Jump to content

Athensfan

Members
  • Posts

    8,054
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    91

Everything posted by Athensfan

  1. But which part of the expenses are you talking about? Tax dollars should fund infrastructure improvements. It's not like citizens should get free metro expansions off the Olympics to use for decades to come. They'll never resort to public funds for Olympic-specific projects. That's unworkable in the US.
  2. You are crazy. Barra is not a photocopy of Miami. Look at your own photo. I have never said such terrible things about Rio and I have no desire to advance that position. You are seriously lacking in objectivity and emotional self-restraint.
  3. Some folks won't be able to rest until we all accept Rio is heaven on earth and will stage the best Games ever (past, present or future).
  4. Why would the USOC shoot themselves in the foot like that? It doesn't make any sense. I really don't know why you would want to see it happen either. Based on everything the USOC has done so far, it seems like there are way too smart to do something so supremely stupid.
  5. There's a big difference between "most likely" and "not impossible." There's absolutely no reason to think another cut is "most likely" prior to the selection of a candidate.
  6. I can't imagine FIFA taking 2018 away from Russia under any circumstances. They don't have the guts to make such a big enemy. Heck, they're still trying to figure out what to do with Qatar.
  7. Of course they're going to make a decision on whether or not to bid on 2024. How mind-numbingly obvious can you get? I still don't see where you've gotten this notion that they are going to cut the shortlist again before picking the candidate. I have seen nothing to substantiate that.
  8. What are you basing that on? I haven't read anywhere that they plan to make another cut before announcing the candidate (if there is a candidate).
  9. That is an incorrect and grossly over- simplified characterization. I resent being coupled with Baron as our views on this topic are not the same. In the wake of Russia and Qatar I don't know that it makes much sense for FIFA to seek out countries with comparatively less interest in football as a means of "motivating" them. But then FIFA rarely chooses the wise option. Yes, China and Canada could conceivably host though both have weak teams that failed to qualify and both have less popular support relative to many other nations. Does that make either one of them the best pick for 2026? Not in my estimation.
  10. I totally agree with this. However isn't it encumbent on the hosts and on the IOC to try to find a better way so that the hosts get more than "fun" and potentially false "glory?" Particularly when billions are at stake? And for all this talk about separating Olympic operating expenses from other infrastructure projects, let's not forget that a good part of why the IOC votes for a given bid is the extra bells and whistles that get thrown in and make it feel like the whole city is getting a makeover for the Games. The IOC LOVES all that stuff -- much more than they're admitting right now. So even though those projects are technically "elective," in practice they're not because they are necessary to induce the IOC to choose your bid. Well the recent ones have been desperately lacking in suspense.
  11. You are looking for trouble. I hope Rio succeeds brilliantly. If the stadium has a different name now, that's fantastic. Definitely the right move. You certainly can't blame me for thinking the name was unchanged when you yourself just called it "Joao Havelange." Pay no attention to the favelas!!! Favelas?? What favelas???? Hooray for the Olympic Games!
  12. The above quote speaks for itself. I didn't say it. And I have no interest in "polemics."
  13. Do you see any Olympic implications here? I'm not sure I do.
  14. Danny how can you say no one calls it Havelange stadium WHEN YOU JUST DID?
  15. Reeks of desperation. We're a nation of immigrants. It's our identity. Then there's the little matter of the name of the stadium. Let's hold Olympic competition in a venue named for a man who is now infamous for his corruption of organized sport.
  16. That's not true. I have no desire to "detract" from Rio's Games. I do think the Olympic Games are a very expensive luxury. Rich cities can host the Games with less pain. They can absorb the difficulty more easily. "Emerging" countries are going to have a much bigger fight on their hands and they'll get hit harder by the cost. You seem to read this as if I'm trying to deny someone a prize. That's not it at all. It's a matter of trying to make sure the people of the host city really get something out of the Games -- something more than a huge bill to pay. I think this entire conversation underscores the need for a more thorough post-Olympics report that outlines in detail all the ways the hosts have benefitted from the Games. I would like to see a long list of concrete specifics. It is also evidence that every Organizing Committee would be served very well by keeping the public well-informed about all the ways the Games are going to improve their lives going forward. The absence of such information makes me wonder how much benefit there really is.
  17. It's things like this that make the Olympics seem so selfishly disconnected from the real world.
  18. And that's where each host has to make their own analysis, comparing the expedited Olympic-related development to perhaps more gradual development over time. I have to believe that Rio's airport, light rail and arterial roads would've gotten attention without the Olympic Games -- particularly since they were already hosting the World Cup.
  19. That is not what I'm saying. There is nothing wrong with using the Games as a catalyst for development -- as long as A.) that development is genuinely needed B.) the value of the development outweighs or at the very least equals the cost of staging the Games and C.) other more pressing projects are not being deferred in favor of less essential development that is linked to Olympic preparation. I honestly don't have enough information at this point to know how much Brazil is benefitting from hosting.
  20. No. I did not say ANY of those things you just attributed to me. I said, I am not clear on how the Olympics are benefitting the people of Brazil and you wrote that there isn't much impact on the quality of life, I did not say Brazil or Rio had "serious financial problems" (though they did fall short of their sponsorship goal). I did not say the city "stopped" any improvements. I questioned whether the Olympic billions would've made more difference had they been spent on something else. I said NOTHING about the Brazilian economy. Yes, its growth has slowed considerably, but that does not mean that Brazil is teetering on the brink of destruction. It just means they need to figure out how to jump start it. I don't see the Olympics factoring in. If you say that the Olympics are helping Brazil grow and have not taken any resources or focus away from other needed development, ok. So far I haven't seen how the Gamesare really helping Brazil.
  21. Absolutely nothing, but I'd still argue that isn't reason enough to justify spending billions on the Games.
  22. Of course. But surely some of those projects would have happened anyway or would have happened a little bit later.
  23. I understand not all benefits are material. As others have pointed out, tourism usually drops around the Olympics. Yes, people come for the Games, but they usually stay away before and after. The net effect is an overall decrease. It's possible that the long-term picture may improve, but this is not guaranteed and it's difficult to prove that an increase over several years is directly tied to the Olympics. One also has to ask how big an increase in tourism is needed to justify spending billions on the Games. As for infrastructure improvements, I enjoy the pictures you post. Clearly there are done nice new projects are underway. I do wonder of these how many of these really required Rio to host the Olympic Games before they could proceed. All I'm saying is that the the host gets the short end of the stick when it comes to hosting Olympics. In some cases, (London, Tokyo) the host is so strong that they can absorb the expense of the Games without much suffering, in others (Beijing, Sochi) the governments don't care if the people suffer and do their best to conceal reality because they're just out to make a statement, in others (Montreal, Athens, possibly Rio, possibly Durban) the Games come with a visibly high, painful price for the people. Every city who bids needs to clearly think through how they can make the Games work for them. When all is said and done, I hope Brazil is genuinely better off for having gone to all the trouble of hosting the World Cup and Olympics.
×
×
  • Create New...