Jump to content

International Events VI: Glorious Anarchy and Chaos!


TheLastWolf

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Padraig said:

As I am writing this, I feel I must apologise.  I've read what I consider so many bad posts, that I can't take it seriously anymore.  Not really your fault Week.

No problem - I'm a few steps behind on the road to nihilism too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

It can't do anything about those things (or other world problems).

And this became me claiming that the article was suggesting that world problems would be fixed by stopping the Olympics

Yeah it kinda follows you’re building a strawman for the by declaring stopping the Olympics would not stop the world problems as if that’s what’s the article claimed

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

You might think that stopping the Olympics is a great idea but that's something that you brought up.  I was never responding to that idea (never explicitly anyhow).  That's what I was objecting to.  (I could obviously talk about stopping the Olympics but it was the second time in a row that my words were misinterpreted by you).

Forgive me but this statement doesn’t track with your posts so far in this thread.

You’ve mocked any statement in regards to the continuation of the Olympics being wasteful. Whilst not really offered a benefit to them besides it being fun to watch. 

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

Your confusion is part of the reason why the article was thrash. :)  The article is throwing mud at the Olympics.  A logical conclusion (I suppose) would be to suggest that if you remove the Olympics, the mud would go away.

The amount mud attached to the Olympics perhaps. It is not a logical to infer that the article thinks if not for the Olympics we would would be sitting around in a drum circle going Kumbaya.
 

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

You are just going to tie yourself in knots with this argument too.   How exactly does the world deal with totalitarian regimes?  Its such a broad question.  And people will wave off my argument and say its "whataboutism".  And try to reduce the discussion to as simple as possible.  China bad.  China not allowed to host any sporting event.  In fact, they aren't allowed to compete. 

Yes, Preferably in regards to the Olympics at least yes, and yes. 

Agreed on it being a simple approach in regards to here. I do not see it as a bad one.

Please explain how going China bad(for being a totalitarian regime currently in the process of committing genocide ), China not allowed to host(for being a totalitarian currently in the process of committing genocide),or even complete, will make a world a worse place.

At least to the perspective of liberal democracies. 
 

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

But in fact, once you start, you can't just stop at China.  There are other governments that are shady.

Exactly, Russia, Saudi Arabia, when it was a thing Nazi Germany are all countries that should have been barred
What is the crucial reason for liberal deomocracies to perform a sporting event with them? 

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

And that is just sports.  Somebody may suggest that sports is trivial.  But now that we have banned 50 (say) countries from sporting events, I can bet you any amount of money you care for, that other things are effected.

Effected negatively?

Alright explain in what ways exactly.

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

I'm not falling for that.  :commie: 

I simply tried to get you to explain what justification there is to continue the Olympics.

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

asked for clarification on your views and you sidestepped them.

But I’ve given such.

For example  pointing to the level of infrastructure that must be built in order sustain it as parasitical on the host cities and allowances for totalitarian propagandize even more on the world stage.

whether you think the costs are acceptable is another issue.

3 hours ago, Padraig said:

Even the IOC recognises that there was a problem with the building of unnecessary infrastructure.  That is why it changed its criteria.

 This is a vague response. It implies a suitable reform has already been dealt but doesn’t explain in what way.

3 hours ago, Padraig said:

And this money being spent.  Do you really think China needs an Olympics to spend its own money to enrich a corrupt bureaucracy?

It can be one of the way ways to do so yes. Will the regime instantly instantly collapse without it? 
No. But still preferable to take it away from them.

3 hours ago, Padraig said:

Is there really some sort of victory achieved by removing Olympics as a factor?  Because it stops old-fashioned flat thumping?  Woohoo.  Perish the thought of people being happy.

Again this want for escapism through sporting events is understandable. But besides accomplishing that feat for the fans what are the real world benefits to the Olympics that demand it’s continued existence over the innumerate costs associated with them?

 

3 hours ago, Padraig said:

But yes, after China wins a few gold medals, their reputation will be saved and all Americans will want to be communists.  A nice happy ending. :)

Nope. Now explain why it’s critical for them to have the chance at some gold medals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Padraig said:

I hear all these things about costs and i'm really curious to see what people mean by them.

