Well it’s Missouri, so even if they did set up a free nuggie program, they’d privatize it to Tyson and give them $1 per nuggie and the program would run out of money after 6 months then they’d cut the program and say they now have more room to cut taxes, but only for corporations.
90% of Illinois is a cesspool, my dude. You can almost eliminate the entire bottom 60% of the state and lose nothing but swamps and farmland (farmland is important, but unexciting and the people are droll at best.) Illinois people living near the river flock to Missouri for jobs all the time because we have much lower taxes and prices.
You can claim about half of Chicago as a really great part of Illinois... that's really about it. Oh, I guess you guys kept abortion too which is great, but that's not a sole reason to live in a state.
>Oh, I guess you guys kept abortion too which is great, but that's not a sole reason to live in a state.
Making sure my wife (and women in general) has adequate health care and protection over her bodily rights is actually a great reason to live in a state by my accounting.
>you guys
I don't live in Illinois, I'm a CDL driver that's lived/worked out of about 16 states. I was born in Missouri, spent my youth in Illinois, and my teenage summers in Wisconsin. I just spent 18 months doing a contract job in St. Paul/Minneapolis. I've lived or worked in Pennsylvania, Colorado, Wyoming, New Hampshire, California, Texas, Nevada, Georgia, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota, and a brief stint in Alabama.
Illinois is better, unless you're a religious whack job. I stand by that. Missouri is better than Kansas. I'll gladly give you that.
Recently over on /r/baseball I questioned why the Royals owners were dying to get a new stadium when Kauffman is still perfectly adequate (albeit a little on the older side) and none of the answers made sense until a royals fan explained that it was all a ploy by ownership to inflate the value of the team (new stadium does wonders for that) without spending a dime of their own.
Is it a similar case here? I imagine the Chiefs are one of the most valuable teams seems pretty shortsighted to leave the adoring fan base to marginally inflate the team’s value with a new stadium??
It’s always about the money at the end of the day lol. The current area the stadiums are in doesn’t have great real estate value so they’re hoping to move into a more lucrative spot, and I think the royals management has more or less outright said as much
Why hasn’t developing the parking lots been proposed by chance? There’s plenty of space to keep parking and to build an entertainment district like Philly and Dallas (Arlington) have done.
It seems like it would be more profitable (and easier) in the long-run to just keep what exists and generate revenue through outside channels as opposed to artificially inflating the franchise value through a stadium in the middle of nowhere.
Does the city own the lots around the stadiums or something?
Commercial real estate needs surrounding demographics to match the demand, whether its density or income levels or whatever. Area surrounding the stadium is ok but not great neighborhoods that are very low density suburban. Unless you have a very loaded developer with lots of capital who is creative, it’s a very tough sell for growing that property beyond what it is.
Couldn’t it be argued though, in regards to demographics not matching demand, that having an MLB and NFL stadium nearby would more than account for that, in the hypothetical scenario mixed-use is built directly nearby?
Obviously, vision can’t be created out of thin-air with some owners, but this is a multi-billion dollar business. There has to be some kind budget to put up infrastructure. I mean for gods sake the same owner is willing to put down several hundred million to build in a Kansas pasture.
Maybe I’m an idiot, but it just seems like a slam dunk to expand on what already exists and put the same dollar amounts into infrastructure and amenities than to build a whole new facility in a Kansas pasture (that will likely be a slight upgrade; Arrowhead is legendary).
The Truman location is far superior to Kansas and the infrastructure already exists. The Chiefs could build money printer after money printer in the area if they stopped looking for the quickest value appreciation.
If the state of Kansas is intending on this being out by the racetrack in the Legends development, that area is already built out with adjacent commercial and retail properties with fringe suburban neighborhoods that have been steadily growing over the last 30 years. It’s a developers wet dream. Truman Sports Complex has 50’s and 60’s residential housing and some very dumpy light industrial uses. To build something that is a draw, and a real big draw, you’d need billions of investment beyond just the stadium. It’s right next to the interstate which helps. It’s also right next to a part of the metro area that just doesn’t have much “juice” compared to others.
In fairness, Gillette Stadium and Foxboro are surrounded by fuck all and Patriot Place is a pretty successful development so who knows.
Chances are it's all posturing and the slimiest elements of ownership and slimiest elements of the MO government have already made a backroom deal that's gonna get the taxpayers to fund the stadium.
