Trump delivered the greatest world cup ever.

[seafoam1]

And liberals want to turn this country communist. 

FIFA is anticipated to announce a record-breaking $15 billion in revenues for the 2026 World Cup cycle. This smashes previous earnings, dwarfing the roughly $7.6 billion made from the 2022 tournament in Qatar and the $5.4 billion from the 2018 tournament in Russia combined.

[The Girlfriend]

Why are you cheering for FIFA making money?  Us taxpayers put up over $5B so FIFA can make their money.  I assume you're a taxpayer?

[cyclone24]

22 minutes ago, The Girlfriend said:

Why are you cheering for FIFA making money?  Us taxpayers put up over $5B so FIFA can make their money.  I assume you're a taxpayer?

You can’t be this stupid. How much do you think we made as a country in tourism that will have a lasting effects. Restaurants, lodging, transportation. 
 

You guys are so bizarre it almost defies logic. It was a big deal to get the World Cup.  
 

I wish you guys cared as much about where our tax dollars go in your own states that tax people out of their minds as you do when it’s a event that has Trump’s name attached to it. (What a surprise)

 

NOW suddenly you guys are the most fiscally responsible humans ever. It’s a joke.

[seafoam1]

26 minutes ago, The Girlfriend said:

Why are you cheering for FIFA making money?  Us taxpayers put up over $5B so FIFA can make their money.  I assume you're a taxpayer?

Dang mdc, your new female persona on this site is doing you no favors.

[The Girlfriend]

11 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

You can’t be this stupid. How much do you think we made as a country in tourism that will have a lasting effects. Restaurants, lodging, transportation. 
 

You guys are so bizarre it almost defies logic. It was a big deal to get the World Cup.  
 

I wish you guys cared as much about where our tax dollars go in your own states that tax people out of their minds as you do when it’s a event that has Trump’s name attached to it. (What a surprise)

 

NOW suddenly you guys are the most fiscally responsible humans ever. It’s a joke.

When you map that $5 billion taxpayer cost against what came back in tourism, you find a classic clash between gross spending and net economic reality.

The short answer is that while international visitors spent an estimated $5.4 billion to $6.4 billion directly inside the United States during the six-week tournament, the actual net benefit to local economies was much more modest.

The Direct Return: The Headlines

According to tourism and economic reports tracking the tournament, the direct spending from World Cup visitors was undeniably historic on paper:

 * The Influx: Around 1.24 million international visitors traveled to the U.S. specifically for the games.

 * The "Super Spender" Profile: Because matches were spread so far apart, the average international fan stayed for roughly 12 days and spent over $5,000 per person—which is about 1.7 times what a normal international tourist spends on a trip to the U.S.

 * Where the Money Went: Out of that $5,000+ average, roughly 34% went directly to local accommodation (hotels/Airbnbs) and 21% went to restaurants and dining.

The Catch: Why Taxpayers Didn't "Make It Back"

If tourists spent over $5.4 billion and the public cost was around $5 billion, it looks like a break-even or a slight win. But economists point out two major reasons why the math doesn't actually work out in the taxpayer's favor:

1. The "Crowding Out" and Displacement Effect

A huge chunk of that $5.4+ billion wasn't entirely new money. During June and July, regular business travelers, convention-goers, and traditional summer families actively avoided major host hubs like New York, Los Angeles, and Miami.

They stayed away because hotel rooms skyrocketed to $700+ a night and traffic was a nightmare. In fact, the U.S. National Travel & Tourism Office noted that overall international arrivals in June rose a meager 0.2% year-over-year. Essentially, high-spending soccer fans just replaced high-spending summer tourists who would have been there anyway.

2. Private Wealth vs. Public Coffers

The biggest disconnect is who got the money.

 * Private Winners: The cash spent by tourists went straight to major hotel conglomerates, airline carriers, and commercial parking operators.

 * Public Losers: The entities that spent the $5 billion were state, federal, and municipal governments (taxpayers) paying for police overtime, sanitation, transit expansions, and stadium upgrades.

Because cities explicitly waived millions in sales taxes on the actual match tickets and corporate hospitality suites to win the FIFA bids, the actual tax revenue clawed back by local governments via hotel occupancy taxes and restaurant sales was only a tiny fraction of the billions spent by tourists.

> The Verdict: The tourism sector—specifically hotels and hospitality—had a highly lucrative six weeks. But for the local governments and taxpayers who funded the infrastructure and security, the direct tax revenue generated by that tourism fell far short of covering the $5 billion public investment.

