Well Capi the Olympics World cup are just spectacles' circus' they come into town they make people happy for a while and then they leave- Thats their purpose, not to solve the social issues of a city/country, and not to make up for decades of poor planning and under funding of social services- Thats what we elect governments for.

I don't think the cost of major public events and places of public gathering necessarily needs to be justified by "economic impact" - I reckon governments should subsidise sport and art quite heavily if there's the budget for it.

The degree of corruption in FIFA, and in construction and project management tenders everywhere is a hell of a worry. That's not a Brazil and Qatar specific issue though.

Biggus wrote:

Well Capi the Olympics World cup are just spectacles' circus' they come into town they make people happy for a while and then they leave- Thats their purpose, not to solve the social issues of a city/country, and not to make up for decades of poor planning and under funding of social services- Thats what we elect governments for.

No, their purpose is primarily to make a significant pot of cash for an insignificant number of people.

But I digress; we were discussing the legacy and long term impact of such events in their host nation and the London olympics has so far provided very little return to the public having cost a ridiculous amount of the publics money.

Exactly, it's not really about the direct cost (or economic benefit), so much as about the corruption, poor urban planning, and the opportunity cost.

Blatter is to blame for many things Burnsy, but under investment in infrastructure and social welfare in Brazil over the past 40 years isn't one of them.

Good analogy about the wedding Lagos it's expensive, the dress the function the photos the honeymoon, perhaps it would be better spent on buying a house but its just the memories.

Of course not, and I wouldn't blame him entirely, though he's obviously a sleazebucket.

FIFA and the IOC seem to go around offering the following quid pro quo:

1. Hey, governments! Grease our palms as much as you can manage.
2. If you do, we'll nominate your gangland of big business confederates for an event that will result in a construction, engineering, consulting and project management bonanza!
3. Yes, please do profiteer on that as much as you can - and keep us in the loop re the gala dinners and bunga-bunga parties.

But it takes local corruption to maximise the potential for vice, for sure.

The problem with that analogy is that we had the wedding and then sold the gifts, the car, the house and the wife to the lowest bidder. One week later we lost our job.

kamikaze wrote:

the olympics aint gonna do shit for london. what is a velodrome that no one is going to use going to do for the east end? it's all a waste of money that could be much better used elsewhere. even the olympic stadium is a huge loss for the city.

As someone who lives there I can safely say it's been good for East London. In fact ask most Londoners their opinion and they'll have a positive outlook.

I live in the five boroughs too. The olympics sped up planned development by about two years according to most estimates.

I'm not really that involved, but I do find it jarring that the sports facilities won't be used post-olympics in a more appropriate way and I don't believe enough money was used in regenerating that aspect of the locality. You'll still find it damn near impossible to find a decent set of sports facilities and more funds should have been channeled into improving the ones that already exist.

Depends how you look at it, I've taken the whole view that it has and will hopefully continue to act as a catalyst for a lot of the investment and development of the area. Though you're probably right, the legacy could have been managed a lot better.

Anyway, the Goverment would only waste the money on stuff like HS2 otherwise...

Exactly, the cunts will only waste the money somewhere else, may as well get a few stadia out of it.

i don't know about china, but she's talking shit with regards to america. downton abbey was popular on pbs before the olympics. i haven't watched an episode, but my mom and her set like that shit. pbs has always had english programming. people my grandmother's age use to love that show with the hyancinth bucket lady. and another that's based in a retail store or something.

you don't need the olympics to export culture, you need something worthy of exporting.

People abroad love the queen and all that shit, especially americans and in the carribean in my experience; absolutely lap it up.

Meatwad wrote:

people my grandmother's age use to love that show with the hyancinth bucket lady.

Thats B-O-U-Q-U-E-T.

kamikaze wrote:

the olympics aint gonna do shit for london. what is a velodrome that no one is going to use going to do for the east end? it's all a waste of money that could be much better used elsewhere. even the olympic stadium is a huge loss for the city.

They'll use the track for the World Athletics and then turn into a footy stadium with the track kept round it or something.

It took NSW about 10 years to pay off the Olympic debt, but there is a lot of new development happening in that area now, finally. Plus we realised that Aussies don't care about athletics except during Olympic years, so they turned the stadium into one that can be used for football and hit n giggle cricket and Aussie Rules.

There was a recent article in the Telegraph - possibly Henry Winter - saying the Aussies had the best bid for the 2022 World Cup, but corruption obviously won the day. We would put on a bloody fantastic World Cup, even if it is cold at night.

FIFA is horribly corrupt, and it's hard to see how an organisation like that can ever reform.

Yep, Australia ticked all the boxes-
Top class stadia and infrastructure- Check
Sports mad public- Check
Tourist friendly and safe- Check
Never before held in the region- Check
Bags of brown envelopes passed around to FIFA exec's -_______

far as hell from anywhere else in the world? check