Jump to content

Chicagoans Back The Bid...for Rio


kaiak

Recommended Posts

Well - from my point of view:

Much of what NoGames Chicago (also known as "ProGames ___"?) provides for support are complete distortions of what those documents are actually trying to accomplish. They even quote the Document of Understanding between Chicago 2016 and community groups (a document negotiated between the city, Chicago 2016, and about a dozen or so community groups) as a net negative to those groups. And highlight just about every Chicago 2016 venue as a negative to their neighborhoods and as unnecessary and likely to overshoot their budgets. Most of the people I've seen at their meetings are political opponents of Mayor Daley and people who oppose his policies, and people who would oppose anything in the city rather than people who can verbalize any particular concerns about Chicago 2016. They've completely lost credibility with me and, when people ask me about them, I explain the reality behind their complaints.

CHItown '16

Dear,

I can see athletes succumbing due to the heat .Temperatures beyond 90's in july/august. Oh Gosh! Although it is SOG, lol!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I shall not address the stupid rantings from Anne Marie.

Regarding No Games, ChiTown nailed it right on the head. Most people in the group are not just anti Chicago 2016, they are anti Daley. They also fed off of protestors in Vancouver and London, and make their arguments based off Olympics in other countries, but fail to mention how U.S. host cities have not lost money.

The group does not have a real interest in truth, but more in their own opposition agenda. I think if they lived in any city with Mayor Daley they would oppose the Olympics, and the only reason why that some in their group even support Rio is because it is Chicago's strongest competitor. Believe me, they would be crying foul in Rio if they lived there - the arguments they raise (bad schools, transit, crime, political corruption, police brutality, economic disparity etc) are all issues in Rio x10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shall not address the stupid rantings from Anne Marie.

Regarding No Games, ChiTown nailed it right on the head. Most people in the group are not just anti Chicago 2016, they are anti Daley. They also fed off of protestors in Vancouver and London, and make their arguments based off Olympics in other countries, but fail to mention how U.S. host cities have not lost money.

The group does not have a real interest in truth, but more in their own opposition agenda. I think if they lived in any city with Mayor Daley they would oppose the Olympics, and the only reason why that some in their group even support Rio is because it is Chicago's strongest competitor. Believe me, they would be crying foul in Rio if they lived there - the arguments they raise (bad schools, transit, crime, political corruption, police brutality, economic disparity etc) are all issues in Rio x10.

Dear...keep trying! You are stupid, not me! I have the rights to express my feelings and if you are unhappy with that, you may ask the moderator to bounce me off. I can't say anything about Rio coz I've never been there. I can imagine your deeply knowledge about them to be barking like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my darlin' looneybin Anne-Marie,

Sweetie...this is NOT the first time there's an anti-group for its native city. It's been done before. There have been...what? 30 editions of the Summer Games, 21 of the Winter?? And they've ALL BEEN HELD.

Sadly, sweetie, the Games will come and go...and you and your negative ilk won't be (t)here much.

Been there; done that, sweetie.

A little too late, too.

Now take your meds as the MD ordered, dear. :lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm not sure "honest" is necessarily the right word, although I don't doubt the forcefulness of their opposition as individuals. I'm no expert in domestic American politics but I've heard many Chicagoans say the NoGames supporters have been peddling half-truths or even outright lies to persaude people of their cause. Perhaps Soaring can shed some light?

Rob, if I may respond to your post...

To put it in perspective, people who may be against the Olympics are simply against the Olympics because Mayor Daley brought up the idea. A lot of them vote no for anything and everything just to oppose Daley and the city of Chicago. They are the first ones to complain about taxes, traffic congestion, parking, schools, special events, etc. etc. When they complain about taxes, they furiously shout out the fact that our sales tax is higher than NYC or LA, but not realize that prices/standard of living is way cheaper in Chicago compared to other American cities. Traffic congestion is another favorite for them to complain about. They're most likely to commute and drive from the exurbs and spend 40-60 minutes on the road. Many live in the bedroom communities outside Chicago and commute to work in downtown and expect all Chicago residents to pay and maintain the roads they use when a lot of Chicagoans commute by public transportation or walk/bike. They like to moan and whine all the time, yet they reap the benefits of living next to a dynamic city.

