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 c