I agree with T.J's response on the funding for college sports teams. Seeing as I play women's soccer here at Towson, I can relate to how the soccer program here falls short compared to other teams in the CAA. We are one of the only teams in the conference to still not have lights on our field. The men's soccer team went to the second round of the NCAA's and you would think they would get some kind of reward for it. We've heard rumors of a total reconstruction of the facility but those results probably will take place long after we all graduate. Most of the funding goes to the "popular" sports like Football and Basketball. It's a shame that the soccer program can't even get the so called basics, but they can fund big screen t.v's and leather couches for the Lacrosse locker room.

In response to Kat, sports in the state of PA is a way of life. Having spent time in Philadelphia, for three years, I saw people sell their homes to get season tickets. It is a way of life. It brings happiness and does create additional revenue to areas that typically are run down. Since the new stadiums have been built in PA the only team that has not won has been the Pirates. Which is a testament to the owners not the city of Pittsburgh. If you look at it from a monetary perspective, I am sure the city of Pittsburgh has benefited from having PNC Park.I disagree that subsidies only helps those that need it least. By keeping the Pirates in Pittsburgh, the city has hosted two all star games and in my opinion has contributed to a resurgence in the downtown. To isolate your question Kat, who are subsidies supposed to help. In my opinion it is the fan.

As Chris said micsongy1 brings up an interesting point. It is in our human nature to make as much money as we can. That is how society has told us to be and this trend will be virtually impossible to change.

i totally agree with micsongy1's opinion on neoliberalism and how it is the american dream to make as much money as we can. He or she is right, we all want to be the best but you dont start out day one as the CEO. I also agree and mentioned in my response about how neoliberalism creates jobs, and as stated by micsongy1 they might not be high paying but they are jobs!

I agree with mgenn1 comment that neoliberalism concepts help create competition in our society and influence people not to give up and to do their best. I also agree that Neoliberalism gives people the economic capability for a new beginning. Neoliberalism created these big sports teams, that we love. It created the big business that we want to own. The money that we all strive to make. People dream to work hard, and one day own a pro sport franchise. So we can make as much money as possible. In someway, the concepts of neoliberlism says this is possible

I think that Drew brings up a good point about the New York Giants and Jets stadium. I agree with him that the citizens in New Jersey who are in poverty would have much rather recieved money to help relieve their struggles that see these two teams get a new stadium.

In respones to Justin's post, I disagree with million dollar state subsides going to professional sports teams. The money is supposed to go towards benefitting the economy but only helps those that need it least.

I agree with Andrew Offsey. He talks about how many things affect a city and the rebuilding of that city( exmaple he talked about the concert at MSG after 9/11) and neoliberlaism and sports are just a small part of that.

I agree with the idea that Mike V. had that corporations should not use their fans, but at the same time its an unrealistic goal to me. Major corporations will always be using someone to better themselves and I think that no matter what, there will always be someone spending their money on the products of the major corporations. They do appreciate their customers, with incentives and deals, but it only causes us to ignore how much we are taken advantage of until another time.

After reading more about neoliberalism, i still cannot help myself to think that starting to rebuild the Superdome in New Orleans first was a bad idea. Although, after reading some points made by my class mates, i think that maybe Tom Benson, the owner of the Saints, could have spent some of his fortune to help rebuild it instead of receiving the whole $500 million. Also, included in that could have been the other extremely wealthy business men in N.O.'s helping out also. It's not illegal for the rich to help the poor in a time of need.

This weeks post was great, looking at the differing opinions emerge. I still stand strong by what I said, that I cant support a team that takes funds that could be used to improve school system that is in dier need of the money. But to look yes at the short term I can agree with some that the constuction of the stadium at least for the short term to supply jobs in the DC area that arn't currently there, but still thats not enough.

I agree with Marc. Who is benefitting from us spending several hundred dollars to our favorite sports teams. It's not like we know them personally. Our money could be going towards things that would be more beneficial.

I beleive L. Mcafee said it perfectly. I agree with everything in his comment because he or she is right; todays society is extremely competetive, and one must vend for themselves. The Saints were Americas team last year and will continue to be for a while. I dont beleive with all the releif donations from Hurricane Katrina, that the majority went to the rebuilding of the Superdome. I remember watching stories on the news how most of the people down there were taken great care of, a lot got new homes, etc. These companies spend lots of money marketing their products, but unlike I said in my comment, I realize like L. Mcafee said it is one vs. society and its up to them to succeed.

A little late because I didnt realize that it is the same thing we do every week. All of that aside, I know Ryan asked us to watch the game and think about everything that goes on behind the scenes, but because I am so used to watching games and just cheering play by play, my mind always just thinks about the next play and whats going to happen. When watching temas like the New York Yankees, it is very easy for me to take a step back and think about everything because they spend rediculous amounts of money. I did think about how all that money in New Orleans went to rebuilding the Superdome while watching the game on Thursday, and how unfair it is how there are thousands still homeless, but its so hard for me to see other sides of things when I dont really want to. I am finding it interesting being informed of topics such as the money issue in New Orleans, but I have never really wanted to do anything but enjoy the games. As consumers of the sports, we dont think about what our money is actually supporting or where its going. People need to realize more and more not only in sports, but in charity donations, etc. where our money is going and who it's actually benefititng. I have never understood the fact that these companies pay millions of dollars for thirty second commercials, and how unneccesary it really is. I guess they do all the calculations and its proven it helps revenue, but there are so many other places where this money would go much further in a better way.

I agree with mike manely with what he was saying about the new standiums in New York. What kind of favors are these new stadiums doing for us. The answer is nothing if they don't bring revenue for the city or state and little to the consumer then why are we putting our money up for these stadiums. Mike just had really good points about this topic.

I have to say that I agree with C Brown in the way that it has always been that the big sports are required to make the majority of money for entire universities as well as high schools. The only thing that I have to say is that even though the main sports like football and basketball receive most of the funding from educational facillities it is given to them for a reason. Those are the big money making sports. So volleyball takes a back seat or any other minor sport, there wouldn't be those sports if not for the sports that make money. Funding for equipment isn't picked from trees, I mean those minor sports don't make the money to buy all of their equipment so I feel as though people should be thankful that their sports are there even though they take a backseat.

*and i just realized i spelled necessarily wrong

i will agree with andrew that it is not necesarrily the fault of the owners who want to build the new stadiums. Because it is their money and they can do what they want with it. My issue with neoliberalism goes to the government because our government is supposed to work for the people but it really only works for certain people. The people with all the money.

I have to say that the strongest point I have read in these posts was the one made by verina79 about giving millions of dollars for a sporting stadium when there are other, bigger, problems such as the lack of funding for education ou there. Why is it that the children living in the same place the new stadium is being built cannot be given up to date books or computers? In the long run it will be the generations that follow that will be at a disadvantage because of the greed of people who already have the money. And lets be honest do they really need more??

In my opinion companies that prosper should be able to gain contracts with whoever they feel. They started from the bottom and worked their way to the top. In our socitey anybody can accomplish that. This is why I don't always get the concepts of neoliberalism. I know that most cities give money to the sports community to help the poor, but also it's a way to keep the communtiy in good hands.

I also agree with Andrew about how the 9/11 concert at MSG was a positive action. Sometimes it takes events like that to bring the people up and get their spirits high so they can keep on keepin on.

I agree with T.J. Thompson's comments concearning the negative effects of neoliberalism here at Towson. Men's soccer was one of the most successful teams here at Towson in the past few years yet when the field house was built lacrosse, football and field hockey were given the new facilities. Football and lacrosse are are pretty much top sports at Towson. Lacrosse is just so big in Baltimore and Towson is trying to become a huge football school. Many are unaware but Towson's field hockey team does not even play games or practice at the facilities. Every day they have to travel to Villa Julie to practice and compete because the new turf was put down in the stadium and field hockey can not play on that surface. Due to the fact that field hockey is not considered a top sport here at Towson that brings in a ton of money, they got shafted. This is a perfect example of the negative effects of neoliberalism.
Another comment about the article by Merrell, I found it shocking that more people watched the Superbowl then voted in the 2000 presidential election. This shows our society's priorities and how we can get so sucked into sports and forget about important things. While neoliberalism does help to bring excitement in most cases and money, I am starting to see the negatives more clearly after reading others comments. With it being 9/11 today I have to touch on the NY concert that was for those who are being remembered for their heoric efforts. I also agreed with Andrew Offsey about the NY concert. While it was to honor those who helped and died, many questioned the true intentions of the concert. Was it to make money or was it really to honor those who died on 9/11? If it was just strictly for the moeny being brought in, this is another example of the negative effects behind neoliberalism.

I found Mike V.'s response to be very interesting. Nike a huge corporation exploits an intense rivalry between two soccer teams and makes a significant profit. Needless to say that the product Nike is selling does not even include team colors. This is a prime example of huge corporations marketing well and taking advantage of consumer vulnerability.

I agree with retz23 for the most part. You do not have to spend a lot of time in the inner harbor on game day to see the money that those two stadiums bring in. And, more parts of the city other than the Inner harbor are getting better. When organizations are marketede during NFL games retz23 says that they are always made out to look good. That is true, but if your marketing something do you think their going to make it look bad. It is ones own responsibility to investigate the organization themselves before supporting it. And one last thing about the homeless guy on the street, he might have the best marketing campaign out of them all for the need of money but he has nothing to give back as Art Modell and Peter Angelos do. (Ravens Super Bowl XXXV brought tons of money to Baltimore)

I agree with Chris Black and he has basically the same views on Neoliberalism that I do. I feel like with neoliberalism very much of the wealth and money is kept up with the rich and stays there, as opposed to being put to better uses like those who need the money. On the other hand though, places like Yankee Stadium really do help a city to prosper. I did not consider that a positive outcome of this would be the opening up of jobs for several people who may need work to make money.