A great example is the suburb of Elk Grove and the O'Hare Airport which sits within the Chicago city limits. They've spent their own tax money and funded an opposition group opposed to any O'Hare expansion--the same expansion project that will benefit United Airlines. Elk Grove's claim is that an expansion may harm their industrial tax base--which of course a lot of the industries are intertwined with the airport. But most importantly, why United? Because the airlines' global headquarters used to be in Elk Grove Village until up to 2006--the same village that's been keeping them from having a more efficient O'Hare which will surely benefit United. So when United decided to cut costs and trim their operations, guess what? They were lured by Chicago to move their global headquarters AND their major operations center from Elk Grove to downtown. After the move, Elk Grove silently decided to stop funding any opposition groups against O'Hare. But they've already bitten the hands that fed them.

So the moral of the story, is that many people who oppose Chicago normally play the Daley card. They blame him for everything, including the O'Hare expansion project, but don't realize that they too reap the benefits of a gentrifying city. I'm just surprised no one has blamed him yet for the global economic crisis. We've gotten used to people who post complaints in blogs, newspapers, forums, etc. and yes they're pretty loud but not necessarily reflective of the majority. If the mayor is so unpopular and incompetent as many of them claim, they're also forgetting that he's now the longest serving mayor in Chicago and won about 70% of the votes in the last mayoral elections. But beyond politics, what keeps the Olympic bid exciting for this city is that under his leadership in the past 20 years, Chicago barely escaped the evil spells of rust belt industrial America that has gripped Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh and managed to turn around and reinvent Chicago. I personally think an Olympics Games is the culmination of the city's transformation and a proclamation to the whole world that yes, we've arrived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the moral of the story, is that many people who oppose Chicago normally play the Daley card. They blame him for everything, including the O'Hare expansion project, but don't realize that they too reap the benefits of a gentrifying city. I'm just surprised no one has blamed him yet for the global economic crisis. We've gotten used to people who post complaints in blogs, newspapers, forums, etc. and yes they're pretty loud but not necessarily reflective of the majority. If the mayor is so unpopular and incompetent as many of them claim, they're also forgetting that he's now the longest serving mayor in Chicago and won about 70% of the votes in the last mayoral elections. But beyond politics, what keeps the Olympic bid exciting for this city is that under his leadership in the past 20 years, Chicago barely escaped the evil spells of rust belt industrial America that has gripped Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh and managed to turn around and reinvent Chicago. I personally think an Olympics Games is the culmination of the city's transformation and a proclamation to the whole world that yes, we've arrived.

Nice post Dino!

CHItown '16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only 47% of Chicagoans support the Olympic plan Chicago 2016

Chicagoans split over Olympic bid

A giant banner hanging from the Michigan Avenue bridge invites people to "imagine" hosting the 2016 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games. Bus riders hear recordings of former Olympians extolling the Games' benefits. On the South Side, signs advertise "cheap" property for sale "near proposed Olympic village."

Chicago is anticipating an Oct. 2 vote by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in Copenhagen on the site of the 2016 Games. It's competing with Rio de Janeiro, Madrid and Tokyo.

As the vote nears, Chicago is still debating whether the prestige is worth the cost and disruption.

President Obama, Mayor Richard Daley, the City Council and the corporate and civic leaders who back the Olympic bid say yes. "This is a great opportunity, and it would not be in the best interests of the city not to take full advantage" of it, says Lori Healey, president of Chicago 2016, the bid committee.

Small but outspoken groups of opponents say no. The city is "broke, corrupt, incompetent and crumbling," says Tom Tresser, an organizer with the volunteer group No Games Chicago. "The people don't want this party."

A poll this month by the Chicago Tribune found a split: 47% support the Olympic plan, and 45% oppose it.

Chicago 2016 says the estimated $4.8 billion cost would come from donors, corporate sponsors, tickets and TV rights. It has more than $1 billion in insurance and $750 million in city and state pledges to cover overruns.

The City Council voted unanimously this month to take full financial responsibility. In the Tribune poll, taken before that vote, 84% of Chicagoans opposed the move.

Rumors and questions

The stadium and aquatic venues would be built in 380-acre Washington Park. Cecilia Butler, who lives three blocks away and is president of the neighborhood council, says the Games would revitalize the low-income area. She has heard rumors that people will be forced from their homes, residents won't get jobs, and the park will be ruined.

All false, she says, but "for some reason people do not want to believe this is an opportunity." The Games would not displace any homes, Butler says, and "there will be jobs." The 80,000-seat stadium would be reconfigured afterward to hold up to 3,500 people and would stay in the park, as would one pool.

Questions remain:

• If Obama does not go to Copenhagen for the vote, will it hurt Chicago's chances?

Royalty and heads of state will represent other finalists; Michelle Obama leads the U.S. delegation. The president said she is "a more compelling superstar."

• Are the financial projections realistic?