What does it cost?  What does it cost?!?  Freedom from the yoke of robotic oppression, THAT'S what it costs!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Varys, I haven't focused on why I think the Olympics should continue because I don't think you have made any reasonable argument for why it should cease.  You brought this idea up first.  It behoves you to justify it.

Your main point is that we should remove totalitarian regimes.  That's pure pie in the sky thinking.  And not based on anything approaching reality.

Week has already called the US "evil" a few posts ago.  Tywin wondered about the 2024 election.  Should we kick the US out too?  Come up with a nice clear definition of "undesirable" regimes and we could have a proper discussion.  

I would agree that China would probably be removed if there was criteria but there is a lot of grey in there between China and Ireland (and we've done horrible things too).

I tried to say this in my last post but it didn't work. :)

And then, you have to worry about the consequences of banning a huge number of countries from sporting events.  Which is hard to think about because it is never going to happen.  But, by definition it is divisive.  I can't imagine how it would not lead to more division?

The other cost you mention is the actual "price".  Which, as I said, has been reformed.  I'll talk about that a little more below.

As I said, you have no real argument.

You need to elucidate the problem.  Suggest a solution.  And clearly show why that solution would improve things.

21 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yeah it kinda follows you’re building a strawman for the by declaring stopping the Olympics would not stop the world problems as if that’s what’s the article claimed

I think you are very confused.  Explain clearly what you mean by this quote above?

I have twice repeated this but i'll say it again.  What I found difficult to accept from the article was trying to connect the Olympics to things like Russia's invasion of Ukraine or China's treatment of the Uyghurs.  That is all I was saying.  You have decided that this means that I was declaring that the article was suggesting that stopping the Olympics would stop those problems.

No.  It doesn't.  Nobody was talking about stopping the Olympics until you brought it up.

I wouldn't read much into a thrashy article.

22 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Forgive me but this statement doesn’t track with your posts so far in this thread.

Maybe here I can give you the benefit of the doubt.  This discussion began with "There seems to be a growing trend among the populace in the Western democracies not wanting to host the Olympics."  You could interpret this to mean that the Olympics should end.

But it certainly wasn't how I interpreted it.  To me it was simply saying that it was harder to find hosts.  And suggesting that the process should change?  (That is why I mentioned a few times that the process has changed).

22 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

This is a vague response. It implies a suitable reform has already been dealt but doesn’t explain in what way.

You don't trust me then?  Think about it logically.  Hosting an Olympics was becoming increasingly expensive.  The IOC may be corrupt but it isn't stupid.  If nobody wanted to host the Olympics, it wouldn't have a purpose.

But if you don't trust me, easy to find info about the reform process online.

I don't think this is the audience for this kind of article.  I imagine it will be sniffed at and dismissed.  You don't need a gold medal to be a true hero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this is an international event: 'Earth Overshoot Day' is the day in the year humanity begins to exceed its annual consumption of the earth’s replenishable resources.

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/a-scary-and-overlooked-milestone

So not a fossil fuel or mineral extraction thing, but rather the productive capacity of nature (including "managed" nature like farming and managed forests).

When you look at the graph there is good news and bad news. The good news is that the resource use per person has not gone up by all that much. But because of population growth the available resource per person has basically halved since about 1960. The break even point ~1970 had a global population of about 3.7Bn, if we Thanosed the problem we would be basically back to break even, but that's probably not on the cards, at least not as a deliberate decision.

Interestingly in 1971 MIT released a study predicting that by 2040 we would see a global collapse of civilisation. If that's as bad as it sounds, it could be we will Thanos ourselves anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

Varys, I haven't focused on why I think the Olympics should continue because I don't think you have made any reasonable argument for why it should cease.

So no counter argument to what exactly are the ever pressing benefits towards the Olympics that demands it’s continuation despite parasitical on cities and utility for dictatorships.

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

Your main point is that we should remove totalitarian regimes.  That's pure pie in the sky thinking.  And not based on anything approaching reality.

Ah once more a retreat to the Nirvana fallacy. You’re actions won’t create a utopia so why even do em?

People will inevitably die. So why not just allow kids to smoke? Barring them from smoking won’t keep them alive forever. Besides they may enjoy it.

Totalitarian regimes will always exist. So why ever try to limit their influence or damage ever? Just let them host the Olympics it’s fun.