I agree with the positive side that andrew took about the 9/11 concert at MSG and how that has helped people cope with the tragedy. But on the negative side I think building new stadiums, such as the meadowlands as drew and myself talked about, when they arent needed, can hurt a community rather than help it.

I have to disagree with Mike V, I do not think big sports corporations are taking advantage of their fans, but I do feel that they could give a little more back to the community.

I agree with Ashley about how the rebuilding of a new stadium can boost morale and bring people together. In times such as today where our nation is at war, has had a natural disaster destroy an entire region, people need to be brought together and support each other. Sports is an excellent example of how this can be done.

Frank has some good points. I mean i don't think sports are supposed to help poor people but because people have a lot of money people point the finger at sports. People don;t think for themselves and sports was not designed to help with everything but it does what it can while trying to be operational

i believe with a that people make choices in everyday. If you can't afford something or don't like it, don't buy it. Its talking about opportunity cost from micro and macroeconomics. People make decisions with time, and money all the time and this effects where it goes. Does anyone force you to go or watch a game? No but you choose to. The guys at the top have a lot of the money and the guys down here at middle class and students the dream to get there. The decisions in life can help you get there with luck. Thats why i think neoliberalism isn't as bad as people think.

i Do agree with some of the points c Brown says about athletics and neoliberalism. They definitely have priority over schedules compared to other students. College universities are also a suspect in the matter but thats the way life seems to be as everyone wants as much money as it can. However without the university getting as much money from students coming to Towson and people spending money on the school with sports, would the university really have the resources it could have in benefiting overall? Don't forget the athletes don't get a dime unless they make it to the pros and cant do endorsements or whatever. It isn't a perfect system but it seems to do a good job keeping people motivated to stirve to get more money which means harder working.

I also agree with T.J. about how if you aren't the main sport you don't get the same funding. It's very upsetting to not see very many fans at our soccer or volleyball or field hockey games. But it's because we don't put very much effort at all into advertising those sports. Maybe if we advertised more, they would have more fans, and maybe have more of a willpower to win. All of this would bring in more revenue for the school.

Neoliberalism has become very common in sports today, and it very much has its share of positives and negatives. Yet at the end of the day the negatives outweigh the positives. We live in a world where money equals power. The place I see it the most is here at Towson University itself. Athletics are a big source of revenue for many colleges and universities, and Towson is no different. We thrive on our money making sports: football and basketball. The more games we win, the more money we receive. So, it�??s no surprise that the President of our college told our basketball coach that this year we need to win at least 20 games. Not just so we can feel proud but so that we can bring in more revenue. This revenue is what will help with the renovation of the Towson Center arena, which will begin in spring 2008. Because then if we can make the arena better then we can bring in more fans to watch the games. It is a never-ending cycle of making more money. But the funny thing to me is one of my professors told me that the Kinesiology department was promised a new building, but it keeps getting pushed back because of the stadium and arena renovations. Education doesn�??t seem to be a very high priority. Also, I don�??t know if many of the students notice but when choosing classes, all of the athletes get priority over the other students. So, even the seniors who need these classes to graduate have to wait until the athletes have set their schedules. What does that say about our university? If our seniors were bringing in revenue for the college then maybe they could have priority. Money is at the center of everything and the more money you have or bring in the more power you have. That is how I see neoliberalism in sport today.

I agree with T.J. on his comment about how some sports do not receive the same funding as other "popular" sports such as football and basketball. This is the same case all around Maryland in many area high schools, where an athletic department may receive a new stadium and rubber track, but the school itself still may be using books from the 1970s for English class, or the soccer team itself may be playing with leather balls still. Just because a football team (for example) may contend or even win a state championship, doesn't mean the school itself should place the education or other opportunities for students in the background.

As a sport fan it is always hard to look at the �??other side�?� of sports that in which is behind the scenes and neoliberalism. There are both positive and negative aspects to this idea of neoliberalism in the sports world. A positive affect of neoliberalism is that it has created job openings and making the �??American Dream�?� possible. However I do believe that neoliberalism is always changing the world of sports and those involved.
As we mentioned in class, wealth is power; the more wealthy you are the more powerful you are and the more say you have. As I was watching the Ravens and Cincinnati game tonight I began to think who is actually benefiting from these new and over the top stadiums. It is just becoming outrageous! An average middle class citizen is lucky if they can even afford to go to one football game in a season. With ticket prices ranging up to 250 dollars for a decent seat how can you go. The question a lot of sprots fans including myself are asking is where is all this money going? The answer is simple; it is going to the owners and other affiliates who are only getting richer and richer. These brand new stadiums are being built for millions of dollars and it is not benefiting anyone except the owners and the players. I guess we should just let the poor get poorer and the rich get richer.

In response to micsogny, have to disagree with the concept of neoliberalism being good. How can you agree that giving someone 500 million dollars is good business skills. I think it is simply political and given to him to benefit the people behind to team. I don't think you should be given a government subsidy when there are thousands of people who have been affected by the same tragedy that reap no benefits at all. How many houses do you think could have been built with 500 million dollars. I don't think that you wouild consider that the owner of the saints "earned" that fairly, as would be the basis of free competition.

Ashley Pirro mentioned that the 500 million dollar stadium in new orleans was a good idea becuse it helped boost morale. Well, if I was a resident of New Orleans, who had just been devistated by a hurricane, I sure as heck am not going to any football games, and if you ask me, I think I would appreciate 500 million dollars in new homes and rebuilt communites than a single stadium that is generating money for the already rich.

I have to say that it is interesting to look at sports as anything other that a sporting event. I have to admitt that I have never done anything but "watch the game." However, it is funny to think about the behind the scenes of a sports game. It is amazing to think of the revenue generated from a single sports game. It is almost imposible to comprehend the amount of money surrounding a single sports team, from the players salaries, the coaches salaries, owners salaries, merchandise sales, ticket sales, etc. Its is also amazing to the amount the highest paid individual in a sports company makes as comapraed to someone who sells hot dogs at the stadium. The income differences is enormous, yet justified.

On the issue of neoliberalims, I have to agree that it does have a negative effect on our society. I think many americans want to believe that open competittion is good for our economy and for the "american dream." I would have to disagree. I would bet to say that there are not any people wtih the same caliber of the Bill Gates, Hiltons, Waltons, Fortune 500 owners, sport teams owners, etc, that have made it without an advantage. To make it to that level of wealth is nearly impossible if not at all. Many "regular" people who have made it through the ranks are few and far between, and many have made it on sheer luck.

Several months ago my brother and sister had this same conversation, with my sister in favor of free competition and my brother opposing. My sisters argument is that if McDonalds wants to sell food that leads to the obesiety of the American society, it should be allowed too. It should be up to that individual to make the decision not to eat the greasy big mac. However, agreeing with my brother, I think that our environment does play a huge part in our way of life. I think that these big companies market to a certain demographic simply to play on their sheer lack of knowledge or social disadvantage. The big question is why is the kid selling drugs on the corner walking around in Nike's and name brand clothes, when they can't even read and write. Its because they are victims of their environment, and this is what they are tought by society.

In class, we talked about the funding of a stadium costing about 500 million dollars, yet there are beggars and homless people outside the front doors. How can a society accept this. Why aren't peolple standing up against these social injustices? My 7 year old daughter attended the Baltimore City Public School system for two years. The tragic environment that my child had to endure are beyond belief. Upon walking into the school, the stinch of urine is the first thing I noticed, then the lack of books, computers, gym, was what I found in her classroom, not to mention the fact that the delapatated building and chairs and desks that looked like something my grandmother would have used. However, just ten minutes away to the better aeras such as mount vernon or caton, these condidtions were not the same. And yet we pay 500 million dollars on a stadium, pay elected politicians, sports players, and CEO of big corporations millions of dollars a year, and call it equal.

So I have a solution. Send all of their children to the inner city schools under the same conditions. How soon do you think they would last.

Neoliberalism, being a dominant political �?? economic force in our society can be a good thing, but in this situation it seems to be doing nothing more than making the rich richer. We read a slide in class relating to the new stadium that will be built in DC; the government has �??agreed to subsidize a new baseball stadium, in Anacostia which will cost at least 500 million dollars with the possibility of at least 700 million.�?� Being a resident of Maryland and an Education major I know the terrible shape the DC schools are in these days. How, can a city put money into a stadium which as Ryan stated, will not make the city any money, while schools are suffering. For example, �??2 billion dollars are needed to fix and repair their poor conditions.�?� The Owners of the Washington Nationals are robbing the children of DC of a proper education. These kids are reading extremely out of date texts, and the physical states of the schools in some cases are purely disgusting. I am a baseball fan but I can�??t support something that takes much needed funding away from DC area schools. If the Nats are playing at RFK right now and the stadium is still in working order is it really necessary to take away money that could be put to good use for the construction of a new stadium? When the owners of the Nationals say they are going to shell out the money needed to fix DC schools I might consider supporting the decision to build a new stadium.

I agree dominant socio-economic theory exists in every facet of sport, and as Ryan stated absolutely can be characterized by hyper-competition and marketing. If you look at it specifically in the deregulation of markets such as lowered taxes and increased subsidies for corporations there are a few specific examples that apply to sport. The state of Pennsylvania for one has built four stadiums with tax payers money, which to be honest I do not have a problem with because it may be the only way these teams can keep up with the larger markets and continue to exists. This has turned out to be a billion dollar subsidy to keep these teams on the playing field. I do believe it has worked as the Steelers, Eagles, and Phillies have all been very successful and compete at a very high level. The one exception is the Pittsburgh Pirates.

The Pirates have one if not the best stadium in baseball, but are in the process of racking up their 15th straight losing season in a row. One might say how in the world does this happen, the truth is I do not have a clue. I feel it is stealing. There have been two All Star games to pump up the cash flow, countless sky blasts, and bobble head nights, but no winning teams. The Pirates finally this week fired their most current gm Dave Littlefield, who took the post July 31, 2001, and his teams went a combined 442-581, never coming close to .500.

