Jump to content

Home

2016 Olympics


Totenkopf
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don’t really consider it a persuasion problem. The United States have hosted their share of Olympic Games: St. Louis 1904, Los Angeles 1932, Los Angeles 1984, Atlanta 1996, Lake Placid 1932, Squaw Valley 1960, Lake Placid 1980 and Salt Lake City 2002.

 

What about the winter (not world) olympics at our ski resorts? We've had a fair number of those IIRC correctly.

 

I believe Rio’s argument that South America has never hosted the games was persuasive (and more importantly fair). Plus they sent their head of state, we sent our head of state. They sent Pele, we sent Oprah Winfrey.:snear:

 

Even I would rather meet Pele over Oprah Winfrey. If anything I'm going to blame Michael Jordan for not going. At least he could have offset Pele somewhat. ;)

 

Ooooh. The Texan Tiger comes out a-roarin'. :thmbup1:

 

Yeah I know what you mean, there is a certain thing about the seriousness and dignity of sending relevant national icons as opposed to altar-of-the-ego celebs. Not that I have anything against Oprah personally but I, like you, could actually give a fly monkey less about her. Especially to represent the US in bidding the next Olympics stage.

 

Decision's already made though so I guess the point is moot. :xp::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and I cannot imagine the huge debt that will more than likely follow...[/Quote] The U.S. has gotten pretty lucky in that regard, but that would also worry me.
What about the winter (not world) olympics at our ski resorts? We've had a fair number of those IIRC correctly.

Don't ski much do you? The last four I listed are for the Winter Games. :xp:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't need to imagine: ****Vancouver****.

 

We finished paying the Montreal debt only a few yrs ago. I've also been into high lvl sports (athletics and horse related sports) and I would never want my children (if I ever have some) to be exposed to what I have been exposed: it was everything but healthy. Besides, if you can't uber mass produce goods, forget about even trying to sell anything at the Olympics...

 

 

I think this was exactly why the US didn't need the 2016 games. With all our current financial problems, it was an expense we could do w/o.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like a poisoned gift to me.

 

...and I cannot imagine the huge debt ( edit: monetary and social) that will more than likely follow...

 

If it were only me, you can keep the games all you want: it's definitely not something I want my taxes to be spent on. I couldn't care less about the Olympics: I don't see what's healthy in training like crazy (like jumping in a pool 5-6 hours per day...to me that's pure obsession) for a few moments of self glory that don't bring anything to society (except perhaps a huge collective debt) other than bragging rights for the athlete and his/her sponsors. It makes a for nice 2-week party for the benefit of a very-few but before and afterward....ouch for the rest of us! (especially when you look at all the other needs around). Yay for the bread and games society!

 

 

Sorry for breaking the party :p

 

There are indirect returns, prestige and other reasons to host the Olympics. As a fellow Montrealer, I understand why you'd hate the idea (yes, I was "born" into that debt), but I think that for an emerging country, such as Brazil, having all the eyes of the worlds directed towards you in a positive way would bring great benefits in the long term.

 

Depending on how they organize it, they can minimize the monetary issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, the only reason the Olympics are such a money pit is because everyone feels it is necessary to turn it into a show like "Pimp my Track and Field". If contractors and city planners didn't feel it necessary to build an entirely new stadium of pools and tracks, etc. full of commercial advertisements (probably another contributor to the unneccesary expense, though they pay nothing), it'd probably be a rather good way to take in some money for the nation.

Even Brasil has the proper arenas to host the events, as well as a cool jungle setting to place all the running events. Take away all the unneccesary and they could host an Olympics worth watching. Then again, I'm not the type who cares much about people swimming in optimal conditions or running on a scientifically designed track with an aerodynamic suit + shoes combination.

 

The modern Olympics is and has always been about making the companies rich off of tax payer money.

 

.... Funny how that always seems to pop up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WGN Radio's Steve Cochran had promised prior to the IOC vote that if Chicago didn't get the Olympics, he would synchronize-swim in a kiddie pool to Celine Dion's song "My Heart Will Go On" from the movie The Titanic.

 

Imagine a guy in a a very tight swim cap, snorkel and goggles, life vest, and flippers standing in a swim pool as fans, including one with a ferret, watch. It was a unique experience that I share with you.

http://www.wgnradio.com/videobeta/watch/?watch=aa18246d-fad5-41ee-9576-2372b235e855&src=front

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not posting this only as someone who grew up in Montreal but as someone who works on trying to find financing for schools and clinics in several emerging countries (and who also lived there during 7-8 yrs): from both povs, I find that the amount of resources, including displacement of poor people in many cases, spent on a 2-week Olympics is obscene (and the so-called prestige isn't going to help them in any way, it's only going to profit tot he same people, often foreign companies -like Coca-cola...just about anything you try to distribute at the Olympics requires their blessing and a considerable amount of your money- and a very small group of well established big corporations and, for a limited time, accommodation providers).

 

Sorry, but when I see articles like this (http://www.ctvolympics.ca/luge/news/newsid=16980.html#blog+whistler+life?cid=wgtgam) I cannot manage to shed any tear. There are a lot of people out there who work more than their *sses out trying to feed their families and can never expect anything else but misery or close to misery. If my (eventual) kids were going to do sports at that level, which is more than superfluous and way beyond normally accessible sports, I'd say "if we, as your family can't afford it, then find the means to pay for it and don't ask people who have to feed their families to sponsor your activities: your basic needs have been more than 200% fulfilled and that's not just about staying healthy anymore, it's about being spoiled and self-glory"...and if I were to sponsor them myself, I'd at least ask the kid to do some volunteer work in exchange. I admit that I don't have anything against some luxury when one can generate the business for it (in a responsible and respectful manner), I am guilty of that myself, but I wouldn't dare to ask the general public to contribute to fund my whims. I pay plenty of taxes ( I'm in the highest tax bracket in QC -Canada..that's a lot of money but as long as I can afford it and that taxes are going to the general benefit of the population, such as health care or general education, I'm ok with it...paying for a spoiled child's luge fantasies irritates me tough).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...