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

Week has already called the US "evil" a few posts ago.  Tywin wondered about the 2024 election.  Should we kick the US out too?  Come up with a nice clear definition of "undesirable" regimes and we could have a proper discussion.  

And another retreat into the relative fallacy.
Whose even to say if China is a totalitarian regime? Whose even to say that’s bad.Evil is in the eye of the beholder.

To be clear my preference for liberal democracies to withdraw from the competition completely.

If China and Russia wind up the only teams competing at the Olympics the world would not be worse off.

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

I would agree that China would probably be removed if there was criteria but there is a lot of grey in there between China and Ireland (and we've done horrible things too).

Both sides aren’t pure innocents!

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

And then, you have to worry about the consequences of banning a huge number of countries from sporting events. 

Yeah less countries at certain sporting events.

So?

What meaningful harm to the world would it be if the only countries competing in the Olympics were Saudi Arabia, China , and Russia?

I don’t see much.

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

The other cost you mention is the actual "price".  Which, as I said, has been reformed.  I'll talk about that a little more below.

 

Ok

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

The other cost you mention is the actual "price".  Which, as I said, has been reformed.  I'll talk about that a little more below.

As I said, you have no real argument.

You need to elucidate the problem.  Suggest a solution.  And clearly show why that solution would improve things.

You’re arguments thus far have reminded of this: 

 

It may seem a childish retort. It is. But exemplary of the logic you seem to be working under.

Whose to say not dumping money in a big hole would fix the world’s problems? There’s surely other ways money is wasted and there’s no 100 percent guarantee that money wouldn’t have been wasted anyway.

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

You don't trust me then?  Think about it logically.  Hosting an Olympics was becoming increasingly expensive.  The IOC may be corrupt but it isn't stupid.  If nobody wanted to host the Olympics, it wouldn't have a purpose.

 

A stranger on the internet? Not particularly no. What reforms specifically are you talking about actually point to changes in policy.

 

14 hours ago, Padraig said:

I imagine it will be sniffed at and dismissed.  You don't need a gold medal to be a true hero.

I understand those families have great pride with their sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, fathers, and mothers being able to star in the Olympics. Not dissing that.

They’re not bad people for this. Anyone who currently enjoys the Olympics is not a bad person just because they enjoy the Olympics.

But now having acknowledged that; that doesn’t erase any of the legitimate criticisms to be had of the Olympics. 
Call me cynical but I find this to be a common trick in terms of deflection of a individual or group’s product

Point to the fact there are some people, some good people,  who’ve a genuine emotional pinvestment in their products or stand to gain from  for why critism of said group or individual is wrong.

I mean sure McDonald’s advertising towards children has helped formulate the obesity epidemic but how many smiles Has Ronald McDonald brought to kids in the make-a wish foundation?

Can’t we all just shut up and feel nice about this thing that looks nice? Felt good about heartwarming stories about the Olympian competitors. Just turn your brain off and feel good.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

So no counter argument to what exactly are the ever pressing benefits towards the Olympics that demands it’s continuation despite parasitical on cities and utility for dictatorships.

As I said, provide good evidence for the latter. :)

5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Ah once more a retreat to the Nirvana fallacy. You’re actions won’t create a utopia so why even do em?

I'm not saying this.  I'm saying you have suggested something that you can't actually implement.  You can't neatly break the world into the good guys and bad guys.  That doesn't mean that China and the US are equally bad but you need to create a split somewhere.

And even if you could create this split, is this the best way to fight governments you don't like?  You might suggest that we have to try something.  True, but preferably something that would actually be implementable.

That's your homework.  Show me how you'd split the world in two based on transparent, easily defined criteria (I still like incarceration rate).  And then game theory out the results of the split.

There is an interesting discussion to be had about how countries deal with countries they find questionable.  Most people don't think sport is going to drive change but economic sanctions etc have been used.  Or the other hand, the carrot has also been applied.  Nixon's famous trip to China is one example.  Maybe you should start another thread on this, if you are interested.  I doubt people will think banning countries from the Olympics is going to move the dial but what do I know!  There are definitely other ideas though.

Given the US's recent tribulations, its in no position to drive any real change here but as a theoretical discussion, it could be interesting.

5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Both sides aren’t pure innocents!

