I think the economic activity arguments miss a very big value. Back in the 1970s and 1980s when my grandparents were still alive, they didn't get out much but they loved to listen to the royals on the radio and watch them on tv. They maybe went to one game every two years tops, but they felt a connection to the team and it enhanced the quality of their lives. Not everyone wants to watch idotic shows like american idol.

Given a decent team (the last few years for the royals hopefully aren't the rule), I am sure having major league baseball in town brings value to thousands of senior citizens and other low income hard working people that can't aford to actually go to many games. Having a team also builds a sense of community.

Unless an economic study gives significant value to those factors it is incomplete and unreliable.

Why should an economic study weigh non-economic values?

If you want to make non-economic values on the benefits to having a baseball team, that's fine. They certainly played on that during the election ("save our teams!" "keep Kansas City Major League!"). But its unquantifiable and we'll never know whether its worth $400 million for intangible benefits.

However, the tangible, economic benefits of the TSC are pretty clearly not worth the money.

They were certainly worth a $2 million FUD and misinformation campaign, to those that bankrolled it.

More powerful forces than "the will and well-being of the people," were and are at work.