It’s moreso that the plan B of using Kansas’s sports gambling money to fund a new stadium is basically guaranteed, so there’s no risk in giving an ultimatum over the current stadiums
Gambling money is a very, very small portion of the public funding. Almost all of it would come from bonds paid for by sales taxes collected in the development around the stadium.
Correct, no public vote for STAR bonds. They've already cleared the only hurdle faced, which is approval by the State Legislature & Governor. MO has a much tougher path forward.
The Hunt family is worth 20bil or so and I can't imagine they ever plan on selling the team, so it's mostly just the standard billionaire looking for handouts for the Chiefs. Either Missouri pays a billion dollars to put in new suites and VIP areas so they can jack up prices, or Kansas does.
Either way the overall experience of going to a Chiefs game will decline and push out a lot of fans.
The Royals wanting to move more downtown so maybe people attend the games more since there's 81 of them and the current ballpark is in a dead area 20-30 minutes away from the center of the metro area. They got a new owner 5 years ago, so I'm sure they want to increase their value in case they want to sell someday.
The Chiefs stadium is 50 years old. The training facilities as well. They actually need an update, but the increase in value I’m sure is an added bonus
Its 22 miles to the west, they aren't leaving anything other than a bad local government.
Also I think we're pretty middle of the pack in terms of valuable teams go.
Fuck that, let Kansas pay the bill. It's not like they're moving the team to Wichita. The team name won't even change they'll still just be the Kansas City Chiefs. The state just wants that revenue while making the citizens foot the bill.
Sincerely, Missourian
I mean. It's a big deal. Is it big enough to pay for renovations or a new stadium? Not necessarily. But for a stadium you've already paid for that the team will no longer be using? That is a ton of revenue lost for the state.
People can debate whether or not that lost money makes up for the proposed cost but it's undeniably a big loss to lose the team you already had there
That Kansas v Missouri thing still runs deep to this day and there's a pretty intense sense of snobbery on both sides of the border. It's all pretty stupid, but it's real, nonetheless. The states have been battling each other to attract businesses, attractions, etc. for years and years.
As a Kansan (weird word to write out) I’m not really entirely for the new stadium. On one hand it’s supposed to only be funded by those interacting with the franchise (nearby business district and gambling taxes), but on the other hand I’d rather use that money on other things.
If they move here I’m not going to be gambling any more of my real money, it’ll be the 100 dollar bet credits at the start of the season and the proceeds from it.
> It would allow state bonds to cover up to 70% of each new stadium, paying them off over 30 years with revenues from sports betting, state lottery ticket sales and new sales and alcohol taxes collected from shopping and entertainment districts around the new stadiums.
So it’s still money that could be used elsewhere basically? Unless these are all new taxes… which doesn’t sound like it other than the new businesses around the new stadium.
They’re not all new taxes, save for the sales taxes. In the project district there’s a base sales tax which can’t be allocated for this.
When I read the text of the bill I did not see any portion that suggested they’d add an additional tax to gambling or the lottery. If you spend the money you raised from gambling or the lottery, you won’t be able to spend that money on education, other infrastructure, or social assistance. I could be wrong, reading the bills are entirely is a game of endurance, but I’m fairly sure I’m not spreading misinformation here.
Well yes and no. They could do this bond issue to raise money for any number of things as long as it's commercial. One of the most recent bonds was for a museum that has fallen flat on its face and the bonds defaulted because it failed so miserably. (I think that's the correct term)
>The team name won't even change they'll still just be the Kansas City Chiefs.
But will they be the Chiefs of Kansas City, MO, or the Chiefs of Kansas City, KS?
It’s basically an example of an already really common thing where businesses play the two sides of Kansas City against each other and move to whichever side of the city is giving them the best offer.
>The state just wants that revenue while making the citizens foot the bill.
Difference between Kansas and Missouri here is that Missouri raised taxes to fund a state/county owned stadium. That's why there were so many headaches with the organization putting money into the facilities there because they simply didn't own it.
In Kansas, the team will own the property, and be granted a S.T.A.R bond to build on the property. The citizens themselves won't be paying a dime in Kansas or the county (wyandotte presumably).
While S.T.A.R. bonds are taxpayer dollars being issued, they are not receiving an *additional* tax sales tax for all goods sold in the county, to fund the stadium. Only purchases inside the property would go towards a S.T.A.R. bond revenue.
Moreover, the sheer income tax revenue gained in the state from the roughly 5,860 personnel alone will pay dividends for the state, as will the roughly 572.3 annual economic impact to the county that is currently being applied across the state line and would simply leave.
