Anne Marie Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 Chicagoans For Rio Explain Their Case Wednesday, September 23, 2009 12:16pm EDT GB Staff Chicagoans For Rio, told GamesBids.com they are a small group of private citizens that wanted to add a different perspective. They say they are "proud of our city, ... who love to show off our city, but who don't feel hosting the Olympics is necessary in order to do so". The group has its own website, Chicagoansforrio.com, where the public is asked to send e-mails to the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in support of Rio de Janeiro's bid for the 2016 Summer Games. In an e-mail to GamesBids.com a spokesperson for the group wrote ,"our chief concern is financial. Our city is well know for building wonderful assets that are significantly over budget (Millennium Park being the latest example). So while the U.S. usually runs profitable Games, it's difficult to believe this city would be able to keep that streak alive". The e-mail continued, "For those of us who can see both the upside and downside of hosting the Games, watching pep rallies in all 50 wards doesn't qualify as discussions. When our mayor says no tax payer money would be used to host the Games, we all know that's false, and it's statements like that which create a lack of trust about the bid. "In addition, it's our belief that Chicago doesn't need the spotlight of the Olympics to show off our great city" said the e-mail, adding "last year, we attracted 45 million tourists". "As for the response, it's been strong and roughly 90 per cent positive. Hundreds have submitted e-mails to the IOC, and one IOC office sent a response that said, 'We've been bombarded. You've made your point'. And really, we haven't made our point - our fellow Chicagoans have. It's nice they had a venue to do so". When asked why the group decided to support Rio the spokesperson said, "it seems to be the strongest contender. Plus, they have Carnival, so the place is O.K. in our books". Because the group says their goal has been accomplished no further action is planned said the spokesperson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiTown16 Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 Ok You are so curious about me then I say that my sister lives in Chicago and she have business there. So, in the future, she will have to pay more taxes when the costs overuns and will see the city that she lives worst conditions because less money to do investments. And my sister is american and ask me do something to open the eyes of the people here!!! But all you're doing is searching out news stories on the Internet and agreeing with Rio 2016 supporters. And posting on a discussion board that we shouldn't believe has a direct line to anyone in a position to vote (I'd imagine maybe one or two people in IOC HQ is probably reading and summarizing a few threads a day for a newsletter but most members likely aren't reading this directly). Why can't she post her opinions herself from Chicago? We have Internet access here. And, as a Chicago resident, she could much more credibly present her point of view - as well as what is causing her concern and, as long-term Chicago 2016 supporters, we can try to answer them directly or direct her to people who are likely to know. There are also entire teams at City Hall and at Chicago 2016 and among other groups in the area that could answer any questions - in person if she'd like. If she's concerned, the Chicago way is to learn the answers. Nobody I've ever met in Chicago would contact a sibling in Montreal to join an Internet forum to post for them. CHItown '16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 Yeh, seems very odd doesn't it. What always gets me about these anti-games people who pop-up from time-to-time is the fact that they never seem to get that this board is very much pro-Olympics in its membership. They will never get much sympathy for their views here and nearly always end up posting IN REALLY BIG FONT SIZES out of frustration. Not that I'm saying they shouldn't post here, but you're right, it's an odd choice of forum to put across these views in some ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinhu4ever Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 IN REALLY BIG FONT SIZESYou forgot to mention the really bright colors! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anne Marie Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 Yeh, seems very odd doesn't it.What always gets me about these anti-games people who pop-up from time-to-time is the fact that they never seem to get that this board is very much pro-Olympics in its membership. They will never get much sympathy for their views here and nearly always end up posting IN REALLY BIG FONT SIZES out of frustration. Not that I'm saying they shouldn't post here, but you're right, it's an odd choice of forum to put across these views in some ways. Then you should say 'merci beaucoup" to Baron...That's his fashion! kkkkkkkkk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 But all you're doing is searching out news stories on the Internet and agreeing with Rio 2016 supporters. And posting on a discussion board that we shouldn't believe has a direct line to anyone in a position to vote (I'd imagine maybe one or two people in IOC HQ is probably reading and summarizing a few threads a day for a newsletter but most members likely aren't reading this directly). Why can't she post her opinions herself from Chicago? We have Internet access here. And, as a Chicago resident, she could much more credibly present her point of view - as well as what is causing her concern and, as long-term Chicago 2016 supporters, we can try to answer them directly or direct her to people who are likely to know. There are also entire teams at City Hall and at Chicago 2016 and among other groups in the area that could answer any questions - in person if she'd like. If she's concerned, the Chicago way is to learn the answers. Nobody I've ever met in Chicago would contact a sibling in Montreal to join an Internet forum to post for them. CHItown '16 She doesn´t like internet forums, MSN and thinks like that (virtual talk). She only read newspapers and see that any of the press guarantee that´s no risky to taxpayers frm Chicago in the future!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Article from the Wahington Post today: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125367059123032815.html See the last paragrafo about Chicago bid: "But the city's chances could be hurt by the U.S. Olympic Committee's fights with the IOC over financial matters in the past year, as well as the inability of the federal government to offer a financial guarantee for the Olympics." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 /\ Adrian, the last 3 Olympix in US have ALL MADE MONEY!! Did you read that? MADE MONEY...NOT LOST. LA - $223 million; Atlanta - $10 million; Salt Lake - $56 million. But if you and your sister wish to be ostriches with your heads buried in the sand, then that's your problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 I ever said that HISTORY REPEATS SOMETIMES BUT NOT ALWAYS then there´s a risky that anyone can deny!