Why Doesn’t the Government Fix Sporting Events?

This blog has clever readers. One of them, Corey Forbes, writes in to say:

We know that point shaving, game throwing, match fixing, and referee scandals have existed in professional and college sports since as long ago as the 1919 Chicago White Sox. Knowing this, why doesn’t the U.S. Government just fix a sporting event(s) to pay off its debts … or are they doing this already?

I love the “or are they doing this already?”

Anyway: why not indeed (other than the potential p.r. and financial disasters)?

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 31

View All Comments »
  1. Clinton Barber says:

    Because if we ever caught them doing something that heinous, we’d never be able to trust them again.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1
  2. Seminymous Coward says:

    The US government debt is ~$16.4 trillion. The entire US annual GDP is ~$15.7 trillion. A single F-22 (~$150 million) costs more than the total bet on any Super Bowl (~$95 million, admittedly licit only).

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
    • nobody.really says:

      Fixing sporting events doesn’t make money. RUNNING A RIGGED GAMBLING RACKET makes money. So the real question is, why doesn’t government raise money by running a rigged gambling racket?

      And the real answer is: Ever hear of the lottery? Government rigs the games to offer returns much lower than are available on casino wagers. And government gets away with this because it bans most competing lotteries.

      In short, government could fix sporting events — but why bother? It can get the same returns legally through the lottery.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
  3. Jovanov says:

    Mr.Dubner please look into Guiseley a team in third division in England. No Economics is required to figure out the scam happening there (i have been making huge profits due to this) .
    The Governemnt may not be involved but surely the owners are.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  4. rationalrevolution says:

    This doesn’t sound clever, it sounds idiotic. First of all, how much sport fixing would be required to “pay off” over $14 trillion in debt. Doesn’t seem even remotely possible to generate that kind of revenue from “sports fixing”. Another issue, of course, is whether or not “paying off” debt is even a good idea or a desired activity among the worlds financial elite (who pretty much are the ones driving the system in the first place).

    First let’s consider that about 1/3 of the US debt is owed to domestic programs, like Social Security and other types of pension and retirement systems. This isn’t debt that you can just “pay off”, this debt has to be paid down as needed. Granted, over the next 15 years it will be needed.

    Then there is debt held by private investors, both foreign and domestic. Again, you can’t simply pay this debt off. This debt has a schedule. I guess that the Fed could buy back that debt, but in order to do so it would have to pay more than the debt it worth. Seems quite an unusual approach to take. But really, the truth is that private investors WANT to buy US debt. There is a lot of market demand for government debt in truth, an this is one of the reasons that we have so much debt, because the rich and the powerful want the US government to be in debt for multiple reasons, it benefits them in several ways.

    I have no doubt that if the richest and most powerful people in america REALLY wanted us to eliminate federal debt that we would do so, but the truth is that they don’t. They benefit in 3 ways from debt issuance. #1 the use of credit reduces current tax rates, #2 they know that government spending helps the economy in general, and in many cases government spending directly aids them or their assets (government contracts with private businesses, bailouts, government backed loans, etc.) #3 the government has to issue debt if they are going to have t-bills to put money into. Now you may say that currently the price of t-bills is so low that they aren’t even worth investing in, but if you are a billionaire with more money than you know what to do with and you want to keep some of it in something viewed as very safe, then you will have a reason to buy t-bills….

    So really, why doesn’t the government pay off the debt? Because actually paying off the debt is a lot harder than simply raising revenue and paying a bill, and there are a lot of very rich and powerful people who have a vested interesting in the government maintaining its debt load…

    What the treasury markets are basically telling us is that creditors are not calling on the US government to pay back its debts, and thus, that’s the reason that we aren’t doing so…

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4
    • Clancy says:

      Remember, also, that the money still has to come from somewhere. For every bet winner, there has to be a loser (or losers) so even if you won $16E12 on a bet, that’s still pulling it out of the economy so the overall effect is just as damaging as a humongous one-off tax (maybe with different distributional effects)

      Unless, maybe, you bet against the Federal Reserve. . .

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
    • Steve Cebalt says:

      The reader’s suggestion was by no means idiotic. It was lighthearted and bright and made me smile.

      Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
    • Clancy says:

      So now I’m thinking: If it doesn’t make sense for the federal government, what about State governments? They’re smaller and more likely to get into real debt crises that call for desperate measures. Then I realize: most states already have a huge revenue stream based off of rigged gambling. It’s called a State Lottery! Why go through the effort of (illegally) fixing a sporting event when millions of people are willing to bet on little balls being sucked into a tube even when the odds are obviously well against them!

      Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
  5. Robert Foltman says:

    Maybe other reasons why are: A. They would be breaking their own federal law prohibiting sports wagering and B. There isn’t a big enough market that could handle their bets.

    A far better idea would be to legalize sports wagering and tax it, which is what most people want anyway.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
  6. Ken says:

    What sporting event are they going to fix to net them $16t? There isn’t that big of a difference between the Cowboys in the Super Bowl and Jaguars.

    Perhaps instead of fixing the Super Bowl, the should fix the budget!

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
  7. Mike B says:

    Better and less disruptive sources of Government revenue would include a sponsorship programme where Taxpayers can sponsor what their taxes pay for like tanks or police cars. Basically works like a PBS pledge drive where you pay a certain amount you get your name on something. Paying extra gets you more perks. Government can sell naming rights for buildings, a spot on currency or stamps, etc. Also with its intelligence apparatus it can make insider trades based on upcoming world events and structure the trades to impact non-citizens.

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
  8. Michele says:

    Who trusts the government?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0