A study done for Chicago 2016 said the Games would generate $13.7 billion in economic activity in the city from 2011 to 2021. A study of the economic benefits of the 2000 Sydney Olympics found only modest annual gains of 0.25% in the six years before and six years after its Games.

Bob Quellos, a No Games co-founder, says the city has a history of busting budgets. "If we get the Games, it will bankrupt Chicago," he says.

• Why raze a landmark?

The Gropius in Chicago Coalition hopes to stop the demolition of eight buildings on the 37-acre campus of closed, city-owned Michael Reese Hospital. The buildings were designed in the 1940s by Walter Gropius, a founder of the Bauhaus school of architecture. The Olympic Village would be on the site.

Spokesman Graham Balkany says the coalition is seeking national historic status for the buildings, but it won't come before Oct. 2. "We're hoping people will come to their senses," he says.

• How does Chicago stack up?

An IOC evaluation this month said transportation would be a "major challenge." The report noted low public support in Tokyo, organizational issues in Madrid and "public safety challenges" in Rio.

Some ambivalent

People here have mixed feelings. "Imagine the world exposure," says retiree May Berry, 69. "It would be really good for the city as long as it doesn't cost us any money."

Jim Stack, 54, a computer programmer, says hosting the Games would be "kind of cool," but he worries about traffic and displacing residents.

Cab driver Abera Turee, 36, says it would "put the city on the map. ... What the city would spend is not worse than what we would get."

Healey says Chicago 2016 has a solid plan and the city's beauty and diversity are the bid's greatest assets. Still, she says, "We are competing against three other world-class cities."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/20...-olympics_N.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of chicagoans are against olympics only because Tax and by think that the budget for the games aren´t enough. Most of press ever written this! It´s not simple that´s because Daley!!!! <_<
Most of chicagoans are against olympics only because Tax and by think that the budget for the games aren´t enough. Most of press ever written this! It´s not simple that´s because Daley!!!! <_<

Please Reveal Your Real Location, Adrian.

Your posting looks like a Google Translator version of another language (and I suspect I know which one).

The anti-Daley dimension isn't well understood by everyone in Chicago much less by someone looking in from "Canada" It is a very evident component of the NoGamesChicago group and underlies much of what they say.

It's easy enough to find negative articles about the Olympics but they're also right next to positive articles about the Olympics and there is a sense among many more people here that it could be a positive for the city. The U.S. press is also very experienced at creating the appearance of dissent by emphasizing different sides at different times - and negative letters are usually snarkier and written with more colorful language than positive letters.

CHItown '16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I´m from Montreal, Canada and my first language is french! ;);)

And I say again that the press wrote that the FIRST concern of chicagoans, that are against olympics, are Tax and not ant-Daley. -_-

Then why is it a concern of yours? DId the Chicagoans worry about Montreal? :blink:

Where is this civic-mindednesss coming from all of a sudden?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And don´t forget that Federal Government of USA don´t give any financial guarantee!!! If the costs overuns ONLY the city will have many problems!!!

Baloney!! U're talking from...if indeed you are from Montreal...your city's foolish 1976 experience!!

The Feds will ALWAYS take care of the security bills. They did that for the last FOUR Olympics in the US.

Taxes were NEVER Raised in Lake Placid 1980, Los Angeles 1984, Atlanta 1996, Salt Lake 2002!!

Why would Chicago suddenly have their taxes raised? Study a little of the fiscal history of the previous FOUR Games held in the U.S. and you and she should have NOTHING to fear!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voilá la réponse Adrian...My fellow chicagoans keep sending e-mail to the IOC and show the strenght of our common opinion: We don't want the games and increase taxes!

"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".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adrian, you don't know Chicago politics, nor do you seem to understand Chicago's financing structure.

First, Mayor Daley has the lowest approval ratings ever in his 20 years in office. He is unpopular with people because of corruption within City Hall, the Police, City Workers and so on. Many hear view him as only focused on the Olympics, so to show their displeasure with him, they say that they don't support the Olympics. Also, earlier in the year Daley pushed for an outside firm to take control over parking meters. This has been a fiasco, as the company raised the rates significantly and their meters began to have problems.

Now, on the financing side, the federal government will pay for the majority of security costs and will fund some infrastructure improvements tied to the Games. Chicago and the state of Illinois already passed legislation that would cover $750 million in overruns, and they are taking out $2 billion in insurance. Also developers of venues will be pushed to obtain insurance as well. The city has also passed legislation that is would cover all cost overruns.

No U.S. bid has ever had the amount of contingency funds to back their bid.

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...