[News] UPD: Calgary City Council approves exploratory bid study for 2026 Olympics

[polak]

The IOC me might corrupt but the Olympics are what these athletes dream off. Cancelling them would be terrible.

[hah]

I enjoyed the Olympics in 1988 however this Real Sports documentary is worth watching

http://www.hbo.com/real-sports-with-...ode/index.html

[Violator]

Originally Posted by Par

What did they sell to make out like bandits?

Everything that the Olympic committee bought was sold off after the games brand new TVs,couches,washers and dryers all the vehicles that were used.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by craigwd

Very disappointed. 😦
IMO Budapest had the strongest bid of the three.

Yeah, I was really pulling for them to get it...partially because my parents have a pretty nice apartment there and it would've been a great event to attend.

They are hosting the World Aquatics/Swimming Championships this year (which I'll be attending), which was looked at by many as sort of trial event for the Olympics. Maybe they'll try again next time...

[HHW]

Did the survey. My family came to Calgary from Europe in the early 80s (i was in gr4) and we saw how Calgary transformed from a provincial backwater to a much more cosmopolitan city in the 80s and 90s. Hell, you couldn't even get a beer on a Sunday back in 1982.

The 88 games had a huge impact IMHO. There are other factors of course but this was a pretty intolerant and mono-cultural town back then. The world looked at Calgary very differently after. As did Calgarians.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Violator

Anybody have any idea when they will be looking for volunteers.The 2010 volunteers made out like bandits when it came time to sell everything.

There would have to be a bid first, and that bid would have to be successful. So after that.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Frankly, if Calgary puts in a bid for 2026, we are nearly a lock to get awarded the games.

The bid for 2022 came down to winter superpowers China and Kazakhstan.

Beijing will be hosting its second games in 14 years.

Honestly, Calgary should bid for 2026, with the condition that we also get 2030.

Shouldn't we stop and consider why nobody wants to host these things anymore? Why traditional winter sports countries like Norway, Austria, and Sweden can't get the public onboard?

Maybe it's time to leave the games to autocratic regimes that have no public accountability and can throw billions at propaganda exercises.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by HHW

The 88 games had a huge impact IMHO. There are other factors of course but this was a pretty intolerant and mono-cultural town back then. The world looked at Calgary very differently after. As did Calgarians.

The Olympics also look very different today, with security alone running around $1 billion for a Winter Games.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Shouldn't we stop and consider why nobody wants to host these things anymore? Why traditional winter sports countries like Norway, Austria, and Sweden can't get the public onboard?

Maybe it's time to take a step back and leave the games to autocratic regimes that have no public accountability and can throw billions at propaganda exercises.

Again, the supposed mission from the IOC is to change this fact. Calgary is testing that theory.

If their promises hold, great, we can probably make it work. If they revert back to ridiculous requirements, lack flexibility to do things differently (affordably), or corruption, then we walk away. There are plenty of off-ramps.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Again, the supposed mission from the IOC is to change this fact. Calgary is testing that theory.

Let someone else be the test case.

[HHW]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The Olympics also look very different today, with security alone running around $1 billion for a Winter Games.

Agreed and that is not small change.

However, that is not money just thrown away. This mostly goes towards real wages, primarily for local Calgarians / Albertans.

e.g For Vancouver 2010, many Canadian Armed Forces reservists got 3 months employment (during a recession) and a great experience. Many were junior and still talk about how being involved with a large operation such as this was very cool and eye opening.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Shouldn't we stop and consider why nobody wants to host these things anymore?

Have you been following the story at all? There is an exploratory committee considering a variety of pros and cons.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by RM14

Have you been following the story at all? There is an exploratory committee considering a variety of pros and cons.

And I'm a citizen offering up the cons. Keep in mind the makeup of this committee is heavily slanted towards people who are very keen indeed to host the Olympics. If it isn't blatantly obvious the thing will be a boondoggle, they'll almost certain come out with a recommendation to pursue a bid.

