Los Angeles Should Not Host the 2028 Olympics

[Michelle]

It is with growing concern and frustration that I argue the 2028 Olympic Games should be taken away from Los Angeles and awarded to another city in the United States. The current state of the city, marked by multiple crises, poses insurmountable challenges that make it an irresponsible and unsafe choice to host such a monumental global event.

First and foremost, the wildfires ravaging California — including areas within Los Angeles itself — are an urgent, alarming threat. These fires are not only a regular occurrence but have become more intense and devastating with each passing year. The city is struggling to keep pace with the worsening environmental conditions, and it is evident that, even now, Los Angeles lacks the resources and infrastructure to effectively respond to natural disasters on this scale. To entrust a city already battling raging fires with the safety of thousands of athletes and visitors is not only irresponsible, but reckless. The water shortages exacerbating the crisis, including insufficient water in hydrants, are a glaring oversight in the city’s preparations. How can a city be expected to host the world’s largest sporting event when basic safety measures are failing under pressure?

Beyond environmental concerns, the city’s financial situation is another major red flag. The cost to rebuild and maintain essential infrastructure in the wake of ongoing disasters is astronomical. Los Angeles will need significant funding to address these issues — funding that will almost certainly divert attention and resources away from Olympic preparations. How can we expect adequate venues, secure transportation systems, and reliable facilities when the city is already overburdened and underfunded?

The governance crisis further exacerbates these concerns. Los Angeles is currently under the inept leadership of a mayor whose inability to act decisively has resulted in chaos and disarray. There is a fundamental lack of accountability, and no clear vision for addressing the city’s mounting issues. The failure to plan, to prioritize, and to govern effectively raises serious questions about the city’s ability to execute such a large-scale international event. There are lingering doubts about whether the required facilities will even be completed on time. With unfinished infrastructure and an unpredictable governance landscape, the risk of a poorly executed Olympics is too great to ignore.

The fact is, the conditions in Los Angeles are simply not conducive to hosting the Olympics. A city already struggling with natural disasters, financial instability, and governance failure cannot be trusted to pull off the biggest sporting event in the world. This is not just lamentable; it is an injustice to the athletes, the global community, and the citizens of Los Angeles.

It is time for the International Olympic Committee to make the difficult but necessary decision to remove the 2028 Olympics from Los Angeles and give them to a city in the United States that is better prepared, better governed, and more capable of meeting the challenges of such a monumental event. The city’s inability to face the current issues head-on — and its lack of vision for the future — make it unfit to host the Olympics.

[baron-pierreIV]

LOL!!😄 /\/\  Stupid blathering from a CLUELESS source!! 

1.  Yeah, like what OTHER CITY can step in in 3.5 years?  😄

2. None of the major Olympic installations / venues have been affected!  

3. It's really tragic but it's mainly neighborhoods that have been affected and at least the loss of life has been very low.  LA can rebuild -- it is resilient -- and actually use the Olympic Games as a raison d'etre to RISE AGAIN!  Homes can be rebuilt in a matter of months!! 

DUH, Michelle!!  😜

[AustralianFan]

1 hour ago, Michelle said:

 

It is with growing concern and frustration that I argue the 2028 Olympic Games should be taken away from Los Angeles and awarded to another city in the United States. The current state of the city, marked by multiple crises, poses insurmountable challenges that make it an irresponsible and unsafe choice to host such a monumental global event.

First and foremost, the wildfires ravaging California — including areas within Los Angeles itself — are an urgent, alarming threat. These fires are not only a regular occurrence but have become more intense and devastating with each passing year. The city is struggling to keep pace with the worsening environmental conditions, and it is evident that, even now, Los Angeles lacks the resources and infrastructure to effectively respond to natural disasters on this scale. To entrust a city already battling raging fires with the safety of thousands of athletes and visitors is not only irresponsible, but reckless. The water shortages exacerbating the crisis, including insufficient water in hydrants, are a glaring oversight in the city’s preparations. How can a city be expected to host the world’s largest sporting event when basic safety measures are failing under pressure?

Beyond environmental concerns, the city’s financial situation is another major red flag. The cost to rebuild and maintain essential infrastructure in the wake of ongoing disasters is astronomical. Los Angeles will need significant funding to address these issues — funding that will almost certainly divert attention and resources away from Olympic preparations. How can we expect adequate venues, secure transportation systems, and reliable facilities when the city is already overburdened and underfunded?

