Zippin Pippin likely to cost half-million more than anticipated

Whenever I see a thread evolve like this, I think that some participants might benefit by meditating on Federalist Paper #10.

"Anti-capitalism" is about as loaded a term as "pro-life" or "pro-choice." As if there is some absolute in one direction or the other.

Thats true of a lot of labels. Not sure what makes it different for anti-capitalism.

Unchecked capitalism is at least as bad of an idea as pure socialism. Without some form of laws, regulations and oversight, pure capitalism simply evolves into the richest having total control over everything. Total control by the richest people is no better or worse than total control by the government, that's why there has to be a way for both sides to keep things in check.

The biggest problem right now is that neither side seems to have any trust in the other, which is forcing people towards picking absolutes and driving everyone apart.

Aamilj said:
GM and Rollercoasters do not benifit the whole.

You can't look at the GM bailout in a vacuum. If GM had been left to die, the economical impact would have been fairly enormous. Sure, in better economic times allowing GM to fail would probably have been little more than a decade-long bout of relatively localized misery, but in case you haven't noticed, our economy ain't exactly humming along (and was worse when Obama took the reigns). Besides, GM is paying that money back, with interest (much like Chrysler did in the 80's, and is doing again today).

So yeah, I think saving GM was and is better for the whole Nation, at least at this time.

Certainly not the majority of folks but a lot more than I would have ever thought. And numbers have grown since the financial/economic crisis started 3 years ago.

Isn't this what Marxist-Lenin theory predicts as the natural progression?

You can't look at the GM bailout in a vacuum.

You and I will never agree on this Daemon. I honestly believe that the GM bailout was nothing more than payback to union contributors. I don't believe the "too big to fail" argument in the least. Ford was stable under similar circumstances.

As for GM paying back, there is debate on that. I believe that one's willingness to trust the government when they proclaim financial successes is guided by their worldview. I admit I always take a cynical approach when any government entity preaches economics. I point to the 50 trillion plus unfunded federal liabilities and the 2 trillion plus State/local deficits (see 60 minutes link) as good reason for my cynicism.

If government was reasonable and accountable with economic projections, then how do we find ourselves in such debt at EVERY level? There is a worldview difference here. I see government as the primary problem, some see government as the savior.

Which brings us back on topic. I simply am not shocked in the least that the Pippen coaster is 500K over budget. I surmise that this is just the beginning, and this number will go up. Anybody who took the time to read those meeting minutes I linked to can see that the politicians are playing fast and loose with the accounting on this. They want their coaster. They want to minimize the extraneous costs associated with the coaster (maintenance, security, management, etc) in the projections to sell the idea that this will be profitable.

Even if this one example of questionable government activity actually lucks into profitability for the City of Green Bay, I point to those trillions and trillions of unfunded liabilities as evidence that my cynicism for this project and others is based on empirical data.

The fact is, I like coasters. If I ever find myself in Green Bay I will certainly make every effort to ride it. This does not mean that I agree with how this coaster is being funded.

Aamilj said:
I honestly believe that the GM bailout was nothing more than payback to union contributors.

Oh, well, if you believe that crackpot theory, then it must certainly be true. Or something.

I don't believe the "too big to fail" argument in the least.

Then I'll assume you don't work near any sort of large-scale industrial manufacturing regions. If GM had failed, the reverberations would have been felt Nation-wide, simply due to the fragile state of the economy at that time. The number of people who would have been immediately unemployed (estimated as high as 2,000,000, but probably more realistically in the high hundreds of thousands) would have put an enormous strain on an already strained unemployment insurance.

Ford was stable under similar circumstances.

Spoken out of ignorance. Not long before the credit market evaporated, Ford took out a bunch of loans in order to "fix" their company. Those loans seem to be paying off quite well for Ford.

Of course, GM & Chrysler were late to the financing party. The two companies needed financing to secure their future, and none was available, which is why they went begging to the government.

So no, Ford's circumstances were not in any way, shape or form similar to that of GM or Chrysler.

As for GM paying back, there is debate on that.

No, there's not. They are paying it back, and all signs point to the government earning interest as well. Much like Chrysler, who, when paying back loans guaranteed by the government in the 80's, made the government $350 million dollars (about $750 million adjusted for inflation) wealthier through interest.