These things have a momentum of their own. Once political and economic interests get behind something like this, it can become difficult for average people expressing their disapproval to be heard.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

And I'm a citizen offering up the cons. Keep in mind the makeup of this committee is heavily slanted towards people who are very keen indeed to host the Olympics. If it isn't blatantly obvious the thing will be a boondoggle, they'll almost certain come out with a recommendation to pursue a bid.

These things have a momentum of their own. Once political and economic interests get behind something like this, it can become difficult for average people expressing their disapproval to be heard.

Yeah, there certainly seems to be a lot of athletes on the committee. I get why they are there (who better to know what makes an olympics successful) but I wouldnt say they are impartial.

Same goes for some of the members who own businesses in the city.

[Senator Clay Davis]

It would be nice if this became a legit ballot measure. Of course every other city that has done a ballot measure about hosting the Olympics has seen it defeated, so I doubt we'll actually get the chance to voice our opinion. We will to a degree with two elections in 2019, and maybe (but unlikely) this year if the councilors actually have the courage to state their position on it. Predictably the "survey" they have going right now is mostly about supporting the bid. Questions minimize the risks and oversell the benefits, and I imagine they'll ignore most of the comments allowed to be submitted.

[RM14]

There are a majority of citizens who just see total dollars and scream NO NO NO...

Calgary should greatly benefit largely from community investments that would not have otherwise happened without the Olympics. If you are protecting Canadian taxpayers go for it. I don't mind sucking money from Federal and Provincial budgets for local benefit to Calgarians.

Vancouver for example:

"Those projects, along with a flurry of smaller developments including new community centres, the Olympic Village in Whistler and the Richmond Olympic Oval, drove up the cost of the Games, but gave Whistler and Vancouver developments the cities might never have seen.

And those projects were largely paid for by the provincial and federal governments. The report states that for every $12 spent by Ottawa and B.C. on the three big projects, local taxpayers contributed only $1"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle15036916/

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by HHW

Agreed and that is not small change.

However, that is not money just thrown away. This mostly goes towards real wages, primarily for local Calgarians / Albertans.

The money is just thrown away. It is taken away in taxes from people who would otherwise have spent it on things they actually wanted and valued. And where does it go?

Yes, it goes in wages. It goes in wages to people who could otherwise have spent the time at other jobs, producing goods and services. Those people produce nothing while they are working on Olympic security; they only protect other people from losing their lives, health, or property to threats that would never have occurred if it were not for the Olympics.

Frédéric Bastiat had it exactly right:

Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper, James Goodfellow, when his careless son has happened to break a pane of glass? If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation – "It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?"

Now, this form of condolence contains an entire theory, which it will be well to show up in this simple case, seeing that it is precisely the same as that which, unhappily, regulates the greater part of our economical institutions.

Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier's trade – that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs – I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen.

But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! Your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen."

It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented.

The effect remains the same if you spend the six francs (or $1 billion) stationing guards in front of the windows to prevent them from being broken. If the guard prevents anybody from breaking the window, society is worse off by the value of that guard's labour. If he fails and the window is broken, society is worse off by the value of the guard's labour plus the cost of replacing the window.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by RM14

I don't mind sucking money from Federal and Provincial budgets for local benefit to Calgarians.

You should mind. What you're saying is that you enjoy being a parasite.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You should mind. What you're saying is that you enjoy being a parasite.

If it's between the money coming to Calgary vs somewhere else. Pretty obvious what I'd choose. Not a parasitic view. Quebec publicly funded an NHL arena and still accepts equalization payments. That's parasitic.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by RM14

I don't mind sucking money from Federal and Provincial budgets for local benefit to Calgarians.

Of course, therein lies the rub: There is a provincial AND federal election the year an Olympic bid is due. Canada and Alberta are likely to have huge deficts and growing debt as those elections come into focus. So spending billions to host the Olympics is going to be a very hard sell, especially since the NDP is likely to lose and the right wing party, whatever that ends up being, will be running on a cutting taxes/cutting spending agenda...yeah, where's the support going to come from?