The governance crisis further exacerbates these concerns. Los Angeles is currently under the inept leadership of a mayor whose inability to act decisively has resulted in chaos and disarray. There is a fundamental lack of accountability, and no clear vision for addressing the city’s mounting issues. The failure to plan, to prioritize, and to govern effectively raises serious questions about the city’s ability to execute such a large-scale international event. There are lingering doubts about whether the required facilities will even be completed on time. With unfinished infrastructure and an unpredictable governance landscape, the risk of a poorly executed Olympics is too great to ignore.

The fact is, the conditions in Los Angeles are simply not conducive to hosting the Olympics. A city already struggling with natural disasters, financial instability, and governance failure cannot be trusted to pull off the biggest sporting event in the world. This is not just lamentable; it is an injustice to the athletes, the global community, and the citizens of Los Angeles.

It is time for the International Olympic Committee to make the difficult but necessary decision to remove the 2028 Olympics from Los Angeles and give them to a city in the United States that is better prepared, better governed, and more capable of meeting the challenges of such a monumental event. The city’s inability to face the current issues head-on — and its lack of vision for the future — make it unfit to host the Olympics.

I disagree.  

You have written a lot of words but provided no evidence that the city is “unfit to host the Games”.

The Olympics are in 3 years time, not in 6 months time.

Even the Tokyo 2020 Olympics were not removed from the host city during the once-in-a-100-year pandemic,  but postponed fpr 1 year.

However, there is no evidence that Los Angeles will not be able to stage the Olympic Games for the third time in 2028 and there is certainly no need to postpone the Games, let alone change the host city.  

Firefighting and limited water resources issues etc will be learned from this.   But as horrible as this fire storm was, the City of Los Angeles will still easily be able to host the Games with all it’s existing venues and infrastructure.

Los Angeles is a massive city and it was certainly not wiped out by this horrible firestorm.   It will learn, rebuild, re-adjust and re-group and in 3 years time will welcome the world at the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

[sebastien1214]

This is a somewhat "provocative" way of launching the debate, and I do not agree with the general observation: but it at least has the merit of raising another debate which is essential, namely how the model of the Olympic Games must change and adapt to current climate constraints, and it is clear that on certain points, for example with the number of sports and the carbon footprint that this represents, there are things that urgently need to be changed.

[StefanMUC]

2 hours ago, baron-pierreIV said:

LOL!!😄 /\/\  Stupid blathering from a CLUELESS source!! 

1.  Yeah, like what OTHER CITY can step in in 3.5 years?  😄
 

Mar-A-Lago obviously.

[Michelle]

1 hour ago, StefanMUC said:

Mar-A-Lago obviously.

A ‘red state’ would certainly have better governance. Thank you for highlighting this, be it sarcastic or not. 

[Michelle]

2 hours ago, sebastien1214 said:

This is a somewhat "provocative" way of launching the debate, and I do not agree with the general observation: but it at least has the merit of raising another debate which is essential, namely how the model of the Olympic Games must change and adapt to current climate constraints, and it is clear that on certain points, for example with the number of sports and the carbon footprint that this represents, there are things that urgently need to be changed.

 

I agree that the model of the Olympic Games needs urgent reform, especially in light of current climate realities. The carbon footprint of large-scale events like this is a critical issue that cannot be overlooked.

However, my concerns about Los Angeles hosting the 2028 Olympics go beyond the carbon footprint. The city is grappling with severe governance issues, as demonstrated by failure to manage the response to the wildfire crisis. These issues directly affect the city’s ability to manage an event of this scale responsibly.

The worsening wildfire crisis in California is another factor that raises questions about LA’s suitability to host the Olympics. The environmental strain and increased demands for emergency management resources during such an event could exacerbate an already fragile situation.

While I agree that discussing how the Olympic model must adapt is essential, I question whether continuing to award the Games to cities already struggling with systemic issues, like Los Angeles, is the right way to foster this change. Instead, shouldn’t the IOC focus on cities with strong governance and sustainable infrastructure?

