OT - Chicago 2016

F___ing. Disaster.

That is all.

There were a ton of people in Atlanta that did not want the Olympics there back in 1996. While the Games can add prestige to the host city’s image, the Olympics are a nightmare for the locals. If something goes wrong such as a terrorist incident, the host city’s image can just as easily get damaged.

I really don’t know. Brazil’s per capita GDP is about $10,000/yr. The U.S. per capita GDP is about $46,000. It doesn’t sound like a lot, but when you do the math, the difference in the amount of money theoretically up for grabs among a U.S. viewing audience and Brazilian one is astronomical. Most of the IOC members have strong contacts to multi-national corporations. They don’t award the Olympics out of charity.

Does that mean that the winner will be announced Friday as well?

but I see the city being in serious trouble a few years out.

they have sold off all of their assets, so the only way to raise money is to raise taxes, but people are leaving the city so the tax base is dissolving…..not good.

… the independent analysis, anything pertaining to what might happen, and how many are simply repeating what they hear from their anti-2016 friends and sources (including the same publications we dismiss when they are writing about the Cubs).

While the overall expenditures will be huge, obviously, the overall tax burden on the local taxpayers is minimal as compared to the net benefits, including things like $250 million worth of new facilities for the park district in return for spending $15 million.

Yes, the city has made guarantees to pay up (with our taxpayer money) should revenues fall short, but the Chicago 2016 budget allows for a good amount of cost overrun before such guarantees would even kick in. It should also be noted that the last 2 American cities to host the Olympics made money. I’ve seen projections of an impact of $22.5 billion in the entire state and the equivalent of one year of work for 315,000 people.

The vast majority of the funds to pay for the games are dollars the city wouldn’t see otherwise. I must state this again, as this is the most widely spread and annoying of the incorrect anti-Olympic arguments: The vast majority of the funds to pay for the games are dollars the city wouldn’t see otherwise – to suggest that the city is spending money on venues that it could otherwise spend on schools, hospitals, roads, etc. isn’t the case. On the other hand, additional spending means more tax revenues that the city can spend on those services.

The 2016 Bid projects a cost of about $3.3 billion and revenues of about $3.8 billion (not including any private developers, who will spend almost $1 billion to construct the Olympic Village alone). And Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood hasn’t committed to anything absolute yet, but the Olympics always result in federal transportation dollars to boost infrastructure.

The games would also restart stalled (and eyesore) projects like Block 37, Waterview Tower, and the Spire. They’d reignite redevelopment (wow, that doesn’t sound natural) on the South Side. They would help the city lure new business to the area, creating long term jobs.

All of that spending creates a cycle of money being invested in the region, creating jobs, something of great importance in this down (although admittedly improving) economy. The immediate effects of construction alone would be incredible – engineers and construction workers start collecting paychecks, eating out, renting homes, buying clothes, and the money gets spread throughout the city beyond just those working to build the Games. I’m not oblivious to Al, N Oakley, chilango2 and others financial concerns, worries of corruption and suspicion of insider deals, but I personally believe that if you take in to account the effects on construction as well as other industries – food service, security, media, marketing, etc. – it seems far more probable the city ends this thing with a net gain, not just in dollars, but in jobs, infrastructure and pride.

I seriously suggest everyone go read the bid, and then for some good objective analysis, check this.

Own a house, cars, use public transportation and support a family. I am by no means rich and I would love to host the Olympics. For me it is worth a few more tax dollars to see Chicago front and center for the world to see.

I know we are corrupt and Olympic money would line the pockets of our crooked government officials, but i don’t see how that would be any different then what is going on now anyway.

The infrastructure improvements are much needed and this may help get changes and upgrades moving.

On a personal note I think it may be 3 of the most exciting weeks of my life. To sit and watch the world in competition would be amazing.

to prove it’s a world-class city. I already think Chicago is one. (New York and San Francisco would be the only other ones in the U.S., IMHO. Not Los Angeles.)

But the Olympics certainly would provide a chance for the world to see Chicago as something other than the hometown of Michael Jordan and Al Capone. You’d be surprised how many people in other countries still see Chicago through that narrow focus.

Go Chicago!

People who invoke the recession as a reason to be opposed to this are just reaching for straws. The revenue from the games will come in 2016. Not only will we have exited the current recession by then, we quite possibly will have gone through an entirely different boom/bust/recovery cycle. Just as you can’t predict the weather in 2016 by looking out the window today, you can’t make claims about revenue projections based on today’s economic climate. These games will bring in a lot of money 7 years from now, the current recession notwithstanding.

Meanwhile, the spending side of the bid will begin almost immediately and will be a massive economic stimulus for the city. Yes, the infrastructure improvements that will be made as part of the bid will be costly, and per Chicago tradition, will have “overruns.” But that misses the point: many of those improvements can (and eventually will) be made anyway, with no countervailing revenue source. Here you have NBC, international broadcasters, and hundreds of thousands of ticket goers subsidizing the work. For the next 7 years, thousands of workers get jobs that are paid for by these outside revenue sources; the city and its residents get access to world class sporting venues and improved transportation paid by the same. This is a good thing.

