Quote:
Originally Posted by Frequitude
Alright, you win Sen. You can have the last word too. There’s no point debating someone rooted in emotion instead of analysis. Or one who’s stuck on putting words in people’s mouths, framing them up, and arguing against them.
Hope you at least have it in you to speak to your stance that Calgary is on the hook for overruns in the face of contrary facts with respect to security costs.
|
I've made the analysis: It's a massive financial risk with dubious benefits. Nothing emotional about it. What's emotional is the BidCo saying they're sending out athletes and representatives to schools to pump up the bid. They're sending reps....to non-voters....because they have an analysis based case to make? Yeah I don't think so. Surely, you can admit that is a very poor look for such an "analysis" based case that they aren't going to voters to make the case, but to children. The Yes side came into chambers this week and played a video made up entirely of clips of 1988 and 2010. Does that sound like an analysis based case? Sadly you probably won't answer, but I would seriously love to hear your thoughts on that. Pretty tough to say they're not going to be making their push primarily on emotion. Because the financial case is mediocre, at best.
Of course I can admit Calgary is not on the hook for security overruns, that seems confirmed. And that's good. The other overruns? Yes they certainly are, unless you believe getting that insurance policy will be easy. Can they really get the insurance policy they say? Based off what I read, not really, or it will come with extremely restrictive terms and/or a high premium.
But this is an emotional debate. As I said the financial benefits are in the eye of the beholder, if you love the Olympics you will find ways to make the numbers seem great, and if you hate it you'll find reasons to tear the numbers apart. But the evidence is more on the against side, and surely you know that. And if you don't, then the age old question applies: If it's such a good financial deal, why are cities walking away more than ever?