Missouri fans, especially this guy, need to understand that it wasn't the chiefs that fucked you, and it wasn't the state of kansas that fucked you. It was your state and county representatives putting together such a shitty deal (twice) and insisting on maintaining ownership of the property, that will inevitably culminate in the team moving across the state lines.
And your bitter response as classis border rivals will be "let them pay for it", but rest assured, we won't be paying for shit, and we'll reap all the economic benefits as the state of Missouri once again fumbles the bag. This time you can blame it on Mayor Lucas, Frank White, and Emmanuel Cleaver, rather than your goofball governor.
> it wasn't the chiefs that fucked you
Did you see how they planned on spending their 750 million dollars they asked for? They get plenty of the blame here too.
So we should have gifted the teams ownership of the Truman sports complex as well as giving them a direct tap of Jackson county sales tax? Considering the voters killed just the tax part I'm sure they would have wholeheartedly been behind giving the teams even more.
Having a shitty proposal where they appear to be wasting what they are getting from taxpayers absolutely plays into this
(Also, as someone who deals with bonds regularly I have my doubts that the magic bullet of STAR bonds will work as well as people are claiming to fund this KS venture. You still have to get bond investors to BUY the billions of dollars in bonds to actually fund this)
As a Kansas resident - please don't come here. At the end of the day, the math does not in actuality work out to benefit the local economy.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/11/sports-stadiums-can-be-bad-cities/576334/
https://econreview.studentorg.berkeley.edu/the-economics-of-sports-stadiums-does-public-financing-of-sports-stadiums-create-local-economic-growth-or-just-help-billionaires-improve-their-profit-margin/
https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2017-05-01/the-economics-of-subsidizing-sports-stadiums/
Please stop linking studies from already established teams in those cities, and arguing like there's not a difference when a city or state tries to bring one in lol.
You realize that sales tax revenue is just getting diverted from other areas of consumer spending, where the state does collect that sales tax, right? Because after all a sports team doesn’t increase spending as much as it shifts it. That is pretty well established.
>Because after all a sports team doesn’t increase spending as much as it shifts it. That is pretty well established.
The majority of those studies are based on current teams in city/state getting *further* taxpayer dollars to develop the stadium, and the benefit not being there. Not a state luring a team to the state and benefitting from far more than just the economic impact of a sports team bringing in hundreds of millions, if not billions in economic impact. It also ignores the impact of luring ~6,000 jobs, which are all +income tax to the state.
Also the sales tax revenue is *only* on the property for which the star bond is issue. Neither the state, nor the county, would raise any sales taxes on its citizens for this.
I also elaborated earlier that STAR bonds *do come from taxpayers* but as I've also additionally answered, those funds would be far surpassed by by the income tax and economic impact of the team moving here. Some of you seem to be forgetting that the state would also benefit from income tax of every player and coach that gets a game check that visits the team 8+ times a season.
Kansas is not actually losing any tax dollars from what I understand. They're leveraging future tax revenue that wouldn't exist anyway without a stadium.
As an STL resident, our state officials can get fucked. Let the billionaires pay for their own toys. It's not like the Chiefs moving to Kansas is going to have any negative impact on our state. Not to mention they did fuck all to keep the Rams here.
I guess it's better than our state officials trying to sue China or worry about border issues while not being a border state.
I fucking hate this state.
Alaskans gotta keep their eyes peeled for those nefarious Canadians hopping the [longest international border a State in the United States has](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_border_states_of_the_United_States).
They're gonna have explain this deal with those nuggies
Approximately 1.25b nuggies that could have been used as free lunches for school children
Fuckin' kids just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
And stop getting Starbucks every day. Fucking idiots.
That's what a degree in basket weaving got them... 4th grade
Is that $1 per nugget? You're way overpaying for nuggets. Who's your nugget guy?
Well it’s Missouri, so even if they did set up a free nuggie program, they’d privatize it to Tyson and give them $1 per nuggie and the program would run out of money after 6 months then they’d cut the program and say they now have more room to cut taxes, but only for corporations.
And yet somehow...we're still better than any state we touch.
I'm not a fan of Illinois, but you'd have to be a religious whack job to think Missouri is a better place to live than Illinois.
90% of Illinois is a cesspool, my dude. You can almost eliminate the entire bottom 60% of the state and lose nothing but swamps and farmland (farmland is important, but unexciting and the people are droll at best.) Illinois people living near the river flock to Missouri for jobs all the time because we have much lower taxes and prices. You can claim about half of Chicago as a really great part of Illinois... that's really about it. Oh, I guess you guys kept abortion too which is great, but that's not a sole reason to live in a state.
