Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

No Olympics for Chicago!

  1. Oct 2, 2009 #1

    jtbell

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    As I write this, it's down to either Rio or Madrid for 2016.

    I bet ZapperZ is relieved. Now he won't have to worry about hordes of relatives, friends and PF'ers trying to cadge invitations to stay with him during the games! :smile:
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 2, 2009 #2

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    It's Rio.
     
  4. Oct 2, 2009 #3
    One of the big sticking points for something like this in the US:

    From: http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/02/obama-pushes-for-chicago-as-2016-olympic-host/

    I wonder how large of a consideration this was given when they voted?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  5. Oct 2, 2009 #4
    That's indeed a very powerful question. I would imagine that question would keep coming in the future Olympic meetings too.
     
  6. Oct 2, 2009 #5

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It's becoming a pain trying to host conferences in the US (and almost as bad in the UK)

    Still it does help to control those internet billionaires arriving on their own jets
    http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/43

    Mark Shuttleworth is the founder of Thwaite (the online security thing used for web pages) and Ubuntu.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2009
  7. Oct 2, 2009 #6
    It seems all the rich counties have always hosted the Olympics multiple times. Perhaps for good reasons I don't know, but the lesser countries never get a chance.
     
  8. Oct 2, 2009 #7

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

  9. Oct 2, 2009 #8

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    But the olympics is a money maker bringing great prosperity to the host city (at least according to our city council), it seems unfair that rich countries are the only ones to benefit.
     
  10. Oct 2, 2009 #9
    The link given by Pengwuino says the city need not make money out of it, may also go into debt. I heard the same argument in NPR too. It is indeed a national pride.
     
  11. Oct 2, 2009 #10

    f95toli

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It benefits the economy of the city/region as a whole, but that does not necessarily translate into more money for the city authorities and the initial investment is huge.

    I and everyone else who lives in London have been paying an extra "Olympic tax" for the past few years but this will still only cover a small part of the cost of the 2012 Olympics.

    Most cities use the Olympics as an excuse/opportunity to re-develop part of the city so at least some of the money is going into infrastructure etc that will benefit the city for a long time.
     
  12. Oct 2, 2009 #11
    Well not only that but the PEOPLE of the area would want the Olympics to come because that means they get top of the line facilities that are being built... they aren't just going to disappear after the olympics. As well as upgraded infrastructure to the city... look at Vancouver.
     
  13. Oct 2, 2009 #12

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    This is arguable. Some people think it a nightmare when the Olympics comes to town because there are obvious problems when probably hundreds of thousands if not millions of people converge onto your city for one event. Those people probably don't care about the olympics, however. Also, note that the article mentions how those top of the line facilities must still be paid for along with upgraded infrastructure. You can upgrade facilities and infrastructure without having the olympics come to town. In the case of sports facilities, it's almost always meant to be greatly profitable when a new sports complex of such magnitude comes into existence in a city.
     
  14. Oct 2, 2009 #13
    Apparently all the celebrating in Rio led to looting and rioting that left the city unfit to host the olympics.
     
  15. Oct 2, 2009 #14

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Both Athens and Sydney are spending millions maintaining empty facilities. London is still spending millions on the millenium dome that has been empty since 2000, so that will at least get some use.

    That's a bit controversial here. They built a light rail to the airport and cancelled the one linking the suburbs to downtown that they have been promising for 20years.They have upgraded the highway at great expense to the privately owned ski resort that is hosting the olympics.

    From the article - "The Utah Skier Survey found that nearly 50 percent of nonresidents would stay away from Utah in 2002 due to the expectation of more crowds and higher prices."
    That's certainly happening in Vancouver. The local resorts that are closed for one month during the olympics are offering half price passes for next year and aren't selling them - normally season passes sell out in a month. I haven't bought my usual pass for the mountain that isn't closed because the price has gone up 50% and it will be busy.
    Most people here in Vancouver are planning to go to Washington to ski.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2009
  16. Oct 2, 2009 #15

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I was reading recently about financial problems with the upkeep of China's "birdnest" stadium. They just don't have events to book it. It's already falling into disrepair.

    Here's a link that discusses some issues.

    http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Beijing+Olympic+venues+host+white+elephant-a01611957209 [Broken]

    Not good predictions for the London event either.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/sportsNews/idUSTRE56033U20090701
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  17. Oct 2, 2009 #16
    "Sour Grapes"
     
  18. Oct 2, 2009 #17

    Pyrrhus

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Bienvenidos a Sudamerica, mis amigos anglosajones :wink:
     
  19. Oct 2, 2009 #18
    Obama just couldn't close the deal.
     
  20. Oct 2, 2009 #19

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I really couldn't see Chicago as an Olympic venue anyway. It's already too overcrowded and too much traffic, airports that always have delayed flights because everything is overbooked, etc. None of it indicates they could handle the added crowds of an Olympic event.

    Though, one thing that seems odd about having Rio as the front-runner is that it'll be winter there at the time of the summer Olympics. Or will they hold it later in the year, when it's actually summer there?

    I also read somewhere today that the IOC bought an insurance policy this year that would cover the cost of overruns on the budget to protect the host city. Now I want to know what insurance company that is so I don't hold stock in it when they are about to pay out a huge amount for the cost of an Olympic venue! I'm surprised anyone would even provide such a policy when it's almost a sure thing that they'll be paying out that money.
     
  21. Oct 2, 2009 #20
    Is this what you were thinking about?

    http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2004/08/10/44805.htm

    "For the first time, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has taken out cancellation insurance. The $170 million policy covers the risk of the Athens Games being called off because of war, terrorism, earthquakes or flooding. According to IOC president Jacques Rogge, the policy also covers the bulk of the 28 international sports federations on the Olympic program and the 202 national Olympic committees sending teams to the games."
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: No Olympics for Chicago!
  1. Olympics (Replies: 6)

  2. Physics olympics (Replies: 11)

  3. Fairness in the Olympics (Replies: 12)

  4. Chicago Wins! (Replies: 1)

  5. Gizzae chicago band (Replies: 0)

Loading...