Why Should the State Own Wrigley Field?

Lynne Kiesling

There is no economic model that can support the state buying Wrigley Field. The sports economists have to pay some attention to this one. It all stinks to me of political gambit. Heck, Wrigley sells out most games, and that’s even when the team’s having a crappy year. I am not persuaded by the argument that Wrigley’s renovation requires so much capital that it exceeds the levels of private investment that a private owner can undertake.


3 thoughts on “Why Should the State Own Wrigley Field?

  1. In this case, given that the state’s entrance into this discussion is perfectly timed with the desire for a sale of the private structure (and the new owner’s desire to recoup some of said cost in the form of naming rights), it appears as if the desire to keep the ‘pristine, noncommerical’ name of the field (har har) should perhaps motivate the state to purchase the naming rights once the building is sold.

  2. Here is a fun thought. Think back to SimCity (and many other computer games where you manage civilization growth). You as the ruler, or government, have to build entertainment to keep the citizens happy and productive. Are we all being sneakily programmed for this sort of government spending?

Comments are closed.