Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamenspiel
^^So you think that an arena deal is more likely without the Olympics? I just cannot see that point of view and I don't understand it.
Is there any sign that the Flames or the city will come off their current positions? That sounds like pie in the sky thinking and its kind of the view that Eric Francis seems to be pushing on the radio, its very odd. I can understand someone who is against any sort of government spending being against this, but i do not agree that government money will be spent on Calgary in lieu of the Olympics(on the arena or any other social goodies). That is just not happening in the current political climate and maybe never.
|
Oddly enough I heard Eric Francis on the radio the other day and it seems he agrees with you, that an arena deal is more likely with the Olympics. He is very strongly pro-Olympics.
I don't know if it makes it more likely or not the way things stand. I was hoping that some aspect of this bid would include Federal dollars for an arena and stadium but that didn't happen. If that had been the case I'd be voting Yes for the Olympics but that isn't the reality of the situation right now, and conjecture and hand waving over the possbility increasing isn't enticing to me because if they had solid plans to include those features the bidco would have done so. The real "pie in the sky" is hoping this makes any difference to that situation in the face of no evidence.
I agree that we're unlikely to get any Federal money without an Olympics but that money isn't going to anything exciting, as evidenced by this underwhelming bid. Because Fed money is more or less "found" money I'm going off the tab to the city and comparing to what we would get otherwise since we have more control over those and they don't come from a money fairy. For 1B city contribution we get a field house and piecemeal upgrades to other sport facilities. That doesn't seem like a good bargain.