Anyone else over the Olympics already??

@Elessar I wondered which country you were from when you said that, (I looked) I know this is true in the UK. But not only that 40 years ago my city council (just Googled this and found an article) went into huge debt hosting The World Student Games, which most people won't even have heard of.
From the article: it was 1991 and the debt is scheduled to be paid off this year.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-57837682

@Elessar Not in the United States.

@Ynotisay Rare USA W 💪🏻

@Elessar I don't know about rare W's when it comes to the actual Games. No country is close to the medal count of the U.S. in Olympic history.

@Ynotisay I know, don't take it too seriously; just saying that for once the "neoliberal approach" to privatization comes in handy.

I don't think everything should be privatized, especially critical infrastructure and sectors (energy, healthcare, to name a few), but this kind of events definitely should.

@Elessar I see it a little differently. I think there's a lot of ancillary benefits that come through sports. I'd rather see money spent there than on bombs.

@Ynotisay I see no value in taking billions from the taxpayers to build infrastructure whose lifespan is merely days; I support, at most, using public money for programs for preparing the athletes, but for that purpose hosting the Olympics adds absolutely zero.

Given the current geopolitical situation, instead, if my continent spent more in military than in sports I wouldn't complain honestly.

@Elessar But the lifespan isn't just days. Outside of ALL the money that comes in to a city and businesses for the actual Games the venues, transportation, housing and tourism all see revenue far after the Games are over. It's an infrastructure investment.

@Ynotisay OK saying the 'lifespan is days' is an exaggeration but the funding doesn't exist to maintain these facilities so they decay as an asset much more quickly than a facility planned and budgeted for for community use. There is the argument that both could apply Games and Community but the reality is it does not.

@Ynotisay From what I've been reading, the costs are usually much greater than the returns.

The facilities generally are abandoned immediately after the games are over, and don't get converted for community use. Transportation, tourism and housing can all be improved / invested into, by allocating even more resources for them if you don't have to host the games.

@Elessar A couple have been. Sarajevo is an example. But that's typically around winter venues that don't see the visitors and training as much as others. But a winter venue like Lake Placid has done extraordinarily well. But it seems you kind of want to see the bad of the Olympics and I don't. I have a background working with Olympic athletes so I'm all in. But you're in Italy? From what I read the Turin Games, which were very successful, cost about 4. billion EUR all together and generated more than $19 Billion for the Italian economy. And it's still a huge sports training city. I think it worked out pretty well for them.