International Olympic Committee numbers

[Shammrog]

So after all the backtracking you are doing here, why were you going along with the people who were glad Chicago lost out? I think it's too bad they did, but, as I said in the beginning, the US didn't have the numbers and has been an Olympic site many times. South America has not. So I am not all that concerned. But some are gleeful that Chicago lost. Seems a bit unpatriotic to be gleeful about it. Why join that group?

What have I backtracked on? Not one single thing.

I am not "gleeful" that Chicago lost. But I think its a good thing for the country as a whole (and fiscally for Chicago). That notwithstanding, Chicago is a great city.

[YourLandlord]

I am not "gleeful" that Chicago lost. But I think its a good thing for the country as a whole (and fiscally for Chicago). That notwithstanding, Chicago is a great city.

I disagree. Hosting the Olympics is a wonderful thing for a country. The fiscal side might be risky, but actually hosting is good.

[allenmurray]

It would have been great for Chicago, and Chicago is a very cool and exciting town. But, the taxpayers inevitably been screwed (Chicago, Illinois, and Federal) - to the tune of billions if not tens of billions of dollars. Best to blame this one on Rio.

Should we end the olympics altogether? It costs a lot no matter where it is held. If everybody says it is too expensive . . . On the other hand the enormous cost of needed infrastructure is a good argument for a permanant site (or sites).

As a source of national pride hosting an olympics is a bit hard to put a price tag on. If one of the only real superpowers in the world wants to say, "we don't want it because it is too expensive" perhaps the world has outgrown Olympic games. Because if we can't do it is it realistic to think anyone can?

[InSpades]

Should we end the olympics altogether? It costs a lot no matter where it is held. If everybody says it is too expensive . . . On the other hand the enormous cost of needed infrastructure is a good argument for a permanant site (or sites).

As a source of national pride hosting an olympics is a bit hard to put a price tag on. If one of the only real superpowers in the world wants to say, "we don't want it because it is too expensive" perhaps the world has outgrown Olympic games. Because if we can't do it is it realistic to think anyone can?

I don't think it should ever come to that. The reason that Olympics lose money is because of grossly excessive expenses (the Bird's Nest?) or hosting where it shouldn't be held (Athens?). There are plenty of places where hosting an Olympics wouldn't require building so many new stadiums and whatnot. I remember when NYC was putting in an Olympic bid and there were so many projects attached to it that it would have cost a fortune. There's no reason the opening ceremonies couldn't have been held in Giants Stadium for example. It seems like people use the Olympics as an excuse to build things that aren't needed.

Also I don't think nations are really saying it is too expensive anyway. Maybe they should be saying it but they don't appear to be. Possibly they just need to be scaled back a bit. Every Olympics doesn't have to be bigger and better than the one before it.

[allenmurray]

I don't think it should ever come to that. The reason that Olympics lose money is because of grossly excessive expenses (the Bird's Nest?) or hosting where it shouldn't be held (Athens?). There are plenty of places where hosting an Olympics wouldn't require building so many new stadiums and whatnot. I remember when NYC was putting in an Olympic bid and there were so many projects attached to it that it would have cost a fortune. There's no reason the opening ceremonies couldn't have been held in Giants Stadium for example. It seems like people use the Olympics as an excuse to build things that aren't needed.

Also I don't think nations are really saying it is too expensive anyway. Maybe they should be saying it but they don't appear to be. Possibly they just need to be scaled back a bit. Every Olympics doesn't have to be bigger and better than the one before it.

I agree with you - I don't think it should or needs to end because of cost - but if folks here in the good old USofA are going to cite cost as a reason that the US shouldn't host, then that is the logical extension of their argument - if we can't afford it, who can?

I also agree that way too much building goes on. Chicago, NYC, LA, even a combined Washington DC/Baltimore could host with little new construction needed. They all have multiple professional stadiums already in place, a number of universities with large stadiums (that could be turned into housing during summer months), multiple airports, etc.

[blazindw]

Here in Detroit we know corruption, and it sure ain't funny.

Our ex-mayor went to jail, and is still paying millions in restitution to the city.

His license to practice law was revoked, but he will be eligible to run for office again in a couple of years.

And he will be reelected mayor when he runs.

OK. Maybe that is a little bit funny, if you don't live in Detroit.


Getting a few thousand corpses to vote? Now that is funny.