Ultimately, if the Olympic Games are to align with current climate and governance challenges, the IOC must ensure host cities are fully equipped to manage these demands responsibly. As it stands, Los Angeles does not appear to meet this standard.

Edited January 10 by Michelle

[FYI]

6 hours ago, Michelle said:

It is with growing concern and frustration that I argue the 2028 Olympic Games should be taken away from Los Angeles and awarded to another city in the United States.

And what other U.S. city, do you suggest, can take on the monumental task of hosting the 2028 Olympic Games with only 3-1/2 years to go to those Games? And besides, most of the other well-known U.S. cities didn't want the Olympics in the first place. That's how we wound up with Los Angeles by default for a third time.

2 hours ago, Michelle said:

A ‘red state’ would certainly have better governance. Thank you for highlighting this, be it sarcastic or not. 

You mean like this one?

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/02/15/texas-power-grid-winter-storm-2021/

2 hours ago, Michelle said:

Instead, shouldn’t the IOC focus on cities with strong governance and sustainable infrastructure?

Isn't that exactly what they did, though, when they double-awarded Paris 2024 & L.A. 2028?

How many doom-&-gloom stories did we here of Paris 2024 prior to the summer of 2024? And those Games were one of the most successful Games in recent history, if not ever. It has also long been argued that there is no other U.S. city better equipped to comfortably, & sustainably, host a Summer Olympics than L.A. with all of it's existing & high-quality sporting infrastructure, that really no other U.S. can comfortably match. It's a tough call even for NYC.

[fusilli]

In case, can w do New York.. please, pretty please?

[Bear]

what the hell is wrong with you

[Sir Rols]

Surely it’s far too early to speculate on the fires’ impact on the games preparations. Likely it’ll be more a peripheral factor in said preps, while adding some poignancy when the games are actually being staged.

As to looking for scapegoats. I’m not an Angeleno, so I don’t have any real understanding of the situation and dynamics. I suspect even Angelenos will have diverse views on that, particularly at this moment when they’re shocked, confused and frightened. I can only go by what media reports say, and inevitably they’re being framed through the Red V Blue prism of their respective platforms.

Sad state of affairs.

[baron-pierreIV]

1 hour ago, fusilli said:

In case, can w do New York.. please, pretty please?

They may NOT want it.  

[StefanMUC]

6 hours ago, Michelle said:

A ‘red state’ would certainly have better governance. Thank you for highlighting this, be it sarcastic or not. 

So Tulsa it finally is.

The red states that come rock bottom in many national rankings on education, health care, etc you mean? That „better governance“? Well I guess they‘re better at putting bibles in schools, and then forgetting what‘s written in them as soon as a pregnant woman bleeds away in a hospital parking lot.

Red states Florida or Texas are also well known to be immune to natural disasters, right?

[baron-pierreIV]

5 hours ago, Sir Rols said:

Surely it’s far too early to speculate on the fires’ impact on the games preparations. Likely it’ll be more a peripheral factor in said preps, while adding some poignancy when the games are actually being staged.

As to looking for scapegoats. I’m not an Angeleno, so I don’t have any real understanding of the situation and dynamics. I suspect even Angelenos will have diverse views on that, particularly at this moment when they’re shocked, confused and frightened. I can only go by what media reports say, and inevitably they’re being framed through the Red V Blue prism of their respective platforms.

It was really the confluence of natural factors that conspired to make it a perfect firestorm.  

#1 - Just the overalll growth of population in California and southern Cal which is basically desert and scrub grass land.  All that nearly 20 million (half the state's population) sucking up the meager water resources of the region.  

#2 -- Some of the firefighters said that the winds ruled the day.  There is no way to control the winds -- and that's how embers and cinders reached other places 15-20 miles away from Pacific Palisades where it all started.  

#3 - In rebuilding, even if they enlarge all the fire-hydrant pipes and maybe tap into more aquifers and reservoirs -- but if there isn't enough water / water pressure, there's very little one can do to battle fires.  They'll have to think of shipping in sea water inland to fill reservoirs -- and I don't know what that will do to the vegetation around new reservoirs.  Probably encouraging neighborhoods to bring back old-fashioned elevated water tanks . . . which then presents a whole new different set of problems and dangers in volatile, earthquake country.  What about the swimming pools of the region??

I think the horrific events of the past 2 days is nature's way of saying -- STOP with the spread of civilization already; I can only sustain so much.  

