Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Of course. But surely some of those projects would have happened anyway or would have happened a little bit later.

Sure, but's wrong with it if an event likes the Olympics get them fast-tracked?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

BTW, this issue has nothing to do with Rio de Janeiro and Olympic Games. The security in Brazilian Grand Prix in Sao Paulo is made exclusively by Police Force of Sao Paulo state. It's a problem fo

My God, don't they have enough problems! {couldn't resist}

Uh, maybe because they are great ways to show what's going on in and around Rio. Keep posting please

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.

You talk like the city of Rio or Brazil are under serious financial problems or like the city stopped all improvements to build venues for Olympic Games, and both are not right, Athensfan.

In fact, never saw so many works being done (not only in cities involved with events - Santos where I live is getting a state-of-art LRT line).

You get news that Brazilian economy is stagnant and think every citizen here is suffering with that, and the fact is we are living something new: Brazil is not doing great in economy, but population remained at same level of life during this process.

Years ago, a stagnant econony would mean inflation up to 2700%/year unemployment of 30%.... That's not the case... Really.

Again, you see only the picture, not the movie.

BTW, together with LRT, poor districts of Sao Vicente will have running water system, they don't have now...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You talk like the city of Rio or Brazil are under serious financial problems or like the city stopped all improvements to build venues for Olympic Games, and both are not right, Athensfan.

In fact, never saw so many works being done (not only in cities involved with events - Santos where I live is getting a state-of-art LRT line).

You get news that Brazilian economy is stagnant and think every citizen here is suffering with that, and the fact is we are living something new: Brazil is not doing great in economy, but population remained at same level of life during this process.

Years ago, a stagnant econony would mean inflation up to 2700%/year unemployment of 30%.... That's not the case... Really.

Again, you see only the picture, not the movie.

BTW, together with LRT, poor districts of Sao Vicente will have running water system, they don't have now...

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely nothing, but I'd still argue that isn't reason enough to justify spending billions on the Games.

But a lot of those billions are for those infrastructure improvements.

It's frustrating that human nature or the dynamics of public governance mean large projects often require irrevocable deadlines or the glare of high profile targets to get them moving. But I think it's stretching it a bit far to use the notion that the Olympics are often, if not usually, used to kickstart necessary and useful infrastructure investment as a negative point against an organising nation or the IOC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But a lot of those billions are for those infrastructure improvements.

It's frustrating that human nature or the dynamics of public governance mean large projects often require irrevocable deadlines or the glare of high profile targets to get them moving. But I think it's stretching it a bit far to use the notion that the Olympics are often, if not usually, used to kickstart necessary and useful infrastructure investment as a negative point against an organising nation or the IOC.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the value of the development outweighs or at the very least equals the cost of staging the Games

And that's always going to be the extremely difficult one to quantify on a balance sheet. What benefits are going to accrue to British Columbia over the next, say, five to 10 decades from commercial traffic using the Sea-To-Sky Highway? How much economic activity and benefit has it brought the State of NSW to have upgraded Sydney Airport or create a new sporting/commercial/light industrial hub to the west of the CBD. How much economic activity will be fuelled in the greater London area over the next century from having a revitalised new East End neighbourhood? How much benefit is going to figure in the balance sheet 20 years down the track for Carioca's having a modernised airport, light rail transitways and better arterial roads?

Edited by Sir Rols
Link to post
Share on other sites

And that's always going to be the extremely difficult one to quantify on a balance sheet. What benefits are going to accrue to British Columbia over the next, say, five to 10 decades from the Sea-To-Sky Highway? How much economic activity and benefit has it brought the State of NSW to have upgraded Sydney Airport or create a new sporting/commercial/light industrial hub to the west of the CBD. How much economic activity will be fuelled in the greater London area over the next century from having a revitalised new East End neighbourhood? How much benefit is going to figure in the balance sheet 20 years down the track for Carioca's having a modernised airport, light rail transitways and better arterial roads?

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

particularly since they were already hosting the World Cup.