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Pfffft. You just see the glass half-empty instead of half-full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 And I repeat again: I ever said that HISTORY REPEATS SOMETIMES BUT NOT ALWAYS then there´s a risky that anyone can deny!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Riskys for TAXPAYERS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Every single bid city has to accept a certain amount of financial risk. The American people are not risking any more than the Japanese, Spanish or Brazilians. Sometimes cost overruns happen and money that would otherwise be spent on something else has to cover the difference. Every bid accepts this possibility. The financial aspects of Chicago's bid have been more closely scrutinized than those of any other bid in history, not only by multiple civic entities, but by external auditors. All of these entities have concluded that it is a solid plan and the city council voted unanimously to accept the risk. What's more, Rogge has said that the IOC is "completely satisfied" with Chicago's guarantees. All this coupled with the United States' exceptional track record for profitable Games suggests that Chicago's bid is as financially sound as an Olympic bid can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 If that's the case, Adrian, then it's GOING TO BE RISKY FOR all the Cariocas, Chicagoans, Madrilenos and Tokyoites. Pick your city!! No...Adrian is just trying to be a putz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Article from the Wahington Post today: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125367059123032815.html See the last paragrafo about Chicago bid: "But the city's chances could be hurt by the U.S. Olympic Committee's fights with the IOC over financial matters in the past year, as well as the inability of the federal government to offer a financial guarantee for the Olympics" Each city should take care for themselves....the diference is the Chicago doen´t have a financial guarantee of the Federal Government (see the article from Washington Post above)...for example Rio have signature from the Federal Government that guarantee too the finances and I´ve heard that the total budget there is more than one trillion of dolars an year! But I´m not worry about Rio ...I´m worry about future taxes in Chicago and possible deficits that block investments!!! And the polls indicates that more than 75% of chicagoans worry about! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyelBrazil Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Brazil govt. approved a fund with USD 120 bn to 2016 Olympic Games... The check was already signed... About USD 1 trillion (the real number is lower) is the entire budget of Brazilian Govt for just a year... So... Again.. Money is not a problem for Brazil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dino Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Article from the Wahington Post today: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125367059123032815.htmlSee the last paragrafo about Chicago bid: "But the city's chances could be hurt by the U.S. Olympic Committee's fights with the IOC over financial matters in the past year, as well as the inability of the federal government to offer a financial guarantee for the Olympics" Each city should take care for themselves....the diference is the Chicago doen´t have a financial guarantee of the Federal Government (see the article from Washington Post above)...for example Rio have signature from the Federal Government that guarantee too the finances and I´ve heard that the total budget there is more than one trillion of dolars an year! But I´m not worry about Rio ...I´m worry about future taxes in Chicago and possible deficits that block investments!!! And the polls indicates that more than 75% of chicagoans worry about! "Each city should take care for themselves" Adrian, I do agree and we're committed to winning the games so much that we've put our own city to financially guarantee any cost overruns. Plus, do you really know how the US government actually functions? We're a federal republic and our states seem to have a lot of rights and power to do what we deem is right/necessary/ideal for own state citizens. Not everything comes from Washington and we know that. We send more money to Washington than we receive. But does that stop us from functioning? If you think Rio's 1 trillion dollar is great, then good for them. For us Americans, we've spent almost 1 trillion dollars investing in our schools, transportation, and other needs due to the recent economic recession. You like to look at Chicago's past history of cost overruns in some projects yet you can't apply the same logic of looking at the past US games that have demonstrated fiscal responsibility and financial viability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dino Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Brazil govt. approved a fund with USD 120 bn to 2016 Olympic Games...The check was already signed... About USD 1 trillion (the real number is lower) is the entire budget of Brazilian Govt for just a year... So... Again.. Money is not a problem for Brazil. If money is not a problem for Brazil, then more power to you guys! Just spend it wisely, yea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyelBrazil Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 If money is not a problem for Brazil, then more power to you guys! Just spend it wisely, yea? Money is not the problem... The problem is the people with money... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dino Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Money is not the problem... The problem is the people with money... So...that would be Brazil, right? Sounds like future cost overruns and white elephants! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyelBrazil Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Well, tell me some SOG without cost overruns... White elephants will probably happen... I can't deny this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dino Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 Well, tell me some SOG without cost overruns...White elephants will probably happen... I can't deny this. Well, because they were given blank checks, that's why. It's like shopping in a mall with daddy's credit card without limits and can't distinguis between needs and wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyelBrazil Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 I will not compare your shoppings afternoons in family with Brazilian funds... I can say: the velodrome is a white elephant in Rio, if Rio City Hall doesn't give it to Cyclism Federation, it will continue to be a white elephant... I can be wrong, but almost all the other venues have been used since the PanAms... Some not often as desirable, but HAVE BEEN USED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 JUST VOTE FOR TOKYO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anne Marie Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 Chicagoans Back The Bid... For Rio Of Course!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.