Kasz216 said:
That article was about how the Olympics costs people money. Syndey had an estimated economic benefit of 2.78%... before the games happened. What does after the fact analysis say though? http://theconversation.edu.au/hosting-the-olympics-cash-cow-or-money-pit-7403 "Our results revealed that rather than producing an economic benefit the Sydney Games actually reduced Australian household consumption by $2.1 billion."
Keep in mind as well the Sydney Olympics ran 6.6 Billion dollars. |
Kasz, you can find any analysis to support or defend pretty much any point on the internet.
Here is another study. I don't know if it's correct anymore than anyone can trust your own link:
http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/bitstream/140.119/37406/8/803008.pdf
If you are against something you can spin pretty much any facts around to support your position. Likewise if you are in favour.
We have had politicians and major businesses in the UK waxing on about the huge financial benefits the games will bring to London. Yes, yes, I know they have no choice but to say these things and are living in hope.
On the other hand there are the naysayers predicting an economic apocalypse because of the games.
Your link is based on "THEIR RESULTS". The person or group that carried out the study. If I get the time I can probably find many our studies that contradict theirs.
All I am saying is to wait and see the results both socially and financially before rushing to rash specualtion.
Even if the games do turn out to be a financial success (or failure) arguments will probably still carry on because of how each individual or party determine or measure exactly what is success or failure.
Until we have the published results of the 2012 olympics outlining the costs, income etc., I will put this argument aside... but to be continued.