Saying "I don't trust them" is not a logical argument by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh, well, if you believe that crackpot theory, then it must certainly be true.

Spoken out of ignorance.

I've been down this route before. It somehow ends with me being accused of upsetting the "tone?" I'll just note that the "tone" had been quite civil to this point.

Needless to say Daemon, there is hardly an issue (any?) that I've seen from you in regards to politics that I would agree with. If I spend the time and effort to refute your takes, it gets twisted that I'm the uncivilized participant.

As such, I will agree to disagree with you civally. I'll allow some of the other participants who see the world a bit more like I do to refute, if they desire. Once the "tone" calms down, I'll gladly participate...

I think his bigger issue is that citing conspiracy theories doesn't make much of an argument.

I just love political forums. Everybody thinks they are right and everybody else is wrong. A political forum is just as entertaining to keep up with as a religious one.

I for one, beleive this country is being ran by lobbyist's anyway. I don't have any comment on the socialism side of this argument. And secondly, wanna know how I am forced to wear a seatbelt, that I don't want to wear, while being passed by motorcyclist that don't even have to wear a helmet. Will someone, anyone please explain to me how this makes sense.

Corkscrew Follies said:
Everybody thinks they are right and everybody else is wrong.

I think that's true in most discussions.

The most interesting (and telling) aspect for me is how each person handles what they feel is another's 'wrong' take on things. There definitely seems to be trends in what one believes and how they tend view the other side or an opinion that differs for their own.

Jane, you ignorant slut. ;)

Exactly. :)

I think his bigger issue is that citing conspiracy theories doesn't make much of an argument.

Again in the name of protecting the "tone" for which I have been accused ;), I will refrain from thorough debate. Suffice to say that I civilly disagree with what does and does not make a conspiracy theory. I also civilly disagree with the definition of "argument" you define. Suffice to say, we see the world from a much different perspective.

The most interesting (and telling) aspect for me is how each person handles what they feel is another's 'wrong' take on things.

;)

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20110927/GPG0602/109270484/Editorial-Zippin-Pippin-investment-pays-off

:)

But it's immoral!

And of course the responses to that article are still blasting this addition. Unreal!!!!!

I just thought it was important to note that ZP did in fact contribute financially as well as culturally. The city of Green Bay was a very nice town before, but now has more activities and more funding for the future thanks to the addition.

Al Davis would have been proud....Win, baby, win! :)

^^Most people in the comments seem to be calling for ROI numbers, but in my opinion it's far, far too soon to say. Plus, quit being lazy and do some math yourself.

Incorrectly assuming that it costs $0 to run the ride, it was a $3.5 million investment. It drew 403,503 rides at $1 a ride. If it maintains the ridership and ticket price, it will take just under 9 years for the ride to 'pay for itself' in ticket sales alone.

For better or worse, that's what whiners will focus on, because 9 years is the infinite future as far as politics are concerned, and it's easy to say "9 YEARS!?! That's ridiculous!?". It's very headline friendly. It's shortsighted and ignorant, but that's how it goes. Pay no mind to the boost in profile and attendance at Beech Bend [edit: Gah, Bay Beech...], or the addition of a must-do, non-football tourist activity in Green Bay. Pay no mind to the fact that the life of a wooden roller coaster and the benefits that it can provide to an area can very realistically last for 10x that long.

^You seem to have missed a very salient point, revenue-wise: "The $2.5 million in total revenue at the park was the highest ever in the park's 100-year history and 50 percent more than the pre-Zippin Pippin season in 2010."

Not sure if they meant 50% increase over the prior year (approx. 1.7M revenue in 2010 and 2.5M in 2011), or if they meant that the 2.5M represented a 50% increase (i.e., 1.25M in revenue in 2010 vs. 2.5M in 2011). In either case, the fact remains that Bay Beach took in at least an additional 800K this year (apparently ZP did increase ridership on the park's other attractions, LOL - ALL operating rides sure looked busy the day we were there), and as much as 1.25M. Any investment paying for itself in 5 years is a STEAL...and if the article's "50% increase" is taken the other way, we're talking 3 years. Inconceivable!