The owners of the Pirates have basically duped the state of PA out of hundreds of millions of dollars all in the name of turning a profit. What the people of Pittsburgh have been able to count on over the last 15 years have been one of the lowest payrolls in baseball and a team on the playing field comprised of substandard talent. It�??s about time the Pirates ownership spent some money like the other teams who received subsidies from the state of PA and spend the money they have been banking for 15 years and put a quality team on the field.

Basically there are times where it is necessary offer subsidies in order to stimulate growth, the real question are subsidies to professional sports teams on par with giving subsidies to standard business models?

Neoliberalism has many positive aspects to society, Neoliberalism creates jobs, wealth and diversity in our society. The concept helps Toyota, Ford and BMW meet in the US and other markets around the world. It promotes the free market so everyone has sometime of chance to make what they can of themselves in the world. If you work hard in America you can also have wealth and power. Neoliberalsim allows stadiums to be built for the community. Tom Benson one of the richest men in New Orleans got 500 millions to repair his stadium. I would call him a good business man, If my car broke and someone will fix it for free, why not take it ?.That is smart business to cut overhead cost and still get the job done. Exxon makes billions of dollars every year. People do not invest in Exxon to see it operate at a loss. It creates the American dream, buy low and sell high ,and make as much money as we can. Neoliberalism is competition like in sports, Coke wants to sell more than Pepsi. We all want to be the best. The athletes want to win championships and big business want to make a huge profit. The greater the profit the greater the win. There are no company�??s that try to operate, to make a loss. Neoliberalism creates jobs for stadium workers, vendors , and surrounding areas. The jobs may not pay much, but it still creates a job. Everyone does not start out by being a CEO. It creates a free market, if you want to work their you can, and if you don�??t, go some where else. We all have a choice on how we can profit and win. Our society is trained to win, every man for themselves. Mark Cuban owner of the Dallas Mavericks got his millions from a free market by creating his own system to broad cast basketball games over the internet. Kevin Plank owner of Under Armor was not wealthy a person, due to Neoliberalsim and a free market, he had the opportunity to create himself great wealth. The rich may get richer but, Neoliberalsim allows regular people to have an opportunity to have great wealth..

Another example of the negative effects of neoliberalism lies within Towson University athletics. Since I have been at Towson the men's soccer team has been one of the most successful teams in the school. The problem is that the program is funded and promoted well below the standards of other teams in the Colonial Athletic Association conference. I say this is an effect of neoliberalism because neoliberalism is the reason why the athletic funding to mainly go to the "money" sports (football and basketball). While the soccer team gets the shaft because soccer is just not important enough in this country. So at a school like Towson where the funds are limited it only makes sense in the neoliberalistic system that the funding goes to the money making sports. But because of our society's high value on those sports the soccer program does not recieve the support it reasonably deserves. This is a problem that applies specifically to Towson. There are plenty of college soccer teams around the country that do get the funding they deserve. But at this school the athletics department wants so much to have good teams in the "money" sports that it forgets about the good teams that it already has. Although I do not have the financial numbers at hand I'd be suprised to see that these "money" sports actually bring in a profit for the school. Nonetheless in this country it is much more profitable for the school to have a good basketball and football team so who cares if some of the other athletes suffer along the way?

First off let me say that the Colts are awesome!! I think that there is a lot behind each game and especially behind the season opener. The fact that the owner of the Saints who is wealthy, had to raise the 500 million dollars to repair his stadium from the very people who were homeless has been a popular topic and has made the idea of neo-liberalism more apparent. I think that neo-liberalisn is everywhere in sport. It�??s in the advertising and marketing of it and as well as the advancement of sport. With companies like Nike and Under Armour dominating the market, I have often wondered where the difference in price from Nike and say New Balance or Reebok goes. It certainly doesn�??t go to their workers overseas. I can imagine a huge chunk of their revenue goes to the faces of Nike, their higher-ups. Advertising and marketing would get a good amount as well but it is the people that do the hardest and �??dirtiest�?� work that receive the least amount of compensation. This to me embodies the neo-liberalism idea of �??every person for themselves.�?� As much as we love sports and put our time and money into we tend to forget where our money goes. The money we spend on tickets, which can be outrageous, jerseys or anything else they put our team logo on, goes into the pockets of the already wealthy owners. They charge what they do to make money for themselves first and then others after.

I'm not sure I quite understand all of the details of neoliberalism but there are some points that I feel I understand to a limited extent. The first is that of "Trickle Down Economics." From what I understand of this theory, those with the money are supposed to invest in things that will eventually cause give the lower classes some kind of return on the work that they are doing. An example of this which we have talked about in class is the $500 million that has been given to the New Orleans Saints to rebuild the Superdome and "give back" to the New Orleans community. From what Ryan has said, stadiums never benefit the sity economically and even ideas such as restaraunts, store owners, and hotels benefitting apparently do not give back at all to the people. Do those people with little money to support themselves benefit from spending $50+ on a single ticket to a football game? I wouldn't think so. The hope that the city gets from a situation like this seems to be a lost hope in the way that the people of the city are never going to see any of the money or have thier lives improved, especially after such a tragedy that came upon New Orleans. The people deserve more than what they have been given and those who have the ability to change should do something other than investing in a stadium that in the long run will only benefit themselves and never give the people the support they think they have been given.

In my opinion neo-liberalism has its ups and downs, but the issues presented tend to be more negative than positive. For example, the wealthy and high powered businessmen and companies portray the M&T Bank Stadium and Camden Yards to be these highly positive attributes that they are not. Two positives about them are that they created more job opportunities and having two major sports team in the city brought a sense of pride and community in downtown Baltimore. However I feel that the damaging effects that these two major businesses bring out way the positive attributes that I have mentioned. Most people tend to think that having these two stadiums in Baltimore brings in large revenue for the surrounding businesses on game days. But you must remember, just like what was stated in the blog, there are only about 88 game days out of the year. It is the other 277 days that don�??t bring in the same class and amount of people who can afford to go to the games in these two stadiums.
After sitting back to think about the advantages the neo-liberal system has on the already rich and powerful, I have thought of a few different points. One that I find to be very dominant is the competition of marketing. Businesses try so hard and spend so much unnecessary money on making their advertisements the best. Sure everyone loves a cool commercial, but think about how much money the company uses for its production and what that money could have gone towards to help others in the city, other than making the powerful richer. This in an example of radical individualists. They are only trying to help themselves and it clearly leads to the deceitfulness of �??trickle down wealth.�?� This so called �??trickle down wealth�?� that large companies have a positive effect on the lower level of society is an overstatement. In the end it only ends up benefiting the people it came from. This in turn makes it even harder and harder for class movement.
Overall I think that there are many unrecognizable factors of neo-liberalism that I have yet to learn, but from what I understand so far, its overall negatives out way the positives it has on society.

I agree with Alex Levine. When he comments on how sports owners got to where they are by hard work. Also how everyone is capable of doing something if one wants to. If one works hard eventually they can climb the latter to the top.

I am also having a bit of trouble trying to grasp the fact of neoliberalism, but I'm going to give this my best try .I feel that although neoliberalism has many negative aspects, it also has just as many positives. I know that neoliberalism is there to create wealth and competition. I understand that neoliberalism mainly benefits the top of the chain or elite and disregards the lower portion of society. At the same time though, I feel that a team owner, such as George Steinbrenner of the New York Yankees is helping its city greatly by building a new stadium. The construction of the new Yankee stadium is creating many jobs for our economy. In fact, the construction is creating 6,500 jobs for the completion of the stadium in 2009. It has also been addressed that the city New York will spend a million dollars on job training for lower class New York residents who are less privileged. The job training will provide assistance in teaching the residents construction work. Once the stadium is opened, there will also be an addition 1,000 jobs in concessions, working in the suites, as well as the restaurants in the stadium. The city of New York is providing a 200 million dollar budget to create parks and recreational services surrounding the stadium. This could be argued that New York is supporting neoliberalism by not helping the poor in these areas but I feel the creation of the stadium will give the area a new positive feel. Neoliberalism is something our country is runs on and will continue to run on, and while there are many negative aspects it also offers many positive outcomes.

Neoliberalism and sports are two seemingly different concepts, yet in today�??s society I see how they correlate more than you would expect. From the concept of Neoliberalism, I agree with the point that every person is out for themselves. I believe that people no matter what socio-economic class they are born into, can overcome adversity and can make something of themselves as long as they are willing to work for it and may be meet a few people with the right connections along the way. It may take a lifetime but it is something that can be accomplished. The American dream is how you could phrase it. I know the percentage of those that overcome their circumstances is lower than those that succeed but I still believe in it.

In the business of sports, the large corporations are making the big money while athletic programs in our communities and schools are getting cut or under funded. At my high school, gym was only required for one year because there wasn�??t enough equipment for all the students, the school had less than 1,500 students. A theory from Neoliberalism is that the few with great wealth will let the prosperity trickle down the social chain and the economy will be better for it. The thought behind this conjecture is full of good intentions; however in actually, the poor rarely see the drop of a dime and the exceedingly small percentage of the upper crust become even more affluent. The professional sports leagues charge an arm and a leg for merchandise and stadium seats, which fund the millionaires that own the teams and the overpaid players. Meanwhile, stadium cleaning crew makes less than $8/hour. The monetary funds of the sports industry are not distributed evenly; the rich do not send enough of the wealth down the socio-economic tiers. This is why there is such a limit on those at the bottom of the socio-economic pillar. Yet again, they can still surmount difficulty and construct a beneficial future.