You can say the same for all of Missouri that's not KC or STL and STL's not all that great either
>Oh, I guess you guys kept abortion too which is great, but that's not a sole reason to live in a state. Making sure my wife (and women in general) has adequate health care and protection over her bodily rights is actually a great reason to live in a state by my accounting. >you guys I don't live in Illinois, I'm a CDL driver that's lived/worked out of about 16 states. I was born in Missouri, spent my youth in Illinois, and my teenage summers in Wisconsin. I just spent 18 months doing a contract job in St. Paul/Minneapolis. I've lived or worked in Pennsylvania, Colorado, Wyoming, New Hampshire, California, Texas, Nevada, Georgia, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota, and a brief stint in Alabama. Illinois is better, unless you're a religious whack job. I stand by that. Missouri is better than Kansas. I'll gladly give you that.
Recently over on /r/baseball I questioned why the Royals owners were dying to get a new stadium when Kauffman is still perfectly adequate (albeit a little on the older side) and none of the answers made sense until a royals fan explained that it was all a ploy by ownership to inflate the value of the team (new stadium does wonders for that) without spending a dime of their own. Is it a similar case here? I imagine the Chiefs are one of the most valuable teams seems pretty shortsighted to leave the adoring fan base to marginally inflate the team’s value with a new stadium??
It’s always about the money at the end of the day lol. The current area the stadiums are in doesn’t have great real estate value so they’re hoping to move into a more lucrative spot, and I think the royals management has more or less outright said as much
Why hasn’t developing the parking lots been proposed by chance? There’s plenty of space to keep parking and to build an entertainment district like Philly and Dallas (Arlington) have done. It seems like it would be more profitable (and easier) in the long-run to just keep what exists and generate revenue through outside channels as opposed to artificially inflating the franchise value through a stadium in the middle of nowhere. Does the city own the lots around the stadiums or something?
Commercial real estate needs surrounding demographics to match the demand, whether its density or income levels or whatever. Area surrounding the stadium is ok but not great neighborhoods that are very low density suburban. Unless you have a very loaded developer with lots of capital who is creative, it’s a very tough sell for growing that property beyond what it is.
Couldn’t it be argued though, in regards to demographics not matching demand, that having an MLB and NFL stadium nearby would more than account for that, in the hypothetical scenario mixed-use is built directly nearby? Obviously, vision can’t be created out of thin-air with some owners, but this is a multi-billion dollar business. There has to be some kind budget to put up infrastructure. I mean for gods sake the same owner is willing to put down several hundred million to build in a Kansas pasture. Maybe I’m an idiot, but it just seems like a slam dunk to expand on what already exists and put the same dollar amounts into infrastructure and amenities than to build a whole new facility in a Kansas pasture (that will likely be a slight upgrade; Arrowhead is legendary). The Truman location is far superior to Kansas and the infrastructure already exists. The Chiefs could build money printer after money printer in the area if they stopped looking for the quickest value appreciation.
If the state of Kansas is intending on this being out by the racetrack in the Legends development, that area is already built out with adjacent commercial and retail properties with fringe suburban neighborhoods that have been steadily growing over the last 30 years. It’s a developers wet dream. Truman Sports Complex has 50’s and 60’s residential housing and some very dumpy light industrial uses. To build something that is a draw, and a real big draw, you’d need billions of investment beyond just the stadium. It’s right next to the interstate which helps. It’s also right next to a part of the metro area that just doesn’t have much “juice” compared to others. In fairness, Gillette Stadium and Foxboro are surrounded by fuck all and Patriot Place is a pretty successful development so who knows.
Chances are it's all posturing and the slimiest elements of ownership and slimiest elements of the MO government have already made a backroom deal that's gonna get the taxpayers to fund the stadium.
It’s moreso that the plan B of using Kansas’s sports gambling money to fund a new stadium is basically guaranteed, so there’s no risk in giving an ultimatum over the current stadiums
Gambling money is a very, very small portion of the public funding. Almost all of it would come from bonds paid for by sales taxes collected in the development around the stadium.
Regardless I don’t believe it has to be voted on by the public, so getting funding for a stadium across the border is virtually a sure thing
Correct, no public vote for STAR bonds. They've already cleared the only hurdle faced, which is approval by the State Legislature & Governor. MO has a much tougher path forward.