 

[edjr]

37 minutes ago, The Girlfriend said:

Why are you cheering for FIFA making money?  Us taxpayers put up over $5B so FIFA can make their money.  I assume you're a taxpayer?

he doesn’t pay tax to live in mom’s basement 

[cyclone24]

Just now, The Girlfriend said:

When you map that $5 billion taxpayer cost against what came back in tourism, you find a classic clash between gross spending and net economic reality.

The short answer is that while international visitors spent an estimated $5.4 billion to $6.4 billion directly inside the United States during the six-week tournament, the actual net benefit to local economies was much more modest.

The Direct Return: The Headlines

According to tourism and economic reports tracking the tournament, the direct spending from World Cup visitors was undeniably historic on paper:

 * The Influx: Around 1.24 million international visitors traveled to the U.S. specifically for the games.

 * The "Super Spender" Profile: Because matches were spread so far apart, the average international fan stayed for roughly 12 days and spent over $5,000 per person—which is about 1.7 times what a normal international tourist spends on a trip to the U.S.

 * Where the Money Went: Out of that $5,000+ average, roughly 34% went directly to local accommodation (hotels/Airbnbs) and 21% went to restaurants and dining.

The Catch: Why Taxpayers Didn't "Make It Back"

If tourists spent over $5.4 billion and the public cost was around $5 billion, it looks like a break-even or a slight win. But economists point out two major reasons why the math doesn't actually work out in the taxpayer's favor:

1. The "Crowding Out" and Displacement Effect

A huge chunk of that $5.4+ billion wasn't entirely new money. During June and July, regular business travelers, convention-goers, and traditional summer families actively avoided major host hubs like New York, Los Angeles, and Miami.

They stayed away because hotel rooms skyrocketed to $700+ a night and traffic was a nightmare. In fact, the U.S. National Travel & Tourism Office noted that overall international arrivals in June rose a meager 0.2% year-over-year. Essentially, high-spending soccer fans just replaced high-spending summer tourists who would have been there anyway.

2. Private Wealth vs. Public Coffers

The biggest disconnect is who got the money.

 * Private Winners: The cash spent by tourists went straight to major hotel conglomerates, airline carriers, and commercial parking operators.

 * Public Losers: The entities that spent the $5 billion were state, federal, and municipal governments (taxpayers) paying for police overtime, sanitation, transit expansions, and stadium upgrades.

Because cities explicitly waived millions in sales taxes on the actual match tickets and corporate hospitality suites to win the FIFA bids, the actual tax revenue clawed back by local governments via hotel occupancy taxes and restaurant sales was only a tiny fraction of the billions spent by tourists.

> The Verdict: The tourism sector—specifically hotels and hospitality—had a highly lucrative six weeks. But for the local governments and taxpayers who funded the infrastructure and security, the direct tax revenue generated by that tourism fell far short of covering the $5 billion public investment.

 

JFC im not reading some copy paste of something you purposely already don’t like to fit a narrative that everyone but you nerds seems to get. 
 

You take the olympics you take the world cup. Period. You guys are seriously the weirdest people on the planet. 

[The Girlfriend]

2 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

JFC im not reading some copy paste of something you purposely already don’t like to fit a narrative that everyone but you nerds seems to get. 
 

You take the olympics you take the world cup. Period. You guys are seriously the weirdest people on the planet. 

You don't like facts and data.

[Engorgeous George]

2 minutes ago, The Girlfriend said:

When you map that $5 billion taxpayer cost against what came back in tourism, you find a classic clash between gross spending and net economic reality.

The short answer is that while international visitors spent an estimated $5.4 billion to $6.4 billion directly inside the United States during the six-week tournament, the actual net benefit to local economies was much more modest.

The Direct Return: The Headlines

According to tourism and economic reports tracking the tournament, the direct spending from World Cup visitors was undeniably historic on paper:

 * The Influx: Around 1.24 million international visitors traveled to the U.S. specifically for the games.

 * The "Super Spender" Profile: Because matches were spread so far apart, the average international fan stayed for roughly 12 days and spent over $5,000 per person—which is about 1.7 times what a normal international tourist spends on a trip to the U.S.

 * Where the Money Went: Out of that $5,000+ average, roughly 34% went directly to local accommodation (hotels/Airbnbs) and 21% went to restaurants and dining.

The Catch: Why Taxpayers Didn't "Make It Back"

If tourists spent over $5.4 billion and the public cost was around $5 billion, it looks like a break-even or a slight win. But economists point out two major reasons why the math doesn't actually work out in the taxpayer's favor:

1. The "Crowding Out" and Displacement Effect

A huge chunk of that $5.4+ billion wasn't entirely new money. During June and July, regular business travelers, convention-goers, and traditional summer families actively avoided major host hubs like New York, Los Angeles, and Miami.

They stayed away because hotel rooms skyrocketed to $700+ a night and traffic was a nightmare. In fact, the U.S. National Travel & Tourism Office noted that overall international arrivals in June rose a meager 0.2% year-over-year. Essentially, high-spending soccer fans just replaced high-spending summer tourists who would have been there anyway.

2. Private Wealth vs. Public Coffers

The biggest disconnect is who got the money.

 * Private Winners: The cash spent by tourists went straight to major hotel conglomerates, airline carriers, and commercial parking operators.

 * Public Losers: The entities that spent the $5 billion were state, federal, and municipal governments (taxpayers) paying for police overtime, sanitation, transit expansions, and stadium upgrades.

Because cities explicitly waived millions in sales taxes on the actual match tickets and corporate hospitality suites to win the FIFA bids, the actual tax revenue clawed back by local governments via hotel occupancy taxes and restaurant sales was only a tiny fraction of the billions spent by tourists.

> The Verdict: The tourism sector—specifically hotels and hospitality—had a highly lucrative six weeks. But for the local governments and taxpayers who funded the infrastructure and security, the direct tax revenue generated by that tourism fell far short of covering the $5 billion public investment.

 

I have zero expertise in anything economic.  I take your posting as probably correct though I would have no way of knowing.  On its face it sounds reasonable to me.  I would ask the following though.  Has the effect been fully measured.  We saw many stories of goodwill generated.  To me that indicates that maybe there will be an echo effect where the world may return now to visiting America.  I don't know whether that will be true or how that would be measured, but it seems there could be more positive yet to come as our visitors seem to have left with a good impression.

[cyclone24]

1 minute ago, The Girlfriend said:

You don't like facts and data.

You spelled incessant whiners wrong. 
 

You dont like the fact only complete dipshiit liberals would cry about this. But we arent really surprised. 

[seafoam1]

This is awesome. 

[Caine Mutiny]

I think overall it was a great thing for the USA.

[thegeneral]

It was between the North American bid and Morocco. Tough choice FIFA!

[cyclone24]

5 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

This is awesome. 

Like if our board liberals ever think they don’t have TDS or they wonder what it exactly means. This thread would be it. 
 

Heck, if I would’ve known, this is what it would take to get them to actually care about where tax dollars went because they love to tax people out of their minds. I’d have every soccer tournament and  sporting event in the world here.

[seafoam1]

Excellent job Trump!! The US looks so good. And is doing great. 

[FrancieFootball]

 

[cyclone24]

It’s a pretty sad existence some of you guys have. We know you hope this World Cup would be a failure for some childlike jab at Trump. 
 

And then the goofball, we pretty much all have on ignore trying to take some glee of people aren’t cheering loud enough for the president as if it would matter. Lol who cares nerd. We already all elected him. Boo your little hearts out. Cry your little heart out every day for all we care. We think it’s funny.

We joke about some of you guys need therapy, but I’m not even joking anymore. That is just bizarre. Quite the life you guys have carved out for yourselves.

[edjr]

You've chosen to ignore content by seafoam1. Options 

You've chosen to ignore content by seafoam1. Options 

You've chosen to ignore content by Caine Mutiny. Options 

[thegeneral]

2 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

It’s a pretty sad existence some of you guys have. We know you hope this World Cup would be a failure for some childlike jab at Trump. 
 

And then the goofball, we pretty much all have on ignore trying to take some glee of people aren’t cheering loud enough for the president as if it would matter. Lol who cares nerd. We already all elected him. Boo your little hearts out. Cry your little heart out every day for all we care. We think it’s funny.

We joke about some of you guys need therapy, but I’m not even joking anymore. That is just bizarre. Quite the life you guys have carved out for yourselves.

I’ll speak for myself but I believe pretty much everyone wanted the WC to be a big success. Personally enjoyed it quite a bit, went and partied a couple of the days games were going on, watched a ton of it.

What’s quite sad honestly is the US Prez trying to shoehorn himself into the event and begging for praise like he does in so many things. It’s really pitiful.

[edjr]

9 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

I’ll speak for myself but I believe pretty much everyone wanted the WC to be a big success. Personally enjoyed it quite a bit, went and partied a couple of the days games were going on, watched a ton of it.

What’s quite sad honestly is the US Prez trying to shoehorn himself into the event and begging for praise like he does in so many things. It’s really pitiful.

 

your tds is showing 

https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2017/01/02/barack-obama-sporting-events-games-attended-during-presidency

also

 

[thegeneral]

1 minute ago, edjr said:

 

your tds is showing 

https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2017/01/02/barack-obama-sporting-events-games-attended-during-presidency

also

 

Do you see the difference between attending a game, throwing out a pitch versus claiming credit for the success of an entire event that you had little to do with? He’s like a little kid.

[edjr]

Just now, thegeneral said:

Do you see the difference between attending a game, throwing out a pitch versus claiming credit for the success of an entire event that you had little to do with? He’s like a little kid.

Does it in anyway change a thing? was a great event.

Owners of sports franchises show up and get handed a trophy when their teams win a championship. what the fock did they do, other than $?

there is a reason the cowboys haven’t won in 30+ years. meddling owner

[thegeneral]

1 minute ago, edjr said:

Does it in anyway change a thing? was a great event.

Owners of sports franchises show up and get handed a trophy when their teams win a championship. what the fock did they do, other than $?

there is a reason the cowboys haven’t won in 30+ years. meddling owner

No it doesn’t change anything. It makes him look like a needy dipshit and an embarrassment.

[edjr]

Just now, thegeneral said:

No it doesn’t change anything. It makes him look like a needy dipshit and an embarrassment.

and you needed this event to know that?

[SaintsInDome2006]

Remember, kids, it’s America First, not Trump First. Choose.

[thegeneral]

4 minutes ago, edjr said:

and you needed this event to know that?

Of course not. I am commenting in the “Trump delivered the greatest WC” thread. You said this was TDS.

[thegeneral]

2 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

So you hate every country that hosts the world cup. Or are you just tds stupid like we know you are? 

Someone is hurting badly. 

[TimHauck]

19 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Do you see the difference between attending a game, throwing out a pitch versus claiming credit for the success of an entire event that you had little to do with? He’s like a little kid.

And getting a suspension overturned…

[thegeneral]

2 minutes ago, edjr said:

Fair point. I didn’t even realize this was a loser peefoam thread. 

Lol yeah a peefoam production.

Thought this WC was badass. Being in the same time zone made it easy to watch.

[seafoam1]

5 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Lol yeah a peefoam production.

Thought this WC was badass. Being in the same time zone made it easy to watch.

Thegenital is hurting again. 

[seafoam1]

12 minutes ago, edjr said:

Fair point. I didn’t even realize this was a loser peefoam thread. 

Shoot. UneducatedEd got hurt again.

Sad. 

[edjr]

9 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Lol yeah a peefoam production.

Thought this WC was badass. Being in the same time zone made it easy to watch.

I know you’re a good dude and I enjoy your posts.

[kutulu]

8 minutes ago, edjr said:

I know you’re a good dude and I enjoy your posts.

and he likes the taste

[seafoam1]

13 minutes ago, edjr said:

I know you’re a good dude and I enjoy your posts.

Poor uneducatedEd.  

[WhiteWonder]

1. peefoam is terrible

2. Trump is a child

3. tds is alive and well, Rusty is a huge example who cries that it isn't a real syndrome 

4. it's a shame the otherwise cool general is one of them

5 i enjoyed the world cup very much

[The Girlfriend]

8 hours ago, cyclone24 said:

Like if our board liberals ever think they don’t have TDS or they wonder what it exactly means. This thread would be it. 
 

Heck, if I would’ve known, this is what it would take to get them to actually care about where tax dollars went because they love to tax people out of their minds. I’d have every soccer tournament and  sporting event in the world here.

Why would you applaud FIFA making billions when it cost we the taxpayers billions?

[Frozenbeernuts]

If Biden was president and the WC went exactly the same way, the libs would be hailing it a great success.

[TimHauck]

36 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

If Biden was president and the WC went exactly the same way, the libs would be hailing it a great success.

It was a success overall.  Although the average attendance was a bit below 1994 (@Meglamaniac was wrong)

[edjr]

54 minutes ago, The Girlfriend said:

Why would you applaud FIFA making billions when it cost we the taxpayers billions?

why are you forgetting all the money america made? hotels, restaurants, transportation, stadiums etc.

how is it any different than a city/state giving billions for new stadiums? whose money do they use?

[Tree of Knowledge]

8 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Remember, kids, it’s America First, not Trump First. Choose.

The cool thing is Trump is America.  No choice is necessary.