Olympic Superpowers That Have More Medals Than Canada...

[Ozy_Flame]

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Columnists/1072186.html

Here is an article detailing that Canada is gearing for the 2012 Summer Olympics, making bigger investments in 2009, 2010, and 2011. The Olympians going to Beijing, from what I gather, were not really the target of Canada's "Road to Excellence" program.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

I just don't understand the argument about spending tax payer dollars. I'm always blown away by the CBC getting a billion dollars a year from tax payers you don't think you could take 10% of that and give it to athletes?

The same CBC that is pretty much the only major media outlet in the country that even gives these athletes any exposure.

While we're at it, let's take another 10% of that and put a government funded NHL team in Winnipeg. At least Canadians would care about that.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

The same CBC that is pretty much the only major media outlet in the country that even gives these athletes any exposure.

While we're at it, let's take another 10% of that and put a government funded NHL team in Winnipeg. At least Canadians would care about that.

I don't know what your argument is could you please explain it more? NBC is doing absolutely great at giving coverage to the athletes, you understand that CBC and CTV bid for the right to show the Olympics and CBC won the bid (tax payer dollars). CTV if they had won would have done just as good of a job maybe better as they have to be accountable not having an endless stream of funds to fall back on.

You can't compare a single NHL hockey team (privately owned) to an athlete wanting to represent their country, sorry.

[tvp2003]

Interesting article on TSN: http://www.tsn.ca/olympics/story/?id...=topStory_main

Apparently Canada's 57-year-old trapshooting contender got sufficient funding, but still failed to reach the finals

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

I don't know what your argument is could you please explain it more? NBC is doing absolutely great at giving coverage to the athletes, you understand that CBC and CTV bid for the right to show the Olympics and CBC won the bid (tax payer dollars). CTV if they had won would have done just as good of a job maybe better as they have to be accountable not having an endless stream of funds to fall back on.

You can't compare a single NHL hockey team (privately owned) to an athlete wanting to represent their country, sorry.

If they were getting a hundred million dollars a year from the federal government, they wouldn't be privately owned. Our tax dollars would be funding athletes. They'd just happen to be really well paid ones, and doing a sport that Canadians care more about than any other.

It's a silly point though, and not something anyone is actually interested in seeing happen, so I really don't know why I bothered responding, but it's too late now.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

I don't know what your argument is could you please explain it more? NBC is doing absolutely great at giving coverage to the athletes, you understand that CBC and CTV bid for the right to show the Olympics and CBC won the bid (tax payer dollars). CTV if they had won would have done just as good of a job maybe better as they have to be accountable not having an endless stream of funds to fall back on.

The CBC also covers these sports in non-Olympic years, at least more than CTV or TSN. Like I said, they are the only network that gives them any meaningful coverage. The exposure CBC gives them should definitely help them gain more private sponsors. If Canadians really cared about most of these sports, then it would be profitable for all the networks to cover them - not just during the Olympics, but all the time. The CBC can cover them, because they are not profit driven. If you cut CBC's funding, you would be hurting the athletes more than helping.

You can't compare a single NHL hockey team (privately owned) to an athlete wanting to represent their country, sorry.

It's easily comparable. They would both bring measurable amounts of national pride. Besides, I didn't say to fund a privately owned team. Make it a government holding.

Besides, if I can't compare funding of NHL hockey to Olympic athletes - because as you put it; they are too different, then how can you compare funding of the CBC to the funding of Olympic athletes which aren't even remotely the same thing? If NHL hockey in Winnipeg and Olympic athletes are apples and oranges, then Olympic athletes and a television network are apples and orangutans.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

If they were getting a hundred million dollars a year from the federal government, they wouldn't be privately owned. Our tax dollars would be funding athletes. They'd just happen to be really well paid ones, and doing a sport that Canadians care more about than any other.

It's a silly point though, and not something anyone is actually interested in seeing happen, so I really don't know why I bothered responding, but it's too late now.

A government owned NHL is still something I think you can't compare. The athlete most likely cannot go and compete for another country they are stuck with what they got. It's fine if you don't feel Canada should be investing money into our athletes but I feel I have brought up some decent points showing why I think they should and that they could do it without radically changing taxes.

[Jude]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I just keep thinking about a gold medal for the men's hockey team in 2010, and I take a sigh of relief.

You might be setting yourself up for a huge disappointment there...

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

I just don't understand the argument about spending tax payer dollars. I'm always blown away by the CBC getting a billion dollars a year from tax payers you don't think you could take 10% of that and give it to athletes?

Or take 10% of that away and let taxpayers keep it?

[Locke]

We are a winter country so winter is our time to shine.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Or take 10% of that away and let taxpayers keep it?

