Tuesday, March 14, 2006

I just don't understand. . .

why this falls to the government.
WSFA - Montgomery Water Park Not a Done Deal
If developers want to build a water park in Montgomery (or anywhere for that matter) let them, but why should the local government pay for construction? I really don't understand. The article says:
Four developers have expressed interest in operating a water park at Gateway. But in order to make a profit, they need the city to pay the up-front costs.
What I don't get is why they should be able to make a profit off of something the city builds. I know that cities often build stadiums for pro sports teams, and some are comparing it to the building of the baseball stadium,
"When you look at baseball in Montgomery, there were a lot of nay-says who didn't see the vision," said council member C.C. Calhoun. "Now look at the development downtown behind baseball."
Maybe there is some room for government spending it stimulate the economy; I am familiar with Keynesian economics, but I just don't understand things like this. I really don't even get why the city should pay for stadiums and equating a water park to a baseball stadium is quite a stretch in my opinion.

It is my understanding that the city doesn't even pay for new roads in a new subdivision, nor do they even maintain them for the first 6 months to a year, but these developers think they should have millions paid for them, up front, so that they can make a profit on a water park? Do we believe in liberal capitalism or not? I think if the government is building it, it should be like a public park, either free or usable at minimal cost, not something that private owners make a profit from.

At least it seem that at this point it not going to happen.
The mayor and some city council members say they feel obligated to finish Gateway as planned.

"A vast majority of people in the neighborhood had input on the way this plan was put together," the mayor said.

Ok, I'm done ranting . . . for now.

No comments: