Good question. But he is not pulling the team, just his half of the ownership. I am sure there was a bond floated for the property and they get some kind of tax break. But then again who benefits from 60,000 (74,916 seating capacity) people coming to town to see the game besides the obvious people.

And I guess these guys get something out of it:

"The Dolphin Stadium Foundation is a non-profit foundation established in 1995 and is dedicated to the support of non-profit, charitable organizations, which place emphasis upon youth-related programs, academics, and drug-intervention and prevention programs."


According to their website it cost $115 million to build and was financed by private funds, through lease of executive suites and club seats. And I am sure other sponsorships and advertising.

Here is a comparison from the WSJ between the canidates.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122497140074869661.html

Obama's New Attack on Those Who Don't Want Higher Taxes: ‘Selfishness’
October 31, 2008 10:58 AM

On the stump this week, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has pushed back against Sen. John McCain's description of his tax policies.

"The reason that we want to do this, change our tax code, is not because I have anything against the rich," Obama said in Sarasota, Florida, yesterday. "I love rich people! I want all of you to be rich. Go for it. That’s the America dream, that’s the American way, that’s terrific.

(continues)
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-new-atta.html

October 31, 2008
Obama Forgot to Spread His Own Wealth
Patrick Poole
Even when making more than $250,000, he gave away less than 1 percent to charity until he became a millionaire.


Thinking about Barack Obama's impromptu lecture to Joe "the Plumber" Wurzelbacher about his plans to "spread the wealth", I wondered whether Obama was a practitioner of his own "spread the wealth" principles when he had the opportunity to do so, or whether he was the cheap political opportunist and redistributor of the wealth of others that he appeared to be.


Looking at Obama's charitable giving in since 2000 based on his tax returns, we find that Obama consistently refused to follow his own advice to "spread the wealth" when he had the opportunity to do so. This is especially true in years when he made nearly $250,000 or more. Their contributions didn't increase until Barack Obama's extraordinary book deal helped make him a millionaire and Michelle Obama received a nearly $200,000 raise in May 2005 when she assumed a new position with her employer as vice president of "community and external affairs".


As the chart below shows (HT: TaxProf Blog), from 2000-2004, Obama's charitable giving was less than 1 percent:






In fact, Obama gave substantially less than the average family making more than $150,000, which averages giving of 2.2 percent of total income according to University of George Professor Russell James.


By comparison, John McCain gave more than one-quarter of his income in 2006 and 2007 (28.6 and 27.3 percent respectively). And according to the New York Observer, since 1998, he has donated royalties on his books totaling more than $1.8 million.


When Barack and Michelle Obama could voluntarily give more of their own income and had the means well beyond most Americans to do so, they refused. In the event that Barack Obama is elected President, however, he and his Democrat allies in Congress intend to force others to do what he couldn't do on his own.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...d_his_own.html

And GWB raised taxes on everyone by defunding programs that the states and cities had to support, causing them to raise taxes. Most of the money went directly to the war or to service the debt for the war and 'tax cuts'.

BTW, many economists believe that McCain will have to raise taxes also. The only way not to is to stop the wars, or take from Social Security, Defense, or Medicare. The 'chainsaw' method of simply slashing all spending across the board would be a disaster.

As for charitable giving, what does that have to do with taxes? If your wife is worth at least $100 million and you don't have any dependents, you can be a lot freer with contributions. Obama is probably already putting money into both of his daughters college funds.

Clone thread:
The Tax Shit

I don't really care about the charitable contributions issue, but that is seriously the weakest comeback ever.

Obama, who has positioned himself as the one for the little guy, doesn't give to the poor... because he has to put money in his kids' college plan? He's rich. He has been for a little while. He has an insane retirement plan regardless of this election. He has ZERO money worries, not even college tuition.

http://cellar.org/2008/fedchart.gif

If we can lower the bar called "interest on debt" it will be good for *everybody* including the ppl making $200,000.

Yeeeeah... Didja know John McCain has seven children? I don't know which ones are in college, but at least four of them are college-age or younger.

Give me the 100 million and I'll take the kids too.

Some people won't part with a buck, unless it's a registered charity they can deduct from their taxes... some will.

Really? doesn't sound much different than Obamy's plan.

How about Pelosi? she must be one shitty mother to leave all those kids alone while she went after the power of a member of the US House. :eyebrow:

I'm not commenting on how well any of them raises their kids, just pointing out what a stupid defense it is to say that someone can't donate to charity because they have two kids.

I will pay more tax on my family's 100K income, if we can use our military effectively (and manage their vast support contracts competitively and strictly), invest in long term public good works like roads, grid, energy independence, security, (jobs to market to pay down deficit) invest in early childhood ed, vet benefits and control the burden of health care. With strong governance I believe investment will payoff and get us out of Republican deficit hock. I want Obama and his smarter crew driving the bus.

And all I'm saying is that he did donate to charity. I just think comparing McCains single income and stating that he donated %25 of his income when his wife had a net worth of over $100 million dollars versus combined income for a family of four is a vastly different circumstance.

And Obama's tax proposal will affect him, so he does join Warren Buffet and others who believe that the wealthy are under-taxed due to loopholes in a US tax code that is 7500 pages.