That's clearly not what I suggested.  I'm not sure how misrepresenting me helps anything. :)

5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Whose to say not dumping money in a big hole would fix the world’s problems?

Is this your big idea?  You can't provide good evidence that ending the Olympics is a good idea.  But there is a more than 0% probability, so why not?

5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

What reforms specifically are you talking about actually point to changes in policy.

As I said, if you don't trust me, look it up.  They have reformed the process to ensure that cities that have a high amount of facilities already built, will have a much better chance of winning.  Avoid another Rio.

5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Just turn your brain off and feel good.

My problem is that your idea has no merit.  Or, if there is any merit, you haven't shown it.

Its the type of analysis that is increasingly normalised. 

1) There is a problem. 

2) Come up with a really simple slogan that "solves it". 

3) "End the Olympics" in this case.  We can all come up with a few others.

People should turn on their brains and face the fact that things are messy.  There isn't simple solutions to complex geopolitical issues.  That doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything.  But we shouldn't be distracted by red herrings.  Simple solutions are attractive.  I get that.  But that doesn't mean I'm going to accept it.

It is possible that I am wrong.  Banning China or ending the Olympics could be a great step for mankind.  But nothing said here has suggested that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russia is barred from this Olympics' competitions, supposedly, but they seem to be getting around that.

The more we see of the ugly, demeaning demands that Olympic athletes compete even more scantily clad than the women are forced to do in the beauty pageants of which tRumpeter is so enamored, the outright sexual abuse, and emotional abuse, particularly endured by the female athletes by Their goddamned coaches! doctors and caregivers!,  the more I see of the kind of pressure that whole nations put on the athletes to PERFORM, perform even beyond human athletic prowess, that whole countries are more than willing to put their populations at risk of cobid infection and death to have the competitions, the more I read of what happens to the people displaced from living spaces and work permanently where the Olympics are held, the more I hear of the tolls even beyond that to the people who live where the Olympics are held such as pollution and traffic and inflation, the more I read of the cheating and lobbying and other criminal activities -- it's time to dump the whole Olympics industry as hopelessly corrupt and detrimental to the globe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Padraig said:

As I said, provide good evidence for the latter. :)

Ah yes, provide evidence for why dumping money in a hole shouldn’t be done.

Prove that money wouldn’t have been wasted elsewhere.

6 hours ago, Padraig said:

I'm not saying this.  I'm saying you have suggested something that you can't actually implement.  You can't neatly break the world into the good guys and bad guys.  That doesn't mean that China and the US are equally bad but you need to create a split somewhere.

That people should try to curb the influence or damage of totalitarian regimes, or at least see such regimes face a degree of punishment for their actions is possible?

Yeah China isn’t going to crumble or stop it’s genocide of the Uyigurs if they’re not allowed to host or compete in the Olympics. But to me actively committing a genocide in your borders is enough good reason to bar them from a sporting event.

6 hours ago, Padraig said:

That's your homework.  Show me how you'd split the world in two based on transparent, easily defined criteria (I still like incarceration rate).  And then game theory out the results of the split.

China may be doing a genocide but what about the US’s prison industrial complex eh?

6 hours ago, Padraig said:

That's clearly not what I suggested.  I'm not sure how misrepresenting me helps anything.

I see it as an adequate description if you’re going whose to say whose say what is a totalitarian regime when we’re talking about China.

6 hours ago, Padraig said:

Given the US's recent tribulations, its in no position to drive any real change here but as a theoretical discussion, it could be interesting.

Both sides bad. US isn’t innocent either. Why pick on China?

6 hours ago, Padraig said:

s this your big idea?  You can't provide good evidence that ending the Olympics is a good idea.  But there is a more than 0% probability, so why not?

Why not dump money in a hole?

There may be a possibility that the money dumped could be used elsewhere for better purposes, but there’s no guarantee? 
 

The Olympics is  parasitical on host cities in terms of driving up rent for tennants pushing them into debt trying to build facilities that they would never use again, and is a potential tool for dictatorships to propagandize. 
 

But some people find it fun so let’s just the moment eh? 

7 hours ago, Padraig said:

As I said, if you don't trust me, look it up. 

Listen dude there are like trillions of things online many advice contradicts others.

I’m trying to gleam what are you specifically using as the basis for your argument so I’d be able to know what you’re going off of.