As has been similar with several other people�??s responses, I find it difficult to take only one side of the argument on whether Neoliberalism is a good or bad thing. It was hard for me and so far in the early stages of this course, it has been hard for me to look at sports as critically as we have been. As a sports�?? lover and an athlete myself I have never been forced to look at sports from a different perspective. I must say though that I lean towards the idea that neoliberalism holds more of a negative impact on a society. I do not doubt that it is something that is needed for the progression of creating things such as Ravens Stadium or Orioles stadium. I also know how important sporting events like, for example professional football games, are to people and society as a whole. I am someone who has grown up and been around sports my entire life and yet, in this progression to try to see things from a different angle, I am starting to see how something like neoliberalism holds this negative outlook towards sports. I understand that hosting games and having great, lavish stadiums creates a good reputation and promotes a city and its sports teams. What is frustrating to me is where all that money that people constantly spend on buying tickets or buying food at games goes. It is the common trend of keeping the money with the rich and ignoring places where it could be going, like to Baltimore city public schools or families who are living on the streets. Being on a sports team here at Towson, I was forced to sell those raffle tickets which were $20 a piece. For my teammates and I, trying to sell those was an incredibly difficult process, and the most frustrating part was being forced to buy the ones we were unable to sell. I had one friend of mine have to spend $300 of her own money on unsold raffle tickets. It is just unbelievable that we spend thousands of dollars to get an education here, yet clearly that is not enough to continue to support our own teams. I have no problem with fundraising, but to make it come out of students�?? pockets is ridiculous, where we don�??t even see the results of all that spent money.

I feel neoliberalism contributes in a positive way to society. As discussed in class, there are four main aspects that help define neoliberalism as a whole. They are: having no government regulation, free market is the soundest choice to benefit everyone, having economic freedom gives people political freedom, meaning money is power, and lastly every individual for themselves. These concepts help create competition in our society and influence people not to give up and to do their best. I feel most importantly that the economic standpoint represented by neoliberalism is most crucial. Having the ability to create more wealth as individuals helps society as a whole. Generally, this refers to the richer people making more money to help sustain society, investing more to build more and create more job opportunities. Promoting bigger business help build up society for the less fortunate people who are not capable of doing so on their own. From the article I read on neoliberalism, this is referred to as �??Trickle Down Economics,�?� where the rich share the wealth with the poor. This would be similar to feeling the effects of a waterfall. A prime example of neoliberalism is the rebuilding of the New Orleans Saints stadium. After hurricane Katrina hit, the majority of the city was destroyed, leaving many families homeless. Citizens needed shelter and a connection with each other. It was widely recognized that the most important step in helping the most people was to get the stadium back to normal. At first, I thought it was ridiculous that the Saints got a ton of money to rebuild their stadium. After rethinking and rekindling my thoughts it made more sense to me. It seems today that a majority of interaction revolves around sports. Sports are a great engine for reinvigorating urban blight. Sports also help bring together people and unite them as one. When New Orleans was destroyed there were plenty of people that went to the stadium for protection and a place to stay. Although the city was destroyed the stadium helped bring together a wide diversity of people for humanitarian reasons. Private and public enterprise was called on to feed and sustain this burgeoning population. The New Orleans Saints played a vital role in New Orleans. Chaos ensued before the team was able to play in New Orleans at their home stadium. The city was in mayhem. When the stadium was finished getting rebuilt and the team could return to their home town New Orleans received a figurative shot in the arm. It felt whole again. The New Orleans Saints helped bring back culture to there city. The New Orleans Saints�?? comeback brought back a safer, more relaxed and optimistic atmosphere to New Orleans. This is a prime example of how neoliberalism is effective. When the stadium got rebuilt it gave many people opportunities to get their jobs back. It was a morale booster too and gave the people hope that they could reclaim their community
It brought people of all color together, all walks of life, and all economic strata to rebuild what had been their home. Disaster is impartial to rich and poor alike. Economic aid was coupled with restoring social justice, which in turn, resuscitated economic growth.
Eventually, New Orleans would be whole again. Expanding job opportunities, training, increased education and housing options all serve to stabilize and promote economic strength. Economic capability gives people a new beginning and the confidence to change the social and political system around them. Eventually, with people feeling more empowered and local governments responding more to community and individual needs, society in general and New Orleans in particular will become stronger and stable.

I feel as though I am torn about the idea of neoliberalism. I disagree with some of its concepts but find myself realizing how people could agree with the ideas of neoliberalism. After all the main point of neoliberalism is to expand the economy and make more money. A lot of people have discussed Katrina and the Superdome that was renovated while there were people left homeless and starving. Most feel that this is a conflict of interest and morally wrong. They think how can one worry about a �??game�?� when there are people that were left with nothing. I am on the fence about this idea because while I do feel bad that people were left homeless, I can see the excitement that was brought to the city of New Orleans last season when the Saints made it to the playoffs. My older brother was at the opening game in New Orleans when the Superdome was revealed and told me the emotion and energy in that stadium was electrifying. The mascot of New Orleans, being the �??Saints�?� was a little ironic, due to the fact that a Saint is similar to a savior.
There will always be poverty in our world. Suppose the Superdome was never rebuilt and the millions of dollars that would have been spent on the stadium went to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. This sounds great, however who would decide who gets the money and how much. Why is one person on the streets of New Orleans any different from a victim of the tsunami? It�??s a difficult question to answer which is why neoliberalism will always exist. This brings up the idea of every man for themselves and the �??American Dream�?�, people rising up from �??rags to riches�?�. My father has such a greater appreciation for things he buys because he was one to �??live the American Dream�?� and rise from the bottom to the top. Surprisingly, he agrees with the concepts of neoliberalism because he feels if he can do it then anyone should be able to.
There is a fine line between what I agree with and disagree with however, the one idea that I do agree with is everyman for themselves. I agree with this because I know nothing will ever just be handed to you. Everything is so competitive today weather it is in the classroom or on the football field; it really is you against the world. There are some that are unfortunate and were dealt a bad hand but it is how they deal with their situation.

In response to Drews comment, I agree that a 1.3 billion dollar stadium is absurd. If we have this much money to invest on a football stadium why can't we think to spend it more wisely. Maybe on education or even decreasing poverty. Although drew brings in a good argument, i still believe neoliberalism is both positive and negative. If we can afford this 1.3 billion dollar stadium in the long run our economy must be doing something right, for now.

Basically in my eyes neoliberalism is an emphasis on economic growth. Obviously it depends on the society you live in to be determined that of a neoliberal. However since we live in the United States and we have an immense emphasis on economy we can be considered a neoliberalism society. Many will argue that this idea of neoliberalism is negative or positive toward society, but I believe it is both. Now for the negative aspect toward neoliberlism I must talk about the utmost argument. This argument involves the rich and poor. Neoliberalism states that the characteristic of trickle down economics exists within. This trickle down idea basically means that the wealthy share with the poor. Many people would disagree with this statement. The wealthy owners of sports and sport teams are always wanting more whether it would be from getting new stadiums to paying a ridiculously amount of money to get athletes. Not once do I hear about the owners or GM�??s giving back to this community. There are more poor people in the U.S. than any other country. One third of these owners�?? salaries could let poor people live the �??American Dream�?�. If we as a society just realized what is more important we could easily decrease poverty. If neoliberalism says trickle down economics exists then why are there still poor people on every corner I pass?
On the other hand, I also believe neoliberalism has positive aspects. According to the reading Neoliberlism, �??The United States has always understood its mission to be, in part, economic. As much as people fled to America seeking religious freedom, they also sought economic opportunity.�?� I couldn�??t agree more when saying that people from foreign countries come over here for the economy and the �??American Dream.�?� The United States is the richest nation in the world and has one of the top economies in the world. This idea of neoliberalism allows the U.S. to focus on the economy more than other cultural aspects. In doing so, it gives people from all over ample opportunities to make a living and survive. Within the sports industry there are an abundance number of jobs out there. You don�??t have to be the best wide receiver in the world to make that �??cheddar.�?� There are jobs from making equipment to cleaning the equipment. These jobs are not typically very demanding or rewarding but it allows many people to have jobs, make minimum wage, and survive. Sports is an astronomically industry that is worth billions upon billions of dollars. I think we can find a place to put people in to make a living.

The economics involved in sports is a complicated affair, and there is both positive and negative aspects for society. Some positive aspects are possible increase in business activity. The justification often used for public money going into the stadium because it will increase taxes bcecause it increases economic activity. The public justification for putting public money into sports arenas and other sport activities is that it increases buisness activity and thereby increases taxes. So some tax money should go into the sport world, but this justification does not take into account that the money spent on sports would still be spent on business activity, just on another kind. This other business activity may generate as much or more taxes than sports activity.
It seems to me that it is very difficult if not impossible to get an accurate estimate of how much tax revenue would be generated in either case. So the justification is not valid until this is done. If the principle on which tax money is allocated is economic activity then all buisness activity should share in the tax proceeds, not just sports. The justification for collecting and using taxes should not be reinbursed or subsidized to those activities that generated the tax; it should be for supporting those activities such as schools or roads that the whole city depends on.
The rich often get rich because they are better at generating economic activity and profits, and their investing their riches benefit themsleves but also benefit society by creating new buisness activity. No business should be subsidized unless that subsidy generates more tax revenue then the subsidy or if the business is being paid to preform services that the city needs. Taxes represents a taking from everyone so they should be used to benefit everyone directly or indirectly.

I agree with Francesca Terrano. The building of the New Orleans stadium seemed like the wrong move to make because there were too many other problems that needed to be solved first. But after thinking about it, everyone in that area was so mentally messed up. Many people felt alone, afraid, and scared. The fact that this stadium was put up, it gave New Orleans something to be proud of, something to smile about, and realize they are not alone. It was a way to come together as one and be proud to be from New Orleans. I think that is what it's all about. The sense of hope and reassurance that everything is going to be okay. Therefore, I think it was a good thing that the money was put into the new Stadium.

