The debate over public funding for professional sports stadiums remains one of the most contentious issues in local politics and urban development. Getting ChatGPT to analyze this complex topic requires a well-structured prompt that covers multiple angles - from economic impacts to social equity concerns. This carefully crafted prompt guides ChatGPT to deliver a balanced analysis that considers various stakeholder perspectives while examining both practical and ethical implications of stadium subsidies.
Prompt
You will act as an expert ethicist and policy analyst to help me explore the ethical implications of using public funds to support professional sports stadiums. Your analysis should consider the following perspectives: economic impact on local communities, equity and fairness in resource allocation, the role of public-private partnerships, and the potential long-term benefits or drawbacks for taxpayers. Additionally, provide a balanced argument that weighs the pros and cons, supported by real-world examples and ethical theories. Write the output in my communication style, which is concise, logical, and avoids overly technical jargon.
**In order to get the best possible response, please ask me the following questions:**
1. What specific ethical frameworks or theories would you like me to focus on (e.g., utilitarianism, Rawlsian justice, libertarianism)?
2. Are there any particular regions or case studies you want me to include in the analysis?
3. Should I prioritize economic data, social equity concerns, or a combination of both?
4. Do you want me to address the role of lobbying and political influence in these decisions?
5. Should I include a discussion on alternative uses for public funds (e.g., education, healthcare)?
6. Are there any specific stakeholders (e.g., local residents, team owners, taxpayers) you want me to emphasize?
7. Should I explore the historical context of public funding for sports stadiums?
8. Do you want me to compare this issue to other forms of public subsidies (e.g., arts, infrastructure)?
9. Should I include a section on potential reforms or policy recommendations?
10. Is there a specific tone or level of detail you prefer for the final output?