7 hours ago, Padraig said:

Its the type of analysis that is increasingly normalised. 

1) There is a problem. 

 

1) There is problem.

2) see  addressing said problem may involve some inconvenience.

3) Points to the existence of other problems to demonstrate the futility in trying to address said problem. 

4) Continue to enjoy life as it was previously.

7 hours ago, Padraig said:

People should turn on their brains and face the fact that things are messy. 

Sure. 
 

 

7 hours ago, Padraig said:

There isn't simple solutions to complex geopolitical issues. 


Banning the Olympics won’t create a utopia on earth to be sure.

7 hours ago, Padraig said:

But we shouldn't be distracted by red herrings.  Simple solutions are attractive

The world is complex. Saying it’s complex can be an easy way to sound practical when advocating against something that would see a reduction or cessation of a thing you personally enjoy.

7 hours ago, Padraig said:

It is possible that I am wrong.  Banning China or ending the Olympics could be a great step for mankind.  But nothing said here has suggested that.

A step in the right direction to the very least IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Zorral said:

prowess, that whole countries are more than willing to put their populations

Oh yeah we’re still in the midst of a pandemic so having the Olympics this year probably was a poor choice.

It should be noted most Japanese people did not want Japan to host the Olympics in part because covid.

This was forced on them despite its unpopularity.

But hey let’s just ignore them and just feel nice about the heart-warming stories of athletes who’re competing and take enjoyment at the competition. Whose to say any of the covid infections that happen in Japan wouldn’t have happened any way without the Olympics./s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a legitimate question about whether the Olympics should have happened this year.  It doesn't answer the question about whether the Olympics should ever happen.  But sure, you can definitely bring this up.

8 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Ah yes, provide evidence for why dumping money in a hole shouldn’t be done.

We've discussed this point a lot now. :)  Simply finding different ways to repeat the same thing isn't particularly useful.  So again, the Olympics recognised that money has been wasted on facilities that weren't needed.  They have changed the rules on this to ensure cities have already most of their facilities already built.

I'm generally more in favour of reform than revolution.

8 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yeah China isn’t going to crumble or stop it’s genocide of the Uyigurs if they’re not allowed to host or compete in the Olympics. But to me actively committing a genocide in your borders is enough good reason to bar them from a sporting event.

If the world decided to take a hard line on China regarding this, i'd be delighted.  Lets do it today.  Economic sanctions.  Political sanctions.  Throw the lot at them.  If they decided to ban China from the Olympics too (just to be consistent).  Sure.

But you are instead proposing that we should just ban China from the Olympics.   That's the penalty for what is going on with Uyghurs?  Is that really going to make anyone sleep better at night?

I am not disputing the issue.  I would simply be proposing a solution that would actually make a difference. :)  If you really think your idea is more than a slap on the wrist, happy to hear your logic.

In fairness to you, while you haven't answered my question directly, I'm interpreting now that your criteria for banning a country from the Olympics is genocide.  Previously you seem to have been coming at this with a wider remit (teach all totaliarian and undesirable regimes a lesson).  But a narrow focus is definitely easier to manage.  So good job.

I know you have accused me of trying to equate China and US.  I've never done that but I do think it would have been difficult to create a line in the sand in order to create a group of undersirable and desirable countries.  The US ending up in the undesirable group doesn't mean that the US is as bad as other undesirable countries.  But when you have only 2 choices, you are limited.  The incarceration thing was my idea of "humour", as I thought about the type of criteria you'd be using.  If we had a third group actually...that would help.

Now that you have narrowed your focus, I do think you could actually create a line.  It would still be controversial but at least it seems possible to me.

Quote

The Olympics is  parasitical on host cities in terms of driving up rent for tennants pushing them into debt trying to build facilities that they would never use again, and is a potential tool for dictatorships to propagandize. 

This is just grandstanding.  There is no logic here.  Why would cities agree to hosting if it was this bad?  Since 1984, only 1 totalitarian regime has hosted the Olympics (Beijing in 2008).  Since then we've had 2 American, 1 Greek, 1 Spanish, 1 Korean, 1 Australian, 1 UK, 1 Brazilian and 1 Japanese.  All democracies.

In future, we have France, the US and Australia.  With London apparently interested in hosting it again.