The Montreal argument foretelling 30 years of debt is also inapt. That is the single worst example of fiscal mismanagement of any Olympic games, so naturally it becomes the expected result for any opponent of the games. Overlooked by this argument is that LA turned a sizeable profit ($250 mm), and Atlanta a modest one ($10 mm). There is no reason Chicago could not do the same. While US sites are the best comparison, they aren’t the only ones to turn a profit: 88 in Seoul turned a huge ($350 mm) profit; Beijing last year made about $16mm in profit despite being one of the most expensive games ever put on; and Barcelona reportedly made about $5 mm in profit.

Does this guarantee Chicago will be in the black? No. But that’s why they have insurance. Which then leads to the other argument: all residents will be paying the overruns for years and years through higher property taxes. This is a possibility, but far from a likelihood.

And balanced against all of this? Its not just the possibility of turning a profit or improving the city. Think a little bigger. For many cities that have hosted the games, this was their chance to open themselves to the World and come out as a world class city worth visiting, worth doing business in, worth living in. Some cities squander this chance, but others (e.g., Barcelona) have been completely transformed by their Olympics. Chicago is already a world class city, the Olympics would just help make sure everyone else knows it.

Full disclosure since Al apparently will draw this out anyway: I am now a former Chicago resident transplanted to the East Coast. It won’t be my property that gets taxed for this, and you can use that as an argument against me if you like. The other points, I think, stand on their own merit.

If Rio gets the Games, I won’t be disappointed. However, if Chicago wins out, I’ll be proud of my city and will be looking forward to the Games themselves.

On one hand, the city will hit some pitfalls if the bid is successful. The entire scenario will almost surely cost an extravagant amount of money, with enormous overruns…the tax ramifications of which will be left to us that live here, both in the city and within the state. Security in the city will have to be annoyingly tight that summer, an utter nuisance. The city and state will be forced to foot the bill for an enormous stadium in Jackson Park that will never be used again, no matter how much of it is “temporary seating” – the comical irony is that Soldier Field was originally built as a stadium for an ultimately failed Olympic bid but the city decided to renovate it just before launching the current bid. Those neighborhoods that the original fanpost claims will be “spruced up” will be subjected to gentrification and, even if you claim gentrification to be a good thing, that focus won’t extend west of the Dan Ryan, to the places that really could use some civic attention. And for all that want to cite Barcelona as an example of improving a city’s image, they were left with a bunch of decaying facilities on hilltop, linked to the urban center by a tram to nowhere…a really depressing site that’s now passed off as a tourist attraction.

On the other hand, the city will benefit in many ways if their bid wins. Chicago will finally be forced to make a lot of massive, necessary improvements to the CTA, expressways, and commuter rail that will ultimately reduce traffic in the long term, making two weeks of congestion seem like a bad memory. Those infrastructural improvements are hugely important to the future of the Chicago. In a sense, a successful Olympic bid would be a very expensive way to force such renovations into existence because the collar counties and downstate would balk at footing part of the bill if it couldn’t be passed off under the banner of civic pride, no matter how important the city is to their own economic well-being. In addition, while I doubt that building an Olympic Stadium in Jackson Park would spur any kind of renaissance through Englewood or any of the blighted southside neighborhoods, it will surely cast more attention on those areas and, in turn, force more Chicagoans and Americans alike to realize just how bad day-to-day life is for so many of their fellow citizens.

Then there’s the actual games. I’ve attended two Olympics, Atlanta and Athens, and all I can say is that the Games are incredibly fun. You get to see a bunch of weird sports, played with breath-taking precision. For example, world-class table tennis is amazing…team handball is pretty great…and so on and so on. My girlfriend was an elite swimmer through HS and college and, though steadfastly opposed to the Olympics bid on other grounds, she would relish the chance at seeing the aquatic events in person. It’s just too bad that a historic venue like Wrigley Field, so intertwined with city’s own history, doesn’t factor into the bid – couldn’t they at least have a preliminary round of a field event there while the Cubs are away?

…If Chicago does win, those that were initially opposed to the bid shouldn’t shun the Games. Those two weeks would be a blast…I just can’t decide if it’s worth the cost. So, if the IOC chooses Chicago, I’ll look forward to the event. And, if the IOC goes for Rio, no big deal.

It could be great but Chicago couldn’t run a girl scout meeting without going way overbudget how can it run this?

If you haven’t seen the presentation I just watched it. It was pretty awesome.

I’m kind of neutral to tell you the truth.

One thing I’m tired of is people saying with all the shootings how can they think of the games.

That is just stupid. The shootings and us going after the games have no connection. I also don’t think the Fenger thugs thought “Daley’s going after the games let’s kill someone!”

And the idiot calling the radio yesterday among other people going on and on about how much Patrick Ryan and Oprah and some of the other rich people involved have and them giving it to the games. First it’s THEIR MONEY.

First if they wanted to take a bath in it it’s their perrogative.

Second the people the morons mention give a lot to charity (esp. Patrick Ryan in fact quite a bit of my NU tuition was paid for by one of the scholarships he is involved with) and pay the highest tax rates we have,

And again we hear the stupid say how dare you care about this when there are other problems. Just because you care about this doesn’t mean you don’t care about other things.

Boers and Bernstein were having a discussion of who would light the torch if we got it.

I personally liked the idea of lighting Jim Belushi on fire and throwing him in. I despise that man.

But seriously Michael Jordan is the obvious choice. 2 time olympic and possibly the greatest athlete in US history not to mention his ties to the city.

Chicago – out in the 1st round.

It was all those dammed “Its gonna happen” signs in Daley Plaza…… Typical Chicago shutout in the first round of the playoffs.