Neo- Liberalism is a very tricky argument because it can really go either way. I personally would lean more towards this dominating socio-economic society being more of a positive thing. I love sports in every way, the competition, the sense of belonging, pride, and the excitement of your favorite team winning a huge game. These sport owners got to where they are because of either a lot of hard work, or luck. Either way, they are up there and we are not. Everyone, whether you are homeless, middle class, or rich should be able to do what they please. To clarify, I think that everybody has their own life to live and work for, and if these rich owners want to advertise and market their team to make more money, then so be it. We all can think for ourselves and if you cannot afford to buy something then don't buy it. I guess some people make it seem like all of us "average" people act like mice and these corporate owners have cheese on a string waiting for us to latch onto it. I think it is completely up to each person whether they want to buy season tickets to the ravens or purchase the most popular players jersey. In terms of taking our Tax dollars to make stadiums, I think it helps to really bring people together in a city. There can be a lot of crime in a city, or a disaster such as Katrina that can seperate a city, but once all of these people enter a stadium all rooting for their team, it becomes a giant family. Neo-Liberalism is important for society to stay together instead of floating apart, even if it does benefit a few higher class people. I can't complain everyday that I am not as rich and powerful as some people are, but rather be happy with what I got and continue to root for the teams I love and go to sporting events because it makes me happy.

Neo-liberalism is proving to be a hard concept to grasp and I'm not having much luck either. I can see the benefits it has for American society as easily as I view it's down-falls. Neo-liberalism does provide new economic opportunities but that can only go so far. I easily find the negatives outweighing the positives. After reading, "Life in the Fast Lane" by Matthew Benjamin, I questioned some of the intentions of NASCAR. One of their main ideas that will soon take place is the building of two new tracks in Seattle and New York (Staten Island) in an attempt to move them to a higher media market and increased sponsorship. But there's a catch to the story. Because they can only fit so many races in a season, original birthplaces of NASCAR, like Darlington and Rockingham, N.C. must give up their races. By adding these new race tracks, they wont be just increasing profits and media and sponsorship they are going to be taking away homes to build new racetracks and allowing original towns like Darlington to fend for themselves after NASCAR leaves there. What will the towns of Darlington and Rockingham do now, as the races brought in high revenues?
On a side note, I had a recreational football game on Saturday in Federal Hill. The Orioles also played the Redsox that day and driving through downtown, I witnessed a homeless person at almost every intersection leading up to Camden Yards pleading for change from O's and Redsox fans. The stadiums, as they sit side-by-side may be a huge attraction for Baltimore, and they are fun to attend, but who is really attending them. Tickets are too expensive for many people of Baltimore, rather it is people from outlying counties and cities coming in. The stadiums also boost revenues for surrounding restaurants and bars but not the lower class like neoliberalism is supposed to work. It seems the trickle down from above idea stops with the middle class. This is the negative, more visible aspect of neoliberalism, where there is very little room for class movement and the poor are blamed for their problems.

Drew brings in some interesting information. Definately a good point of one of the negative aspects. I know if i was a struggling citizen, I'd be quite upset.

Neoliberalism is what makes our culture function. We rarely question why and it isn�??t a main focus in the media because it is part of our nature. We grow up being taught (or at least I did) to fight and make things happen for myself. I feel that the majority of society with money can in a way looked at as being greedy. As you brought up in class, if I had to fire however many people to make 5 million dollars, without question, I would. And so would everyone else. Our society is all about survival of the fittest, and unfortunately the fittest are the ones with money. My first thoughts that come to mind when I think about the rebuilding of the Saints new stadium is that it is a great idea. What better way to bring up the spirits of the city than to rebuild the team�??s home. It can be looked at as rebuilding the team. It gives you something to look forward to, something to be passionate about, something to smile about. On the contrary, the point being brought up about the millions of dollars being put into the stadium when there are so many families without homes. It is quite twisted when you really think about it. Outsiders look at the city and think what a great idea, but if you look deep enough, it just doesn�??t make sense. You want to give the town something to be excited about yet you put millions of dollars that could of really made a difference in helping the families into a money making machine.
I do not disagree that the rich just get richer and they stay in power because of that, but I do not in any way put blame on them for the poor being poor. Although it is frustrating to know that I am helping making those richer when I am broke, it�??s the vicious cycle and society we live in. Like someone brought up in class, its survival of the fittest; make it happen for yourself. I was raised to not blame anyone but myself when it comes to my faults or failures. I do think that putting millions into a sports stadium is a little drastic, and the money could have been used to help others, but on the contrary, the sports industry does provide jobs to millions. People live for sports. It puts passion in them and brings them together without realizing. People of all different ethnicities play and watch sports. I think it promotes a good message that people watching and playing don�??t notice color or differences, they just notice that they share a common passion. Like someone brought up earlier, after 9/11, they held that concert and many were confused about it. It gives people a feeling of hope and entertainment and that�??s incredible, that entertainment can help put a little laughter into people. �??United We Stand�?� is a phrase that every person living in America knows, and I see sports events showing a great example of the phrase. Despite what bad things our country is going through, we still stand as a team. This is why neoliberalism isn�??t brought up in the media; because people subconsciously escape into sports. I feel that there is definitely just as many positives as there are negatives to neoliberalism. Maybe, in order to balance out the rich and the poor would be to take some of the taxes that we pay and instead of building a 500 million dollar stadium, build a cheaper stadium and put the majority of the money towards education or hospitals.
Whether I side with or against, I am not sure. But I definitely think the positive sides to neoliberalism overpower the negative as a whole.

francesca makes a excellent point about the benefits about neo-liberalism. New Orleans did not have much going for them, but the Saints provide some kind of relief from the woes of everyday life, even if its minimal.

I also agree with Mike V and believe major corporations should not use their fans to be making that all mighty dollar. However, how are we going to bring to light the fact that these corporations are exploiting their fans? If the situation is not brought to the forefront, nothing can be done to enlighten those with a blind eye.

I see neoliberalism as having a negative on society. As mentioned in other posts, it works that the rich get richer and the poor, well remain poor. This concept easily translates over to sports. As sports franchise owners fork out large amounts of money to bring professional franchises to their city, who is actually the beneficiary? It sure is not the people of the city. As money is spent on building that new state-of-the-art stadium and practice facility, think to yourself, where else could that money have been spent? I cannot think of a surrounding metropolitan area that boasts about their public education system. Also, that money could be spent on healthcare. How can we as people partake in these sporting events if we are not healthy enough to attend or watch them. If we�??re going to be spending all this money, lets give it to a cause that actually has something to look forward to and become better then what they were given. Funding for youth programs, recreational sports leagues, or school music programs can help kids stay off the streets and keep their lives on track. This �??all about me�?� attitude is driving this argument. So many people have become self-absorbed, myself included, that sometimes it�??s easy to become blinded by things that only benefit themselves, and not seeing the broader picture.

I was walking through the Inner Harbor Sunday and saw some of the good that putting in Camden Yards and M&T Bank stadium. The Inner Harbor looks beautiful, and I am sure the businesses around the stadiums have bloomed by constant sporting events over the span of a year. However, if someone would go about three blocks away from the Inner Harbor, especially at night, it�??s a scary place. The Inner Harbor ratio to the rest of Baltimore serves as a perfect model for the effect of stadiums. Some do well and benefit while others are swept aside for the sake of profit. One could easily market that area as a sign of growth, but it never seems to make all the way through the city.
The Inner Harbor serves as the perfect example as to why Neoliberalism is a flawed system. It has benefited people and the main highlights of it (trickle down, deregulation, market control, individualism) have embodied what is said to be the American Dream. This dream of someone pulling themselves up out of nothing into something is great and has gotten some people through very rough times. The problem is that this happens once in a blue moon because most people lack the resources to follow through. The strength of Neoliberalism is that it gives people the hope that something can come from the economic system. However, those that have lived this dream don�??t necessarily follow through with trickle down economics and then seek to control the market so that the dreamer and family can live comfortably. This system was designed with the belief that people are inherently good and will proceed to do the right thing. This doesn�??t always happen. Keeping in mind that the NFL and other professional sport organizations do give back, they take more and every event is usually marketed out so that the organizations look good.

As many other students have already stated, the concept of neoliberalism is still unclear, but I will do my best to discuss this issue. During the middle of last week I read on article online about the new stadium that will be built for the New York Giants and New York Jets in East Rutherford, New Jersey (http://www.nynjfootball.com). The new complex will house 82,500 fans per game, have 2,500 high-definition televisions throughout the stadium, and have many other state of the art features. After our discussion in class about how amongst all the tragedy the occurred post-Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans Saints were able to rebuild their stadium; I began to think about the �??New Meadowlands�?� differently.
I do believe that a new complex for the New York Giants and New York Jets is a great thing for both teams and will generate more revenue for the state of New Jersey. On the other hand though, maybe the $1.3 billion that went into building the �??New Meadowlands�?� could have been used in a more productive way. Approximately, one fifth of New Jersey�??s population experience poverty, but they do get to have a new state of the art complex in their state. I am sure close to one hundred percent of the people who are experiencing poverty in New Jersey would have rather received money from the state so that they can live. Instead, they got to see the Giants and the Jets get a new stadium. This is a great follow up to the arguments made in class by Professor White because this just shows that the rich are continuing to get richer, while the poor are continuing to struggle.

As difficult as it is to comprehend, I do agree that the dominant neoliberalism is a problem in our society. Although I do not fully understand all the complexities of the topic, the sheer fact that so many people live in poverty while a select group of others consume the majority of the wealth for themselves is obviously an issue. Professional athletics are a great example of how money can be used for devoted very disproportionately. While thousands of fans sit inside of M&T Bank Stadium to watch the Ravens play the Bengals tonight, spending their money are hokey merchandise and incredibly overpriced food and drink, hundreds of others will be sitting just on the other side of those walls, begging for spare change from the more-fortunate passers by. If even a dollar of each hot dog sale went directly into the pocket of homeless individual, poverty would certainly become almost non-existent within a matter of years. However, because of how our society operates, this will never be the case. Stock holders would never allow for their investments to be shared with the lower class citizens of Baltimore and the players would never agree to the salary cuts necessary to compensate with such charity. It is not the selfishness of one or just a few individuals that causes these unfair discrepancies within our economy, but, as stated in class, this is just how our system works. While I do understand the perks of a capitalist economy, whether it be the ambitious competition that is driven by it or the motivation of individuals in the work force, this is a very negative downside.