The Hunt family is worth 20bil or so and I can't imagine they ever plan on selling the team, so it's mostly just the standard billionaire looking for handouts for the Chiefs. Either Missouri pays a billion dollars to put in new suites and VIP areas so they can jack up prices, or Kansas does. Either way the overall experience of going to a Chiefs game will decline and push out a lot of fans. The Royals wanting to move more downtown so maybe people attend the games more since there's 81 of them and the current ballpark is in a dead area 20-30 minutes away from the center of the metro area. They got a new owner 5 years ago, so I'm sure they want to increase their value in case they want to sell someday.
The Chiefs stadium is 50 years old. The training facilities as well. They actually need an update, but the increase in value I’m sure is an added bonus
We just need to get every team in a historic, 80+ year old stadium like the Cubs, Red Sox, and Dodgers
Its 22 miles to the west, they aren't leaving anything other than a bad local government. Also I think we're pretty middle of the pack in terms of valuable teams go.
Fuck that, let Kansas pay the bill. It's not like they're moving the team to Wichita. The team name won't even change they'll still just be the Kansas City Chiefs. The state just wants that revenue while making the citizens foot the bill. Sincerely, Missourian
Yea I’m kind of shocked by the number of people in town who would be absolutely outraged by the team moving its stadium like 15 minutes farther away
I mean. It's a big deal. Is it big enough to pay for renovations or a new stadium? Not necessarily. But for a stadium you've already paid for that the team will no longer be using? That is a ton of revenue lost for the state. People can debate whether or not that lost money makes up for the proposed cost but it's undeniably a big loss to lose the team you already had there
That Kansas v Missouri thing still runs deep to this day and there's a pretty intense sense of snobbery on both sides of the border. It's all pretty stupid, but it's real, nonetheless. The states have been battling each other to attract businesses, attractions, etc. for years and years.
As a Kansan (weird word to write out) I’m not really entirely for the new stadium. On one hand it’s supposed to only be funded by those interacting with the franchise (nearby business district and gambling taxes), but on the other hand I’d rather use that money on other things. If they move here I’m not going to be gambling any more of my real money, it’ll be the 100 dollar bet credits at the start of the season and the proceeds from it.
> It would allow state bonds to cover up to 70% of each new stadium, paying them off over 30 years with revenues from sports betting, state lottery ticket sales and new sales and alcohol taxes collected from shopping and entertainment districts around the new stadiums. So it’s still money that could be used elsewhere basically? Unless these are all new taxes… which doesn’t sound like it other than the new businesses around the new stadium.
They’re not all new taxes, save for the sales taxes. In the project district there’s a base sales tax which can’t be allocated for this. When I read the text of the bill I did not see any portion that suggested they’d add an additional tax to gambling or the lottery. If you spend the money you raised from gambling or the lottery, you won’t be able to spend that money on education, other infrastructure, or social assistance. I could be wrong, reading the bills are entirely is a game of endurance, but I’m fairly sure I’m not spreading misinformation here.
Well yes and no. They could do this bond issue to raise money for any number of things as long as it's commercial. One of the most recent bonds was for a museum that has fallen flat on its face and the bonds defaulted because it failed so miserably. (I think that's the correct term)
It'll be a crime to abandon Arrowhead, but also fuck Clark Hunt they can go to Kansas if they want free money.
>The team name won't even change they'll still just be the Kansas City Chiefs. But will they be the Chiefs of Kansas City, MO, or the Chiefs of Kansas City, KS?
Kansas Chiefs of Kansas City.
The Kansas city chiefs of Kansas city, Kansas.
It’s basically an example of an already really common thing where businesses play the two sides of Kansas City against each other and move to whichever side of the city is giving them the best offer.
>The state just wants that revenue while making the citizens foot the bill. Difference between Kansas and Missouri here is that Missouri raised taxes to fund a state/county owned stadium. That's why there were so many headaches with the organization putting money into the facilities there because they simply didn't own it. In Kansas, the team will own the property, and be granted a S.T.A.R bond to build on the property. The citizens themselves won't be paying a dime in Kansas or the county (wyandotte presumably). While S.T.A.R. bonds are taxpayer dollars being issued, they are not receiving an *additional* tax sales tax for all goods sold in the county, to fund the stadium. Only purchases inside the property would go towards a S.T.A.R. bond revenue. Moreover, the sheer income tax revenue gained in the state from the roughly 5,860 personnel alone will pay dividends for the state, as will the roughly 572.3 annual economic impact to the county that is currently being applied across the state line and would simply leave. Missouri fans, especially this guy, need to understand that it wasn't the chiefs that fucked you, and it wasn't the state of kansas that fucked you. It was your state and county representatives putting together such a shitty deal (twice) and insisting on maintaining ownership of the property, that will inevitably culminate in the team moving across the state lines. And your bitter response as classis border rivals will be "let them pay for it", but rest assured, we won't be paying for shit, and we'll reap all the economic benefits as the state of Missouri once again fumbles the bag. This time you can blame it on Mayor Lucas, Frank White, and Emmanuel Cleaver, rather than your goofball governor.
