GV 2 Whistle, ACLU Stepping in

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

You're suggesting that almost all amateur athletic programs are run by simply accumulating debt that is never paid back? I find that very unlikely. After all who would loan them the money in the first place?

Most amateur athletic programs are run via registration fees, sponsorships, donations and fund raising but at the end of the day they have to pay their bills. This is what I mean when I say self-supporting.

No, stop assuming what I'm suggesting because you keep getting it wrong. You'll save time.

I said "any meaningful definition." The fact that virtually every amateur athletic program in the world either gets sufficient support makes your statement meaningless. Of course they're all self-supporting, but so?

Now, some of them get support from other sports (the men's tennis team at the University of Iowa, for example, is likely taking their funds from the football team). Others get it straight from donors. Others get it from tax dollars, raffles, bake sales, etc.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, stop assuming what I'm suggesting because you keep getting it wrong. You'll save time.

You'll note that I asked if that was what you were suggesting. I didn't assume it.

I said "any meaningful definition." The fact that virtually every amateur athletic program in the world either gets sufficient support makes your statement meaningless. Of course they're all self-supporting, but so?

So, you said very few were self-supporting. Now, of course they all are.

Now, some of them get support from other sports (the men's tennis team at the University of Iowa, for example, is likely taking their funds from the football team). Others get it straight from donors. Others get it from tax dollars, raffles, bake sales, etc.

This is my point exactly (well, except for the tax dollars bit). They should support themselves, not take tax money. (Unless, of course, the tax was specifically raised for the purposes of supporting athletics.)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

1. You'll note that I asked if that was what you were suggesting. I didn't assume it.



2. So, you said very few were self-supporting. Now, of course they all are.



3. This is my point exactly (well, except for the tax dollars bit). They should support themselves, not take tax money. (Unless, of course, the tax was specifically raised for the purposes of supporting athletics.)

1. I missed the question mark on what was grammatically written as a statement. Fair enough.

2 and 3. I addressed them in my next post. I'll just say that most school budgets are passed with the assumption that sports are included.