I think moconn7 made me think a lot about their statement. I do see how it can be good and bad, but this country is not always equal and the land of all opportunity.

Just like everyone else, I think Neoliberalism is much easier to talk about then to write about. It is a confusing topic but I think it is what makes our country, and the world at that, what it is. Not that i fully agree with everything that has gone on in our world today, our government and the political stances people take, I think if it wasn't that to complain about, it would be something else.
Trickle down economics (the rich sharing wealth) is hard to take a side on if you ask me. I see both angles and what is good and bad about either stance. I see that when the rich just get richer, it keeps the people that are in power right now, in power forever and it is kind of a never-ending cycle. But if you really think about it, people can rise up against what they have been brought into and really make a difference if they try hard enough. What was the original way of power from the beginning of the United States? Pretty much exactly what it is now. Like we talk about in class it has been the same type of people and they have all had pretty much the same type of ideas. Not that I am going to say that this is all good, but why is there just starting to be a problem with it now? We have gone this far as a country (and again not to say that there are not things that need to be changed), but if people really hate the President and what he stands for, why not move? Obviously the greater population of this country voted for someone. Twice. Our President is not a perfect man, as is no President or person on earth, but you live in America and as a citizen of the most free country in the world, you should support who is in office. You had the chance to change it and you will also have that chance in the future. No use in talking smack about him now.

The deregulation of markets and tax-cuts have not really been a topic that I have read up too much on. I'm not sure I have an exact opinion because I don't have enough information to back up my stance. From what I understand it is another form of keeping the people on top...on top. I do disagree with the way the government slyly taxes citizens of middle and lower classes while finding ways to keep the rich, rich.

Commercialism. Unfortunately, this is what runs every single living aspect of this country and it very well is nauseating. The fact that when I'm watching a normal tv show like "Desperate Housewives" or a football game, I get a zoomed in shot of a Ford symbol on the front of the new 2008 Explorers or the Gatorade symbol on the water bottles that the players clutch in their hands on the sidelines. Have you ever noticed that after a UFC fight, the winner is thrust on stage with some kind of manager throwing his sponsor shirt on and squeezing some kind of energy drink brand hat on his head? Where is the sport in sports? It all has to do with how much money the guy next to you can make by shoving ads in kids faces making them want the newest cleats because then they will be cool and fit in. I am a product of this generation by every means possible. As I look back on all the things I have been conned into buying and wanted subconsciously from ads on TV, at the stadiums and opening a magazine, I just see how rich I have made so many people.

In responding to all the comments of Neoliberalism, I still haven�??t convinced myself that it is a totally wrong concept. Economically I'm not sure how we could survive without it, but I think some aspects about it are just morally wrong. One thing that really bothered me is the funding of a renovation/building of an entire new stadium while people in poverty continue to suffer. Especially the situation where New Orleans got the go ahead to repair there stadium after hurricane Katrina (Spent nearly 500 million dollars). To me this is an awful situation. One of my closest friends went down to New Orleans this past spring break to help rebuild multiple houses. After hearing all her stories and seeing pictures I couldn�??t see how repairing a stadium would be one of the main priorities. She had pictures of total devastation. Debris and dust everywhere, if you didn�??t know what you were looking at you could of guessed a bomb went off. Katrina swept through nearly 2 years ago and people still haven�??t been able to move back into there homes, much the less return to New Orleans. It�??s pretty sad that as a society we put rebuilding a stadium as the main priority... a.k.a making money.

In response to G. Shaw I just can�??t see how funding to rebuild a stadium would lighten up everyone�??s spirit enough to forget that they still have no home in New Orleans after 2 years. Whether this renovation made the rich, richer or the poor, poorer, I�??m starting to believe that this statement has to be true, and that every man is for themselves these days.

Well this topic as a political question would be difficult enough but when sports are involved it only complicates the issues. The ideas of most organized athletic leagues like the NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL are to make big money and do it quickly and now. Let�??s take the NFL as an example. The NFL completely epitomizes the aspects of neoliberalism. Not only does the NFL have a hold on the American public but it also has an effect on the countries of Canada and the continent of Europe. This is directly related to the sharing of culture to the rest of the world. There is the Canadian football league and NFL Europe. Both of these organizations are used more for older and younger players that are out of their prime or inexperienced respectively. One clear example of this was in New Orleans. I would go into it but I am making the assumption that everyone can figure out the significance of how the Superdome in New Orleans was rebuilt long before the homes of hundred of thousands of people were built. This was due in part to the fact that it was believed the spirit of the Saints would build spirits throughout the community, or a trickle down effect. The NFL also uses neoliberalism to produce numerous jobs for those who may not have had jobs previously. What I mean is that when an NFL team moves into a new city the city usually benefits by creating jobs that most people don�??t wish to do because they would much rather watch the sporting event. There is no doubt that the NFL has made huge strides toward uniting the cultures, but personally neoliberalism is not an answer but a temporary fix.

Neoliberalism is a tough topic to talk about for me because on one hand I want to see it is good but on the other I want to say it is not very good. I am gonna start by saying neoliberalism is bad becasue the big corporations control all the wealth nad the so called little guys or people suffer becasue of this. For example a family run small buissness is hurt by the bigger powerhouse buissnesses. For example a small hometown hardware just cannot compete with the likes of a homedepot. Homedepot controls the wealth in the hardware department and with neoliberalism the smaller hardware store has a tough time breaking even. In a world of so called opportunity how can the small buissness survive. In many cases the smaller bussisnesses close down and just surrender to the bigger ones.
In sport its just becoming outrageous how can you even afford to go see a game. Wit hthe ticket prices ranging up to 100 dollars for a decent seat how can you go. Then if your so lucky and can go forget eating becasue you one hot dog and beer is running you 12 dollars. What is our money going to the big owners who drive 4 different cars or the players with diamond earings and mansions. These brand new standiums are being build for millions of dollars and it isnt benefitting anyone except the front office and the players. I guess we should just let the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. But I feel in sport it is societies fault we pay for these ticket prices and beers. We buy these guys 100 dollar jerseys. Isn't there a better use for our money. We all pay for the sunday NFL ticket which is about 200 dollars to see these guys. Who are we really benefitting by doing this.

As im writing this i still have not made up my mind totally on if i am a supporter of neoliberalism or i am not. I feel that it, like most things in our society today, has some good traits and also some bad ones. In this reply though i am going to write about one main characteristic of why i feel that neoliberalism is good.
In class, Ryan mentioned that stadiums haven't brought any money to the cities they are in, at all. Now we didnt touch on this much, so i dont know the specifics, but i have to beleive that this only pertains to the stadium itself. In the example of giving money to rebuild/build a stadium instead of giving it to the poor or other groups that may need it, i think that in most cases this can be used as a good thing and this is why.
When thinking of a major city, one usually thinks of famous landmarks that are there. Some of the most famous landmarks are Athletic complexes (ie stadiums, arenas, etc). These complexes become the cities pride, it becomes almost like thier center peice of how people know them, as a city. Without these stadiums and/or professional teams, these people (especially the lower class) have nothing to show for when it comes to city pride. The lower class already has little, taking these things away would create even less pride for them. When professional teams compete, people from ALL over come to watch them play. When these people come, they spend money. NOT just at the ballpark but everywhere. Some might need a hotel room, or a meal or something else that will make them spend money, even parking costs money. So when talking about the fact that it is a bad thing to start the New Orleans rebuilding project with the stadium and not the projects or apt. complex's, i feel that it is a good thing for the reasons i just provided. The people that run the parking garages, the restaurants, the hotel workers, policemen, etc, they are all now working more and bringing in more money because a professional game is going on. They can start earning money to repair thier own houses, which in fact could eventually save the government money. And even if you wanna talk about the beggers, these events bring in more outsiders which will give the beggers more people to beg from and a better chance of attaining money. ( that was bad but somewhat of a supporting idea).
So in conclusion, like i said, i am not yet opposed to neoliberalism or pro neoliberalism, but i feel that starting a building or rebuilding process with a center piece like an athletic stadium is not a bad overall idea. I guess it may just depend on the situation at hand.

It is obvious that neo-liberalism is the driving force in our society. The rich are getting richer by putting a strangle hold on the middle class, mainstream part of society and making them believe what they want to get what they want. The neoliberalists or the ones that have the power to persuade, use their upper-hand only to become more powerful. But, if you look at it, this is the way it has always been and is the way our society is set up, as a capitalistic (every man for themselves) organization. I think it is the way it has to be. Getting people in support of you and your beliefs is a true way of gaining a position of authorization or power in America and not always for a bad outcome. Sports owners such as Peter Angelos and Art Modell had to get where they are somehow. They had to work in other fields to gain the money to become a sports owner and have the power to pull dollers in the direction of new mecca stadiums and complexes which in my opinion did bring more money to the city than playing games at Memorial stadium. I believe the homeless guy on the street had every right to rise up and make something of himself and be in a postion of power just as everyone else has to. The way I see it, he has taken away his individual rationality from himself. Going against the way our society is set up is pretty much what the terrorists are doing and they disagree with the same "survival of the fittest" mentality.
Sporting athletes in our society are sometimes different when it comes to this neoliberalism outlook in that positive outcomes can result. They have a position power to suade ones opinion in one direction or another just by being a well-known sports figure and someone that home town fans can relate to. Some sports figures such as Duce McAllister uses his power to bring in money to help rebuid New Orleans. The National Football League is teamed up with the United Way in order for players to use their position of power for a host of constructive projects. The Orioles' Brian Roberts uses his position of power on fame to rise money to help kids in local hospitals with life treatining illnesses. For all the negatives that produced by neoliberalism, I think that it is equaled in comparison by all the positives and "every man for themselves" is the American way.