I'm not saying that there wasn't issues with how the Olympics were managed but if they were as bad as you say, they would have ended.  And good riddance too.

9 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Listen dude there are like trillions of things online many advice contradicts others.

Well, show me the stuff that contradicts me?  You have trillions of choice apparently!  You can ignore the stuff that agrees with me, if that helps.

9 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

1) There is problem.

2) see  addressing said problem may involve some inconvenience.

No.  As I said above, you aren't addressing the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Padraig said:

Why would cities agree to hosting if it was this bad? 

It's not cities who agree.  It's the people who are very rich and powerful and make a great deal of profit out of it for themselves -- which always includes real estate grab for starters. See the example of Bloomberg who wanted it for NYC some years back, which I already pointed out.  But we had an active and proactive city council that had seen personally what happened in other cities in the last years who did this and understood NYC could not afford this.

So that's a dumb question coming from someone who has seen it happen very many times in places in many other situations where They can make an effwad of money and the hell with anyone else.

Capitalism at work, doncha know?  Well, yes, you do know. 

Hey, this is going on everywhere regarding covid.  The hell with those who die -- we must think of the economy of, o, well, you know disco dj clubs.  The hell with vaccination and mask mandates -- we must be kind to those who won't compromise Their freedum for the sake of others' safety.

The Götterdämmerung of ineptocracy that is Brexit, out of which a very few are making a killing by literally killing many businesses even. On and on.

You know this, fer pete's sake.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Here’s some more nuance;https://www.npr.org/sections/tokyo-olympics-live-updates/2021/07/27/1021095005/with-all-eyes-on-tokyo-the-city-has-just-hit-a-new-high-in-covid-19-cases

 

Many people may suffer and die in Japan. But can’t we just have fun in the meantime?

Japan has a population of 126 M, and had 4,300 cases yesterday. The US has a population of 330 M and had 60,000 cases yesterday. Is the US shutting down professional, college and amateur sports because ‘many people may suffer and die’? At the Japanese rate the US would have, what, 10,000 or 11,000 cases?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, L'oiseau français said:

Japan has a population of 126 M, and had 4,300 cases yesterday. The US has a population of 330 M and had 60,000 cases yesterday. Is the US shutting down professional, college and amateur sports because ‘many people may suffer and die’? At the Japanese rate the US would have, what, 10,000 or 11,000 cases?

No, and so many people will suffer and die in the US. Some estimates show that the US could spike back up to over 1k deaths per day (saw 4k mentioned somewhere but that seems unthinkable).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Zorral said:

It's not cities who agree.  It's the people who are very rich and powerful and make a great deal of profit out of it for themselves -- which always includes real estate grab for starters. See the example of Bloomberg who wanted it for NYC some years back, which I already pointed out.  But we had an active and proactive city council that had seen personally what happened in other cities in the last years who did this and understood NYC could not afford this.

You do know you have contradicated yourself right?

Rich people make it happen.  But...then...they don't...

Witness, NY, Hamburg, Boston.  And there are a few more that I have forgotten.

It used to be a thing that every big city wanted to host the Olympics (I remember wild stories about Dublin in the 1990s).  But the costs kept going up and as smaller (or less wealthy) cities continued to host it occassionally (e.g. Athens and Rio), there were some horror stories.  The IOC has reacted to that (and the elevation of a sustainability narrative) by reforming the process.

It doesn't make the IOC a wonderful organisation.  They had to do it.

And if these rich people don't get rich from the Olympics, they'll find another way very easily. :)  So i'm not saying this is a great win for the little people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Montreal is a big city and when they bid for the Olympics their brash mayor bragged the Olympics could no more have a deficit than a man could have a baby. Cartoonists drew him as pregnant for the rest of his life. The Games were held in 1976 and they didn’t retire their debt until 2006. The stadium alone was supposed to cost $250 M but had a final price tag of $1.4 B. No professional sports team uses it anymore and chunks of concrete have been falling off of it.

On the other hand, it did leave some other legacies. Lotteries finally became legal in Canada, with a new federal lottery created to help pay off the Olympic debt. And while the stadium isn’t used by any pro teams, the entryway has become such a famous skateboarding pipe that apparently it’s one of the spots boarders dream of doing before they die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...