Kwame will not get re-elected again. He probably won't even move back to Detroit...he lives in Dallas right now and I doubt he returns. Even if he did, no way he gets re-elected...if he came back and ran, I would move home and run against him in a second.

[-jk]

Interesting article in the Post yesterday, "Myths About Landing the Olympics" by Stefan Szymanski, "a professor of economics at the Cass Business School at City University London and the author, most recently, of Playbooks and Checkbooks: An Introduction to the Economics of Modern Sports."

[S]ince Los Angeles in 1984, there have been no cases where the Games can show a net profit.

It's hard not to be skeptical, though, about claims by any organization whose major sponsors are Coca-Cola and McDonald's that what it does is good for your health.

-jk

[AtlBluRew]

I have to disagree with those who assert that the Chicago taxpayers would have been left covering a loss. In Atlanta, with no government assistance and with government services (trash removal, police, police overtime, etc.) being paid for by the private organizing committee, we: retired the debt on the existing Atlanta/Fulton County Stadium, built a new stadium, built and/or refurbished athletic venues at high schools and universities throughout the city (and in Athens, GA), built and donated the Athletes Village to the state university system for use as dorms for Georgia Tech and Georgia State, and built a park that is now a hub of economic development (including being the site of the Georgia Aquarium and numerous hotel/condo buildings) ... and we made a profit. Granted, the profit was only in 5 figures and not the millions that were hoped for, but the Oympics were unquestionably a boon to Atlanta.

While the NBC and European broadcast contracts were the largest ever to date for the Atlanta Games, the current contracts are much larger still. It's my impression that Chicago's got more infrastructure in place that Atlanta did when it was awarded the Games. I would expect Chicago to turn a profit on the Games, and to reap economic rewards for years to come, as Atlanta has.

[Shammrog]

Should we end the olympics altogether? It costs a lot no matter where it is held. If everybody says it is too expensive . . . On the other hand the enormous cost of needed infrastructure is a good argument for a permanant site (or sites).

As a source of national pride hosting an olympics is a bit hard to put a price tag on. If one of the only real superpowers in the world wants to say, "we don't want it because it is too expensive" perhaps the world has outgrown Olympic games. Because if we can't do it is it realistic to think anyone can?

Noooo... but given the state of our economy I think we might be best off getting our fiscal house in order before paying to host the Olympics. That's all I am saying.

[BD80]

Noooo... but given the state of our economy I think we might be best off getting our fiscal house in order before paying to host the Olympics. That's all I am saying.

Will there still be Olympics in 2416?

[Indoor66]

Will there still be Olympics in 2416?

I doubt it. The ancients don't give us much beyond 2012.

[Shammrog]

Will there still be Olympics in 2416?

Yes, but you are an optimist if you think we'll have it together by then.

[allenmurray]

Yes, but you are an optimist if you think we'll have it together by then.

I'm always an optimist about my country. I remain convinced we can do great things. I've always been puzzled by the marriage of pessimism and patriotism by some.

[Shammrog]

I'm always an optimist about my country. I remain convinced we can do great things. I've always been puzzled by the marriage of pessimism and patriotism by some.

Like most anything, you have to take the bad with the good. And we haven't exactly been fiscally responsible... at any point in my lifetime.

[YourLandlord]

Like most anything, you have to take the bad with the good. And we haven't exactly been fiscally responsible... at any point in my lifetime.

This post will be deleted in 3...2...1...

[JBDuke]

Folks, I've deleted a number of posts in this thread that discuss the PPB and have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Let's keep this thread about Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics, the fiscal merits of hosting the Olympics, and other similarly related topics.

Thanks.

[throatybeard]

I'm particularly dismayed at some of the PPB usual suspects trying to turn this into a fight. For that reason, I haven't acted as a mod in this thread, but it really illustrates why we gave up on the PPB as a place that could be civil.

[allenmurray]

Folks, I've deleted a number of posts in this thread that discuss the PPB and have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Let's keep this thread about Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics, the fiscal merits of hosting the Olympics, and other similarly related topics.

Thanks.

Any debate about Chicago's bid for the Olympics will involve arguments about the appropriateness of our president traveling to present to the IOC, and thus will take a strong Public Policy direction. Any debate about the fiscal merits of hosting the Olympics will take a strong Public Policy turn very quickly because hosting any Olympics always will involve tax money. If you really want us to stay away from PPB material I suggest that the thread be closed. It s difficult to know where the new lines are, this one seems to actually be tempting folks to try to walk the tightrope.