Sure why not? I don't know what you are getting at.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Not sure I agree with zero funding for lesser known countries. I grew up in Malaysia. Singapore is right next to us. So is Indonesia and Thailand. I know for a fact that all these countries get a lot of funding for their sport (mainly badminton for malaysia, singapore, and indonesia). According to my Uncle, who's a former olympian for badminton, they've had funding since the 70s. Not all sports will get the money, but sports the country believes will have a good chance in winning a medal (in Malaysia's case would be Badminton).

Countries such as malaysia, singapore, china, or hong kong have a thing they call "losing face." To lose face is a huge taboo in these countries.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

A government owned NHL is still something I think you can't compare. The athlete most likely cannot go and compete for another country they are stuck with what they got. It's fine if you don't feel Canada should be investing money into our athletes but I feel I have brought up some decent points showing why I think they should and that they could do it without radically changing taxes.

Well you've done a lot of bashing of the CBC, but you did raise a good point with "if they are successful, maybe more kids will get into sports".

I don't know if it's true or not though. If this kayaker was funded to the tune of 150 grand a year and managed to bring a bronze medal home with him, would more kids take up kayaking? Or would more kids take up kayaking if there was a 150 thousand dollar grant to a community to set up a kayaking program?

Someone else raised a point about "if they came home with 25 gold medals, would you feel better". I gotta say no, I wouldn't. Yay, they won a gold medal, but after that, well, where does it get ya? Where does it get the country? Nowhere, far as I can tell.

[Jetsfan]

Originally Posted by troutman

When judging Olympic performance I think it is useful to look at medals won per capita. Historically, Canada and the US have done about the same.


http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/sp...ime-per-capita

Finland is #1.

Canada and US are doing about the same at #29 and #28.

Exactly my point...with only 35 million people we can only produce and support so many exceptional athletes.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Well you've done a lot of bashing of the CBC, but you did raise a good point with "if they are successful, maybe more kids will get into sports".

I don't know if it's true or not though. If this kayaker was funded to the tune of 150 grand a year and managed to bring a bronze medal home with him, would more kids take up kayaking? Or would more kids take up kayaking if there was a 150 thousand dollar grant to a community to set up a kayaking program?

Someone else raised a point about "if they came home with 25 gold medals, would you feel better". I gotta say no, I wouldn't. Yay, they won a gold medal, but after that, well, where does it get ya? Where does it get the country? Nowhere, far as I can tell.

Fair enough for the kayaking, all I can say is that I really didn't know that much about kayaking and after seeing it I think I'm going to go down to the glenmore and rent one. Perhaps if we fund kayakers they would be more likely to give back to the kayaking community in the future in the form of coaching and training.

If Canada won 35 gold medals I think I would be a little bit proud. There isn't much in this country to take national pride in and I would like to see more of it.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

There isn't much in this country to take national pride in and I would like to see more of it.

You can't be serious.

I guess having one of the best standards of living in the world and consistantly being ranked as one of the best places in the world to live is no reason to have national pride? It sure beats getting medals in obscure sports. People risk their lives to live in Canada, INCLUDING athletes who have defected here and now, and in the past, have represented Canada at sporting events such as the Olympics.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by TheyCallMeBruce

Countries such as malaysia, singapore, china, or hong kong have a thing they call "losing face." To lose face is a huge taboo in these countries.

I guess I usually interpret this as pride in one's country. To showcase their country's athletes, they're willing to spend money. Now granted, I know that a lof of countries aren't democratic, and thus taxpayers don't really have any choices, but there are countries like Austrailia and the US who are democratic, and their taxpapers are willing to fund it.

I guess what annoys me is, Canada spends money on stupid stuff like the gun registry, which IMO is completely useless. I would have rather saw that money go towards developing athletes.

[The Ditch]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

You can't be serious.

I guess having one of the best standards of living in the world and consistantly being ranked as one of the best places in the world to live is no reason to have national pride? It sure beats getting medals in obscure sports. People risk their lives to live in Canada, INCLUDING athletes who have defected here and now, and in the past, have represented Canada at sporting events such as the Olympics.

People also risk their lives to get into countries that in my opinion are better to live in than Canada. In my day to day life I do not see much national pride for this country, maybe just being a nice place to live isn't enough? After traveling and living in Europe there are some places there that absolutely blow anything Canada has away.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by The Ditch

People also risk their lives to get into countries that in my opinion are better to live in than Canada. In my day to day life I do not see much national pride for this country, maybe just being a nice place to live isn't enough? After traveling and living in Europe there are some places there that absolutely blow anything Canada has away.

Can you define national pride? What do you expect to see in your day-to-day life that would represent more national pride? More flags?

How would, say, having the best 3m diver in the world for a short time enhance our country and increase our pride?

[Fire]

I'm proud as the next guy when Canada wins a medal, but in the end what benefit do we get as a whole by giving athletes a free ride going after their dreams. If athletes want to go to the Olympics then most of the money should be coming from non-public sources. The government should be concentrating on supporting physical activity in general, not specifically towards a few athletes.

Does it really matter if we have a faster swimmer than the Americans. Does that give the USA a leg up on Canada somehow?