kristina40, DrTerwilliker, kenwards, ericlewis0, Loose Fur, leu2500, Actbriniel, slice, annieli, Mike08, renbear, Maximilien Robespierre, cultjake, Dretutz, DrJohnB, slowbutsure, humanmancalvin, implicate order, jm214, valkyrry, hooktool, cv lurking gf, Mr MadAsHell, FarWestGirl, mikejay611, Teiresias70, trumpeter, Haf2Read, sethtriggs, thomask, Santa Susanna Kid, sonorelli, BarackStarObama, muddy boots, smoothnmellow, floridablue, Grandma Susie, MRA NY, marshstars, wintergreen8694, MuskokaGord, Be Skeptical, organicus, Liberal Mole, biloxiblues, cjo30080, Desert Scientist, blue aardvark, ratcityreprobate, Sunspots, stlsophos, imlpdx, Alfreda89, dradams, DRo, Mentatmark, caryltoo, jaebone, Cyndiannp, friendjudy, Mortifyd, Azazello, Porterhouse, Rejoinder, Sister Inspired Revolver of Freedom, Maggie33, wolf advocate, jacey, KansasNancy, anodnhajo, SparkyGump, molecularlevel, IndieGuy, Eric Nelson, nellgwen, tallahasseedem, Pootie, S F Hippie, a2nite, Deep Texan, Trotskyrepublican, FreeSpeaker, This old man, peachcreek, reginahny, MartyM, Buckeye54, marking time, notdarkyet, Rixar13, wxorknot, lollol, tytalus, jennyp, stvnjon, Glen The Plumber, George3, this just in, madcitysailor, BobTheHappyDinosaur, GoGoGoEverton, Ray Pensador, Lily O Lady, Tigger Too, MrBigDaddy, skinflower, gypsytoo, boudi08, JerryNA, howabout, helpImdrowning, Icicle68, Avilyn, solarbay, tampaedski, Ishmaelbychoice, BettytheBoop, Kimbeaux, Catkin, Ellen Columbo, starduster, skepticalcitizen, danjb, MID Gadfly, RUNDOWN, Tronsix2, eagleray, justaHippie, Liberty Equality Fraternity and Trees, SirReal, Kit RMP, Sonnet, RANDREWF, sillycarrot, kathybbb, Kalisiin, Here since 02, babyowl13, Miiiisha, ricklyoung, sherman54, Wildfaery, JourneyInside, Sandika, LOC2000, patjehlen, Gaia light, Cynthia Hobgood Strauss, Blackwolf53, mchaole, kay3295, kirkhansen9, HaroldPDX, kgoodwin1960, bill dog, Coco Puff, Antitheist, dhi, DeepNCrazy, Mrcynical, rfmaszczak

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site