Which was always the counter-argument during the 2016 race when questions were raised about the viability of the WC-SOG double. That the WC was the best imagineable huge test event and insurance policy to ensure any perceived risks to being ready for Rio 2016 were dealt with. And that's probably panned out by the script, despite the inevitable hiccoughs and hand-wringing along the way.

I still don't see how you can make a negative about Rio, or hosts in general, upgrading infrastructure using the Games as a springboard. It's a story the IOC should be making a bigger deal about, but then again, I think it's really communications more than anything else that's their biggest fail and shortcoming lately.

Edited by Sir Rols
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rio pacification effort in the favelas, drug trafficking, etc. Say what you will about the progress made there is still along way to go. (graphic images)

It's things like this that make the Olympics seem so selfishly disconnected from the real world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think World Cup related infrastructure is very relevant to the argument. The WC is more of a national hosting event, whereas the Olympics are more focused on the host city . The WC legacy includes regional/nationwide infrastructure/links improvement/construction spread around the ENTIRE country. The Olympics usually offers local benefits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think World Cup related infrastructure is very relevant to the argument. The WC is more of a national hosting event, whereas the Olympics are more focused on the host city . The WC legacy includes regional/nationwide infrastructure/links improvement/construction spread around the ENTIRE country. The Olympics usually offers local benefits.

But infrastructure in Rio specifically of benefit or use for both the WC and Olympics, and the decades to come, is definitely relevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

You already bring those arguments between the lines to discussion before, anyway, you continue to keep questioning why Brazil should expend their money on Olympic Games instead of social programmes, running water systems or whatever.

No matter how much we explain, those programmes are underway and Olympic Games at R$ 30 billion tag (to be paied in long term financing) are nothing compared to Brazil year-round budget (Brazil just give today R$ 24 bn to some "BRICS Development Bank", R$ 24 bn in one day), but you keep questioning the same things like Brazil have a problem of lack of funds.

I told you several times, our problem is bureaucracy, not money.

As much as you are not a taxpayer in Brazil, I'm really trying to understand why are you so worried about this.

Edited by DannyelBrazil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rio pacification effort in the favelas, drug trafficking, etc. Say what you will about the progress made there is still along way to go. (graphic images)

some video showing drug dealers in favelas bla bla bla bla

And maybe the whole pacification will never exist. Even cities in the so-called first world have its drug dealers and drug addicted people...

Anyway, watching this kind of production (I could watch the first minute only), making entire Rio de Janeiro looking like a big favela, even I fear to go to the city and made me think why give Olympic Games to a city with 6 million favelados (in fact, less than 15% of Rio citizens lives on them)...

<_<

I don't think World Cup related infrastructure is very relevant to the argument. The WC is more of a national hosting event, whereas the Olympics are more focused on the host city . The WC legacy includes regional/nationwide infrastructure/links improvement/construction spread around the ENTIRE country. The Olympics usually offers local benefits.

Part of the transportation plan were used already in the World Cup. 2 out of 3 BRT systems (and those are major for Rio 2016 transportation plan) were already delivered for the World Cup (something you guys won't get information in the international media and can lead to repeatedly posts like "I don't have enough information on how the city is progressing)...

Edited by DannyelBrazil
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see this kind of discussion as a desperate tentative to detract the games in Rio or in any other emerging country city that win the right to host Olympic Games in future.

Based on the arguments, only rich cities with nothing much to build and with 99%+ running water systems can host the games... Since they have enough money to waste in useless sports events...

Only rich cities can benefit from them...

Even if this argument was valid to IOC (and this wasn't, right, Beijing? right Buenos Aires?). This does not matter anymore.

Rio will host the games, no matter how much the city needs to improve. Rio will host it with pacification programme under way, with running water system to be completed...

And, after all, those are Rio de Janeiro taxpayers problems. IOC wants structure to host the games, so far, with hiccups here and there, Rio is doing it.

Finally, as my signature says, we proved a lot of times already, the city can host international huge events...

How many huge international events more Rio must host to prove the world the city can be trusted?

(and I didn't added FIFA Beach Soccer World Cup, FIFA Futsal World Cup, FIVB World League finals, Judo World Championships, Rock in Rio festivals and the list goes on........)

