Quote:
Originally Posted by nobles_point
Good points, but I think something people are fundamentally misunderstanding here is how the games help to renew and optimize Calgary’s geography wealth.
I moved here 2 years ago after living in Saskatchewan for 35 years & Toronto for 2.
The quality of life here is second to none in part because of the cultural and physical legacy of the 88 games (Nakisha & the Canmore Nordic centre for example). The place is a play ground with geography that the rest of the country can only navel gaze at.
The point being is that there is an existing outdoor industry and culture here that is one of the region's greatest assets to diversify the economy.
Tech firms and entrepreneurs can startup and locate anywhere.
What gives Calgary an advantage over places like Toronto and Vancouver, not to mention Winnipeg, Saskatoon, southern Ontario or Quebec is the proximaty and affordability of this playground.
I can be in the mountains in 40 minutes from my house.
It’s an ace up our sleeve that other places do not possess. It’s also one we should take full advantage of and not squander. Provided housing can stay affordable it only enhances our economic competitiveness.
If people in Calgary haven’t lived elsewhere or haven’t for a long time, I can see how this perspective fades because it’s the normal they have become accustomed to. My kids will probably grow up with this. My son's school playground has a panoramic view of the Rockies.
My jaw still drops when I see a morning view of a sunrise on the eastern slopes of the rockies.
This is why I find people on the NO vote frequently can not see the forest from the trees. The seem to confuse finance and economics, knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing.
What makes the Olympics even more attractive is that it also unites us as a City/Province/Country while providing attention to the rest of the world that we couldn’t purchase even if we wanted to.
|
It's not like we won't have those types of places if we don't get the Olympics 8 years from now........we already have them.
The entire thing boiled down to 2 things for me.
Are we getting the legacy infrastructure the city desperately needs and are the risks of acquiring said legacies worth the real risk of paralyzing the city with what could be a massive tax burden that will last years and years beyond the party itself.
One was a very hard no, and the other one was a soft yes.
Easy decision for me.