I agree with TKuhl that the attitude in the world today is "every man for himself". If someone doesn't have kids it is true why would they want to put money into schools or rec sports. Also another point made was that the new stadium's benefits the wealthier part of society which in most cases not all are the people that live outside of the city.

I agree with Andrew Offsey. The concert in NY, in my opinion is almost the same as rebuilding the stadium to bring the saints home! Yes both cities were devestated but it is essential to over come and in both of these situations, it brought the cities together in having a common hope and feeling of faith! And although people sit there and they money needs to be elsewhere, at these critical times money needs to be everywhere, but that is just not the life we live.

Neolibralism has some positives in sports. When describing trickle down economy, an example of how I interpreted it as is fractions of the income professional sports teams are making being donated to small charities. You here about athletes funding chairites and things, such as Doug Flutie. Though it is only because of his son that drove him to do so, it is going towards helping people other than those related to him. A positive example of how of every domain of human life is subject to the forces of the market is in the cheesy Disney sports movies. When hopeless kids from the hood get an inspiring coach and finally come together to do something productive and get off the streets and end up making a name for themselves. They are mostly based on true stories and you see them all the time on tv. Kids coming from bad neighborhoods getting full rides to great schools and ending up in professional sports. Just like we discussed in class about how Michael Vick probably grew up dog fighting every weekend, and just because he is a professional athlete now, doesn't mean he is going to give up one of his favorite pasttimes. An example of how every man for himself shows positive in sport is in preseason football. Football is a team sport and as long as the team wins everyone is happy. But in preseason, everyone gets a chance to show off what they got instead of the same 11 men on offense and 11 on defense in the entire game. The second and third stringers have a chance to move up and get the attention they deserve. I agree that neoliberalism causes touble in society, but the small hand full of people that it helps may be worth it.

Neoliberalism can be both good and bad to our society. An example of it hurting our society is the building of new stadiums in cities that do not need a new stadium. Take the NY Giants. The Giants and the Jets are getting a brand new state of the art facility built right next to the old one. In my eyes it is useless to spend all that money on a new stadium when there is one in perfect shape. The meadowlands now still sells out pretty much every week, so its not like building a new stadium is going to help bring in more of a crowd. Same thing with the Yankees. I dont think the Yankees should tear down the biggest part of baseball history, Yankee Stadium. If it aint broke, dont fix it. THe only reason that people build new stadiums, is not for the fans or for the city as they might tell you in order to get your money, but its for the big shots who already have millions of dollars and want more. When the new stadiums open, theres gonna be so much hype and the media is going to go crazy about it. Advertising on billboards and during games is going to be ridiculous. It takes away from the game, in any sport. What ever happened to just playing ball!?

I can�??t say wether I think that neoliberalism is �??good�?� or �??bad�?�, because I have seen both outcomes from the fact. From my experience it has been in Baltimore, at our football and baseball stadiums.
As for the good that I think has come from the neoliberalism in this area the new stadiums have a lot of jobs for some people in Baltimore and have created the infrastructure need to host many events. The event was the �??Dew Tour�?�(a skateboard, BMX, and Moto X competition) , which was invited into Baltimore earlier this summer. It was a great event in my eyes because it housed many great opportunities for many people. One in specific was a skateboarder that goes by the nick name of �??Gumby�?�.
I was on a Street team to promote and market the Tour in Baltimore this summer as an internship with some other fellow students at Towson University. We ran into Gumby at an event that our street team has planned to promote at which was a skate board competition at Charm City Skate park in Baltimore. Gumby competed and won first place in the competition and the prize for first place was a few tickets for the Dew Tour. It didn�??t seem like much a first but Gumby was in for a real treat.
As the event neared, Gumby was convinced by friends and family to enter the Open Qualifier at the Dew Tour for the skate park event. Long story short he end�??s up qualifying last place and gets a chance to ride on live television with all the pro riders at the event and in turn giving Gumby the spot light that one would need for more opportunities like this one.
Now the down side, yes this was a great experience for a young athlete but it was only a great experience for one athlete. Not everyone gets the same opportunities like Gumby had and that shows how that even tho we live in a free and equal nation, its not always free and equal.

I don�??t believe Neo-liberalism through sports, or even in general, has had a more negative impact than positive on society. With the obvious fact that sports in today�??s society is one of the nation�??s biggest markets, sports has helped to shape the economy the United States has today. Sports is business. Sports is money. Sports is entertainment. Neo-liberalism has made sports a multi-billion dollar industry. Without neo-liberalism, there would be no stadiums, which bring people of all races, gender, ethnicity, class-standing together. And while someone is making an incredible profit off of those people together, it still does have a common good. Those who reap the benefits of the sports industry should not be looked down upon at all. While it costs an arm and a leg to attend games, and even more to eat there, people go because they want to. They want to go see their favorite team or athlete or team duke it out against another team or a rival. They do so because they enjoy doing those things. What does it matter who the money goes to and what they do with it? Yes, there may be poor people outside stadiums, but poverty has always been a problem in the United States. Even before huge stadiums and $100 tickets. I don�??t believe sports has contributed to poverty. And while it can help give back to the community, it will never solve the problem. What is it supposed to do? Sweep up homeless people off the street, bathe them, clothe them, buy them a home and food, and get them a job? Poverty is an issue of government, not that sporting industry. And owners arent to take all the blame �?? the reason why tickets, merchandise, food in stadiums, etc. is so expensive is because that what it takes to pay the players that people want to go to see. And what about the athletes? They make millions upon millions, should they be responsible for helping the case of poverty?

I also agree with Mike V and think major corporations should not use their fans as a way of making the extra buck. If they continue to take advantage of their fans they are going to begin to lose their support. People will begin to pick and chose what is important to them. They should be appreciating their customers rather than wringing them dry.

As neoliberalism has created some positive aspects such as opening up jobs and making the "American Dream" possible, I do not think it has many more positives that outweigh the negatives. By giving money to the already wealthy we are not only helping to boost them up even more, but we are not stopping to look at what could be done for ourselves and those in need. As we talked about in class, wealth is power; the more wealthy you are the more powerful you are and the more say you have. So what about those who are trying to build their way up just to be kicked down again because they are threatening the wealthy and their power. Even those who are far from a threat but just trying to get themselves ahead for once in a system that is made to commend those already in a position. If you think about it, why would it be any other way? Those who are making the decisions are the ones who with power, so why would they jeopardized their own position for someone else hence every individual for them self. Watching the Colt and Saint game, I started questioning how much went into the pregame entertainment part where they had various artist performing and then the effects for their shows. The commercials they had Faith Hill doing had to of cost an insane amount of money, yet couldn't that money of gone to a charity or good cause and used them to advertise. Why pay Faith even more money to advertise a station and game that people are already watching. Yes it was catchy and neat to see her supporting the sporting event but it was not necessary. They even could of had her on there with an organization or charity group where her paycheck for that commercial would go to them. The money put into strictly entertainment is outrageous compared to what it could be spent on for better things.

Now I do believe neoliberalism is important for growth and the economy, however I just think there could be some revisions made to better the community as a whole instead of the parts the selected few get to say matter. I suppose rebuilding the Saint's stadium could make the argument that is the trickle down theory, to an extent. Yes, it was a nice relief factor for the people of New Orleans to get their minds off of the disaster and it was nice to have some hope and something to believe in. However, the trickle down theory only goes so far. Those who were able to get a leg up after the hurricane and begin to make a new life are the ones that get the pride and hope, they get to go to a Sunday game to relax and forget about things. It is the other thousands of people who are now homeless that don't even get a dime to help rebuild their lives, but it's okay because they have a new stadium now. The trickle down theory stops at them. I just feel the money could be spent a little bit more wisely to care for the individual person and not just the community's image they are trying to portray.

Another way to solve the problem and help out those who are working hard just to be buried even more, is to tax the wealthy more and give the majority of the people who do not fit into the top 3% wealthy tax breaks. Then use the money from the wealthy to go towards rebuilding parks, schools, after school programs to help the rest of the community. The owners of the stadiums, teams, ect. can afford to lose a little bit of money and still remain competitive with the others teams if they are losing money as well through the taxes. If the kids in the lower classes are able to see some advantages maybe it would help to decrease crime, drugs, and violence by keeping them off the streets. Helping them out just a little bit could give them the hope they need to push themselves harder because there is a reason now, and they could end up being the ones at top someday making the decisions. Maybe then the whole view would start to shift and give those with less power a little more say.

Neoliberalism has it positives and negatives, maybe with a little work it would have more of a positive influence for everyone.

I agree with Mike V. I think it is unfair and irresponsible of major corporations to take advantage of fans just to make an extra buck. People should be more aware of what is going on around them, myself included. This class is definitely opening my eyes.

I do not like politics at all. So it is very difficult for me to write about them, but I am going to give it a shot. Neoliberalism, as stated before, is the dominant political view in the United States. I am going to look at the downside of this view because, as I said before, I do not like politics so I want to take all the shots at it that I can. One of the biggest problems with this viewpoint is who benefits from it. Neoliberalism makes the people that have money richer and the people not as well off work harder to stay at that level. This idea can also be applied to sports. One of the things that were talked about in class was how a city will spend a ton of money to bring a sports team to town because it will benefit the city. But the people that really benefit are the owners of the team and the television companies. The owners get all the profits from attendance and the T.V. companies get more money because there are more games for them to air and more viewers in more markets. That money could have been put to much better use. I will use Baltimore as an example. Baltimore city schools are terrible. The money used for either stadium could have been used to renovate the schools or to pay teachers better so they actually want to work there. That money could have gone toward renovating old buildings to provide more housing. There are so many old warehouses that are being used for nothing. It could have also gone to local sports leagues to get kids off the streets and to give them something to look forward to. Having a sports team in town only benefits the people who can afford it.
But we chose to give money for this stuff because it is something that we can actually see benefits from. Professional sports serve as entertainment, whether it is in person or on T.V. Not everyone has kids so they would be upset to see there money go to something that has nothing to do with them. This all goes back to the �??every man for himself�?� attitude. If something isn�??t going to help them, they don�??t want to see their money go toward it, like area schools or youth sports teams. And these are just the bad points of neoliberalism from a sports perspective. So much more could be said about it, but it wouldn�??t be worth the breath wasted to say it.