Edited by DannyelBrazil
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

So far, I'm affraid Brazil was focused in organization of other big sports event, buddy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

how could you pass judgement on the video if you only saw the first minute? And if only about 15% of rio's population thats still 1.7 million people. A lot worse sounding than 15%

Binary, don't get me wrong, I'm tired of foreigners documentaries showing only the bad side of Rio, like the city only have a bad side.

I'll be amazed when you guys post a link here showing the marvelous National Museum of Rio or what archtects calls the "archtectural timeline coast" of Rio...

Even the musical scenario of Rio alone deserves a huge documentary... But no, foreigners came to Rio and only do documentaries about favelas, crimes, prostitution...

Of course, media is too worried to show how poor and miserable are the lifes of those who live in Rio...

About the numbers, yes 1.7 million lives in favelas... But millions and millions does not.

Edited by DannyelBrazil
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure it's in the planners' minds that there are some parts of Rio that isn't very positive in representation. That, of course, would lead to proper planning to avoid the areas as much/far as possible or to revitalize the area. (at least that's what I'm assuming. it seems like common logic to avoid bad places)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure it's in the planners' minds that there are some parts of Rio that isn't very positive in representation. That, of course, would lead to proper planning to avoid the areas as much/far as possible or to revitalize the area. (at least that's what I'm assuming. it seems like common logic to avoid bad places)

^^ Yes

Not to mention, all the touristic zone favelas were "pacified" (which not means bad guys are not there but it means crime dropped a lot, specially robbery and mugging).

Link to post
Share on other sites

If avoiding their problems is what they're doing, then that wont carry over well with the media. A media that will especially focus on Rio's problems during the games.

And danny, like it or not, the media wont show the good side of rio because that's not news, it's advertising. The media reports on these stories because unlike beaches or museums crime and violence is hazardous to health. Think about it like this, if hundreds of thousands of people are going to descend upon a city for the olympics, don't you think the local media would want to educate people on whats going on their?

And yes I understand why you would be mad about the lack of recognition for the infrastructural improvements. But again that goes back to the problem of whats more important to the individual. Dying or better transportation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And danny, like it or not, the media wont show the good side of rio because that's not news, it's advertising. The media reports on these stories because unlike beaches or museums crime and violence is hazardous to health. Think about it like this, if hundreds of thousands of people are going to descend upon a city for the olympics, don't you think the local media would want to educate people on whats going on their?

And yes I understand why you would be mad about the lack of recognition for the infrastructural improvements. But again that goes back to the problem of whats more important to the individual. Dying or better transportation.

First, Binary, it's not up to foreigners to solve the problems of Rio and Brazil, so, somehow, why the hell we need them to point fingers on our faces and tell us what to do?

Secondly, all the countries in this world have problems. When we got Olympic Games or World Cup in other countries (like South Africa), the focus of news here in Brazil was about the culture, archtecture and very little about social issues, because it's not up to us to point the finger in the faces of other country and make them look really bad.

More than that. I have nothing against show the favelas nor any Brazilian. Did you already think how easy is to every single documentary boy to enter a favela and film whatever they want.

My point is: this is not Rio de Janeiro. It's one part/side of it, a small part actually.

People who come to Brazil must know what to see, what is interesting in Rio, not hours and hours showing how dangerous is part of the city or the so-called no-go areas.

Of couse, this ALSO deserves news. But not only this.

The city of Rio have much more to offer. It's a huge metropolis, home to 11 million people, but it seems only 15% of the city exists for the media.

About crime in Rio, again, there is a lot of exaggeration. Why not go to Honduras to show how miserable are the lives of those who lives in a city with a murder rates 20 times bigger than Rio...

Or even New Orleans.

BTW, never saw a documentay about crime in New Orleans, the murder rate there is twice bigger than Rio... And curiously, the city have more media stuff about carnival than Rio.

PS: Never been even mugged or robbed in Rio. Nor got any member of my big big family murdered...

You are messing a very local problem like it is spread around the city. It is not.

Edited by DannyelBrazil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...