On balance, public subsidies for professional athletic organizations in the United States benefit th

I would assume that my opponent has experience in actually debating this case, which should make this fun! In this speech I'll be outlining my points. On balance, public subsidies for professional athletic organizations in the United States benefit their local communities. I affirm this resolution for the following four reasons: Sports stadiums offer job opportunities Sports stadiums allow players and leagues to pay taxes which benefit the local community Sports stadiums have alternate uses Privately funded stadiums are ineffective at the above benefits Contention 1: New sports stadiums create a multitude of jobs. According to the Associated Press, the Dallas Cowboys AT&T Stadium has created more than 4,000 part and full time jobs. In 2011 when there were concerns of a cancelled NFL season due to a work stoppage, activist James Parks concluded that more than 115,000 jobs across the country could be lost due to this one disagreement. Parks also stated that the average NFL team employs 3,739 people, and without stadiums there is not a need for these jobs. The creation of stadiums also employs thousands of construction workers. According to Mortenson Construction, the first year of construction of the new Vikings stadium alone will supply 1,600 construction workers with over 900,000 hours of employment. Nearly 300 million in wages will be paid in the operation of this stadium. According to the International Convention of Sports and Leisure, the economic activity caused by the new stadium will generate over $26 million a year in tax dollars and over $145 million from spending by Vikings fans in Minnesota. In comparison, the state only expended 348 million in the construction of this stadium. Contention 2: Professional athletes and leagues pay an exorbitant amount of money in taxes. In 2013, federal taxes owed by football, basketball, and baseball players exceeded 3 billion dollars, averaging over a million per player. While the NFL is exempt from taxes, its 32 franchises are not. Team clubs contribute 4.3 billion taxable dollars annually. In comparison, the public sector has only invested 7 billion in stadium subsidies in the past twenty years. This means that in the past 20 years, taxes from team clubs alone have contributed 79 billion more than the public sector has invested. Most of tax dollars end up benefiting the local community with the construction of roads, and the improvement of public education also provide health care and emergency services. Contention 3: Sports stadiums offer alternative uses. Many stadiums are used as shelters during natural disasters. 10,000 people took shelter in Qualcomm Stadium during forest fires in California. This was similar to the use of the Reliant Astrodome during Hurricane Katrina, where 25,000 evacuees took shelter. Stadiums can also be used as public venues for concerts and academic tournaments such as MATHCOUNTS. Approximately 140,000 students attend these competitions annually, and nearly all of them are held in sports stadiums. Cultural festivals are held in stadiums as well. For example, NRG stadium recently held the Junta Hispa"a Culture Festival that reminds citizens of the richness of their culture. The International Gem and Jewelry Show will be held in NRG stadium, along with the Houston Wedding Showcase, not to mention the annual Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo. This rodeo contributes over 320 million regional dollars annually. In this way, stadiums improve the happiness and education of their area, as well as promoting safety and improving public morale. Contention 4: Privately funded stadiums, considered an alternative to public stadiums, cannot be built in optimal locations. Due to the eminent domain law, only the government can confiscate private property for public use. Therefore, privately funded stadiums cannot be built in occupied locations that would have positive economic outcomes. According to a study by Arthur C. Nelson at the Georgia Institute of Technology, "If a decision has been made to construct a stadium, locating it in the CBD will probably generate greater economic benefits than locating it in the suburbs; indeed, if the facility is built elsewhere, it may lead to localized blight that dampens the MSA share of regional income. " For these reasons, I affirm that public subsidies for athletic organizations are needed. I'll use the second and third round to respond to my opponent's arguments.