Hosting The Olympics
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-07-30/hosting-olympics
The world’s top athletes are competing for the gold at the London Olympics. But it’s not just the Olympians striving to come out on top. So is the city of London. This month, British Prime Minister David Cameron made a pledge to turn the Olympic games “into gold.” Every four years, host cities hope the international platform will serve as a catalyst for economic growth. Officials see it as an opportunity to modernize transportation systems, jumpstart urban renewal, attract tourism, and gain international prestige. But some doubt London, or the host cities before it, will ever come out ahead. Diane and guests discuss the costs and benefits of hosting the Olympics.
Guests
Andrew Zimbalist
professor of economics at Smith College.
Tom Rhoads
professor of economics at Towson University.
Lisa Delpy Neirotti
associate professor at George Washington University.
Mark Spiegel
vice president of international research at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
Steve Wilson
European sports editor at the Associated Press.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
London could have revitalized its slums with or without the Olympics -- but a lot of other countries really could use the boost. Let's turn the Olympics into an international development engine.
1. Keep the Winter Olympics in the Northern Hemisphere
2. Move Summer Olympics to the developing world.
3. Split it into two regional biennial events instead of one quadrennial event
4. Establish human development and civil society goals as prerequisites for inclusion in the pool of candidate host nations.
5. Establish investment requirements for participating nations and media rights holders.
I understand that bringing the Olympics to town does not pay for itself in job creation etc. What is a better way to create jobs in a community? And especially creating jobs for so many unemployed youth?
Economic studies also show that war in the long run is harmful to nations, yet the USA still seem to embark upon it every few years.
Q for Andrew Zimbalist..
Earlier you mentioned cost neutral/loss at the aggregate over time while hosting thhe Olympics. Would you gather that if a given city were to host the Olympics for consecutive years that the host city would see an overall cost benefit? If so, my suggestion would be for Athens, Greece to hold the event for the next 20 years...
It would give Greece a chance to use stimulus $'s to build/upgrade the site(s) plus add hotels to accomodate added tourists. I would also seek private investment for external vacation locales around Greece to accomodate the exodus of citizenry for the games and those can be highlighted in the off years as future tourists locales.
Just a shout out for the Greeks...
John Smyth
Houston, Tx
This conversation is very similar to the conversation we have in the US regarding a city either gaining or losing a professional sports team. It's like trying to cost justify a kid's birthday party.
the trillion spend on the military industrial complex vs billion spend on the Olympics. both are a waste of money yet, both are a "showoff party" for a industrialized nation. but it seems to me for what ever reason you want to beat up the Olympics as a posts to the other useless project the government would spend.
Andrew Zimbalist is a great get on all things "public" and "sport" in the same sentence.
If only his day job could be getting in the media to counteract every case of the "Hoboken Zephyrs" holding up a city for a new stadium.
And I'm listening to yesterday's show today, so I hope to hear some fleshing out, confirmation or denial that many of the empty seats are sponsors' and VIPs. It's to be contrasted with some citizens there who've been shown saying they can't get a ticket for anything.