Quote:
Originally Posted by stampsx2
How is spending money on an Olympics irresponsible when the Olympic committee would be doing everything possible to insure this is a good investment.
A boost to calgary’s economy, infrastructure built that’s only partially tax payer funded, job creation. Vancouver broke even and so did Calgary in 88. There’s a lot of people working to make sure this would be a success.
How do consider that irresponsible spending?
|
CODA and VANOC broke even operationally. That's not the overall costs though. VANOC's stated revenue was 1.9 billion and a total GDP value of 2.6 billion. So they stated they were debt free. Actual total cost of those Olympics were estimated at over 6 billion.
Job creation is temporary, most of the workers at the Olympics are volunteers. Partially tax payer funded sounds nice, but is partially 80%? 90%? It's still a massive amount of tax dollars.
At 5+ billion just for the initial bid, there's no way this is thing ends up being a net positive if you want to break it down for value for dollar. You can argue your assigned intangible value to a community for infrastructure, that's valid, but the math is pretty clear.