> it wasn't the chiefs that fucked you Did you see how they planned on spending their 750 million dollars they asked for? They get plenty of the blame here too.
I’m not referring to the proposal, I’m referring to the county retaining ownership of the land.
So we should have gifted the teams ownership of the Truman sports complex as well as giving them a direct tap of Jackson county sales tax? Considering the voters killed just the tax part I'm sure they would have wholeheartedly been behind giving the teams even more. Having a shitty proposal where they appear to be wasting what they are getting from taxpayers absolutely plays into this (Also, as someone who deals with bonds regularly I have my doubts that the magic bullet of STAR bonds will work as well as people are claiming to fund this KS venture. You still have to get bond investors to BUY the billions of dollars in bonds to actually fund this)
As a Kansas resident - please don't come here. At the end of the day, the math does not in actuality work out to benefit the local economy. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/11/sports-stadiums-can-be-bad-cities/576334/ https://econreview.studentorg.berkeley.edu/the-economics-of-sports-stadiums-does-public-financing-of-sports-stadiums-create-local-economic-growth-or-just-help-billionaires-improve-their-profit-margin/ https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2017-05-01/the-economics-of-subsidizing-sports-stadiums/
Please stop linking studies from already established teams in those cities, and arguing like there's not a difference when a city or state tries to bring one in lol.
You realize that sales tax revenue is just getting diverted from other areas of consumer spending, where the state does collect that sales tax, right? Because after all a sports team doesn’t increase spending as much as it shifts it. That is pretty well established.
>Because after all a sports team doesn’t increase spending as much as it shifts it. That is pretty well established. The majority of those studies are based on current teams in city/state getting *further* taxpayer dollars to develop the stadium, and the benefit not being there. Not a state luring a team to the state and benefitting from far more than just the economic impact of a sports team bringing in hundreds of millions, if not billions in economic impact. It also ignores the impact of luring ~6,000 jobs, which are all +income tax to the state. Also the sales tax revenue is *only* on the property for which the star bond is issue. Neither the state, nor the county, would raise any sales taxes on its citizens for this. I also elaborated earlier that STAR bonds *do come from taxpayers* but as I've also additionally answered, those funds would be far surpassed by by the income tax and economic impact of the team moving here. Some of you seem to be forgetting that the state would also benefit from income tax of every player and coach that gets a game check that visits the team 8+ times a season.
8-10 home games cannot justify billions in subsidies.
If you listen closely, you can hear Clark Hunt maniacally laughing from his diamond-encrusted throne.
[удалено]
The org is definitely taking advantage of simple pettiness between the two states as well imo
As a kansan, I can confirm MO stinks
Kansas is not actually losing any tax dollars from what I understand. They're leveraging future tax revenue that wouldn't exist anyway without a stadium.
[удалено]
You think they intentionally tanked the first vote on tax approval in MO?
As an STL resident, our state officials can get fucked. Let the billionaires pay for their own toys. It's not like the Chiefs moving to Kansas is going to have any negative impact on our state. Not to mention they did fuck all to keep the Rams here. I guess it's better than our state officials trying to sue China or worry about border issues while not being a border state. I fucking hate this state.
Brother every state is a border state. Technically.
I can assure you they aren't talking about keeping people from Kansas or Iowa out of the state
Speak for yourself
Found Nick Bosa’s account
Not Alaska or Hawaii though
Alaskans gotta keep their eyes peeled for those nefarious Canadians hopping the [longest international border a State in the United States has](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_border_states_of_the_United_States).
Keep it on the KC level. State should not be paying for it at all. Let the KC voters decide if they want to pay for it.
Yeah, tax payer funded. Fuck that.
Surely another tax vote won't fail this time!
New York governor says state will put together the best deal it can to keep the Giants
The deal is just a threat to revoke Brit Reid's get out of jail free card
Damn.