Neoliberalism is a very hard topic to try and understand. I will try and tackle it from the perspective of how the large corporations take the money and there is no trickle down effect. First off it was said in the reading by Grossberg can the market really provide it�??s on justification. Basically do really want to market and have to market everything in our lives to just survive. Neoliberalism is stated by Grossberg to give us something good and to punish the evil. However is a person Kenneth Lay the former CEO of Enron stating �??I believe in God and the free markets. Well if you are looked upon by some as a higher figure wouldn�??t you want to take care the people around you? Thus leads into my first point about the city of New Orleans.
It really saddens me to think of Tom Benson got 500 million dollars to repair the New Orleans Saints stadium. The masses of people in that city that would need that money to help rebuild and they didn�??t get anything right away is just sick. This is where the so called trickle done effect which is a well known saying in society today comes into effect. I do somewhat see the purpose of trying to rebuild the stadium and bring back the team. They were trying to bring unity among the city after a catastrophic disaster; however I can�??t see at what point the people doing this would think that this would help the people who were in the streets and on top of there houses. Yes maybe the people who were season ticket holders and the wealthy would love to have there team back and the stadium back. Has anyone to this day thought that 500 million dollars could really have helped those people on top of there houses. I bet that the whole city of New Orleans would be better not just certain parts. Mainly where the wealthier people live like the French Quarters.
Every domain of human life is subject to the forces of the market. This was said in the blog and talked about in some respects during class. Marketing and showing of you product is partly what Neoliberalism is defined to do. We market everything that we wear, eat, and talk. Like was said last week in class if the desk up front had a Nike sticker on it and it was defined as the Nike. Thus the Nike chair would make people more inclined to sit in it. The world is full of marketing things and if the marketing of products is correct then wealth and power follows. I also remember that in class we were talking about Westinghouse and it was said that they market correctly however there products aren�??t perfect. Now it might be hard to talk about but at a marketing and business perspective this is a good choice to have products that are eventually going to need to be replaced. They make more money by marketing a product like that thus the wealth comes about and then the power.

If i am understanding this correctly neoliberalism is rather important for a growing city, where i do disagree with give a hurting city millions of dollars to build a stadium. I feel that a sports team is an easy escape goat, a way for a city to hide there problems and pains, in a way you could consider a stadium/sports team is a societys alcohol/drug/medicine. And it helps in some asspects. It gives jobs for the jobless, but also takes away possible homes for the homless. Gives hope and faith to some in the but also raises taxes. Where as neoliberalism has its negative asspects its has many nessicary positive influences. It is a nessicary evil. No one likes the idea of one big corrporation running everything, and spending our tax dollars on things to only make the rich richier. The bottom line is somethings cant be fixed with money and if have a staduim/sports team has proven to help societys(which it has) then spend the money on that. Regarding the four themes of neoliberalism buy the rich getting richer they build buildings, and supply jobs for the jobless, the deregulation of markets, the new stadium brings in tourists and revinue. As the team grows the city grows improving the domain of human life, and finally ever person for them selves is showin in fighting for a job and for money to live.

I had a hard time looking at sports critically to try and investigate neo-liberalism in the sports games I normally just watch for fun. Recently I started reading a book entitled How Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization by Franklin Foer and was fascinated by its stories. One especially caught my eye and I thought of it in class once we discussed the profit hungry agendas of both the teams themselves and the companies that help fund them. A good example is in the Scottish Premier League for soccer, where one of the world�??s greatest sports rivalries between Glasgow Celtic and Glasgow Rangers is the main attraction. The two clubs rivalry stems from a sort of religious and social conflict, dating back hundreds of years, between the Catholic supporters for Celtic and Rangers` Protestant fans. However what is more intriguing in a business sense is the role the American company Nike plays into this. Whenever Rangers plays Celtic during the year, its sponsor Nike sells orange jerseys to the Rangers fans, even though neither team�??s colors involve even the least bit of orange. The underlying story is that orange is the color of a old Protestant King who retook power in Scotland from the Catholic Monarchy, and Nike simply puts out the jerseys knowing full well that they will sell out by feeding the Rangers fans with another way to show how much they hate Celtic. It�??s kind of an extreme case of greed in sports, but I guess that�??s the neo-liberalist world we live in today, where money is the driving force and the ultimate goal for a team. It�??s just a shame though, that we the fans are just a pawn in all of this and the majority of us are completely ignorant as to what is actually going on.

I'm having trouble understand neoliberalism to be completely honest. I agree with a few things, but I'm not sure if I disagree with anything. I think that is has opened up a lot of employment opportunities for people who didn't have jobs prior to this. I think it has helped the poor people, and the wealthier to unite in a way relating to the sport. I believe that it did help reunite people of different backgrounds, races, etc. and it helped them come together as a whole about a sport or team they love. I don't really agree with the fact that the rich is sharing with the poor, I don't understand that. I think that it really builds up a city/town when a new building arises, and like i said before brings them together as a whole regardless of backgrounds. It establishes a sense of hope and conformity. I do think neoliberalism is essential for a growing city, to help promote the economy, people, welfare, etc.

Neoliberalism is important for growth,rebuilding(emotional as well as physical buildings) and even though there are many who are homeless or need something it is necessary. One example I have to prove this is the concert for the survivors of 9/11 in New york city taking place at MSG(one of the most famous buildings). Now to think about it that even after the destruction and a city looking to be rebuilt itself, they decided the first thing to do was have a concert. many asked why. And it was done to salute the people of the firefighters,police and others involved that they would not be forgotten. There was also a symbolic meaning in this concert. Yes you have hundreds of the most famous people on one stage at the same time but what did it mean. Through the words of the real heros of new york, and rudy guliani that even at our worst we should not and will not live in fear which was emotionally healing people. But the money made from the concert was used to help rebuild parts of the city. I am talking about schools and stuff. Now Many teams in professional sports give back to the community through many organizations such as united way or even donate money for the amount of stats the team gets to education. Yes many of the corportate people get the money. Poverty rates all over have steadily gone down all over, and i think that with all the jobs that each game possesses brings money to all different people. From the food to jersey production, to interns, corportate people, tv, marketing,security, parking and much more. I mean money does get around to different people. New york teachers get better pay then most other city schools and schools on long island get good money too. Now you cant point at teachers and say why they get paid a ton and yet students dont get the books they need. You can always look at the glass half empty but why would you want to. Sports does help but poverty isnt a problem that is easily gonna just go away. everywhere you go people try to nickle and dime you so even though its rough financially that way, you have a country who strives for the best. People are smart though when it comes to money. Example the jets wanted a west side stadium and it got voted down due to people worried about traffic and mainl because the cablevison owner and knicks and rangers owner knew this threatened him. Well people know he is a bad businessman and has killed everything he touches. And people have stopped coming and paying if they didnt agree with him. Now if everyone was educated and we would worry about losing our job to someone else and this system makes people strive for the best no matter cards they are dealt. Obviously it is tougher on people who are poor but you can change your future if you really want to. Once again its tougher being poor but you can do it it is deffinetly tougher.

For those of you confused similar to Fransceca (which was a noble thing to admit) neoliberalism interacting with sport essentially talks about how sport exists in a society through which the dominant socio-economic force (neoliberalism) creates a situation whereby the following themes dominate:

1. Trickle Down Economics (The Rich sharing wealth with the poor)

2. Deregulation of Markets (put nicely Subsidies and Tax Cuts for Corporate Ownership, put critically Corporate Welfare).

3. Every Domain of Human Life Is Subject to the Forces of the Market (a shift toward making every bit of human life a commodity to be bought and sold)

4. Every person for themselves (Even though corporate welfare reigns supreme we should not care about others because it's an individuals job to "rise up")

These are the things you might want to touch on when answering the question. Moreover you may agree with some, but not all, of the previous points, or you may fall strictly on one side or the other, but as long as you defend yourself with sound reasoning that will make me happy (which is important to your grade).

Alternate assignment- the positives about the neoliberalism!
I am finding this topic of neoliberalism hard to grasp however I�??m pretty sure tying it into the Saint�??s stadium is how I can make the most sense of it and relate my thoughts back to you. Neoliberalism is the movement that promotes economic development. (growth, buildings going up, housing, businesses, making money, going to school to make money, etc). It is the dominate economic force! At first I disagreed with the rebuilding of the New Orleans Saint�??s stadium. I did not understand the concept of spending all the money on a stadium when there were people without houses or places to call home. After thinking about it, I have changed my views and took on a new perspective. It is a known fact that sporting events bring people together! By rebuilding this stadium it gave people hope. It also held their city together socially. The people of New Orleans had a common bond. They shared a common culture by each individual bringing different attributes to the table. The people came together. Neoliberalism and that driving force is what kept a devastated city united! It also created a mass wealth and created a large amount of jobs that became available for the people of the town. This put thousands of people back to work, not only for the workers within the stadium, but also for people in construction, electrical fields, etc in the rebuilding process. For the Saints to come back home and play on their turf gave everyone involved in this disaster not only a sense of hope but a comfort that in time, everything would be ok.
As I said earlier, I felt I didn�??t agree with neoliberalism but when I really sat down and thought about it in this context isn�??t it necessary for any successful government? We need this force. We take so much for granted but in America shouldn�??t it be, not what we drive but what drives us that�??s important?