Edited January 11 by baron-pierreIV

[baron-pierreIV]

OK, this shoots down my thought of using all that water off CA's Pacific coast . . .  equally harmful to the environment!! 

Here is why California can’t use ocean water to help fight the wildfires 

LA28 should revisit taking Rowing back to Sepulveda Basin (as was the original plan in 1984 until environmentalists stopped them.)  Finally putting in an expanded (from the current water layout there to a 2300m course will give that whole West Side of SoCal, including SF Valley (Van Nuys, Encino, Burbank,) an extra NEW reservoir PLUS a legitimate 2000m course for Rowing -- so that LA28 Rowing results will not be an asterisked (*) competed on a 1500m course!!  All the other environmental excuses be damned! ALso, turn half the golf courses in the county into new reservoirs!!  

Finally, they should design / redesign swimming pools so that with cranking up or redirecting some things, they can be turned into mini-reservoirs to combat the fires!! 

[sebastien1214]

36 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

OK, this shoots down my thought of using all that water off CA's Pacific coast . . .  equally harmful to the environment!! 

Here is why California can’t use ocean water to help fight the wildfires 

LA28 should revisit taking Rowing back to Sepulveda Basin (as was the original plan in 1984 until environmentalists stopped them.)  Finally putting in an expanded (from the current water layout there to a 2300m course will give that whole West Side of SoCal, including SF Valley (Van Nuys, Encino, Burbank,) an extra NEW reservoir PLUS a legitimate 2000m course for Rowing -- so that LA28 Rowing results will not be an asterisked (*) competed on a 1500m course!!  All the other environmental excuses be damned! ALso, turn half the golf courses in the county into new reservoirs!!  

Finally, they should design / redesign swimming pools so that with cranking up or redirecting some things, they can be turned into mini-reservoirs to combat the fires!! 

But... an Australian staunchly defended me that the water of the Pacific Ocean in Los Angeles was better than the water of the Seine in Paris. 

(I know, I read the article, it's completely unrelated, let me just troll exceptionally for once)

[baron-pierreIV]

/\/\  Well, I guess that's why Surfing for the last 3 SOGs have been held in Pacific waters and waves . . .  despite the 2024 host being in Europe . . . including 2032 . . .  for FOUR successive Olympiads in a row.  But I am sure the Seine waters are fine à des fins de lutte contre l’incendie anywhere on the planet. 

[AustralianFan]

The creation of this bizarre thread that we’re in now to strip the Games from LA is utter bs.

 

 

[Sir Rols]

Émotions are, understandably and naturally, high at the moment. Lots of people, Red, Blue, NOlympians etc, are quick to use the situation for their own agendas.

This thread’s provocative, but it’s sparked debate, comments and activity. Lots of people have posted to refute it.

One thing we can count on is inevitably at some stage Trump will do something batshit and jaw-dropping to take focus off the fires and bring the “Strip The Games from the Nation of Braindead Cvnts” thread back to top prominence.  

Edited January 13 by Sir Rols

[StefanMUC]

Are MAGA media reading this forum?

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lfqm4tfom22y

[Bear]

40 minutes ago, StefanMUC said:

Are MAGA media reading this forum?

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lfqm4tfom22y

my condolences to the next IOC President who will have to deal with this for the next three years

[AustralianFan]

15 hours ago, Bear said:

my condolences to the next IOC President who will have to deal with this for the next three years

Exactly.

[Sir Rols]

17 hours ago, StefanMUC said:

Are MAGA media reading this forum?

It’s more of a Michelle tradition

 

 

[krow]

that's amazing - we love to see an equal opportunity hater. 

purely in it for the love of hating. 

[Rob2012]

iirc Michelle was always of the opinion Rio shouldn't have even been awarded the Games (and ditto South Africa the World Cup). The London posts are a bit of the doomy side but I don't think she ever said we should lose the Games, and besides that was a time when the board was much, much busier and any news story even vaguely related to a host city was discussed.

I can hardly say anything when I've started a similar thread to this recently, although I'm happy to admit I'm treating the LA Games as a lightening rod. Unfair maybe, but I'm not inclined to be even slightly fair-minded when it comes to the US atm.

Edited January 17 by Rob2012