Is it worth the cost to host the Olympic games?
Olympics rule
I believe that it is worth it because the someguwithaopinion is a 12 year old who is wrong. Also the olympics are good because every one gets a job if needed. Also the economy gets a boost of money by ticket sale and business that is booming. Finally thier is a boost in the tourism.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, I oppose hosting the Olympics, because we are already in debt to the point of no return.
The economy is such that if we were to host the Olympics, we would not gain back the revenue to break even. There has been a tepid response to the Olympics in general for quite some time. Not like when I was young, and the Olympics held the importance of a Presidential election or Christmas. People aren't even traveling to see family as much as they used to in better times. Why would they bother with the expense of attending the Olympics? The United States has no right spending money on such frivolities when we have homeless, hungry and uninsured citizens that need assistance.
Posted by: N3vinFaceIt's definitely worth it
I don't know how the olympics can be survived without. The olympics are a festival of sports. It brings joy to our lives and gives us happiness. Without the olympics people won't be brought together. In the olympics, competitors bond throughout the competition. overall i think the olympics are a important event for our world to bring peace and sportmanship.
Posted by: AnonymousIncreased revenue and pride in achievement
Putting on an Olympics is an extremely costly affair, but done right and done well it can generate revenue down to the lowest levels. It also gives us the opportunity to turn around afterwards and say "we were the hosts to the world and we did a fantastic job." Get behind our athletes, get behind our country
Posted by: AnonymousIt is worth the cost to host the Olympic games because of the profits that could be made as part of these games.
When a country hosts the Olympics, their rate of tourism skyrockets. Businesses within wide radii of where the games would be hosted would have profit margins shoot through the roof. The countries themselves are seen by the world as worthy of hosting, and the cultural rating of these countries therefore raise. It would be silly for a country that focused on profit to turn down an opportunity to host the Olympic games.
Posted by: TigerAmbI do think that the cost of holding the Olympic games are worth the cost, the Olympics have the possibility to garner a lot of revenue.
A city can gain a lot of revenue from hosting the Olympic games. The city gets press for the duration of the game, which can bring tourism up. The place that gets to hold the games gets a lot of attention and support. The Olympics puts a city or country on the map. I also feel that players play harder when they are playing at home. It is very expensive but everyone wants the opportunity to host.
Posted by: C0ImEIiteI believe it is worth the cost to host the Olympic Games as it is a perfect forum to showcase all your country has to offer.
The Olympic Games although an expensive undertaking to host is well worth it. Not only does it result in a huge influx in visitors with money to spend but it means worldwide focus on the host country for several weeks. The television coverage not only broadcasts the athletes competing, it means a slew of journalists from around the world all reporting on the host country.
Posted by: R3n5God2iIIaThe cost is worth it.
The Olympics may be costly but the money generated during the games makes up for the overall cost. Some people may think that the Olympics does not care about the poor or the starving in places such as Africa however the International Olympic Committee has created the Olympic movement which feeds, clothes, and educates kids in places of high poverty. So the Olympics are worth the coast.
Posted by: AnonymousI find it to be financially worth while to host the Olympic games.
I think that although the cost of hosting the Olympics may be great, the rewards and sheer pride the city feels is far greater. The Olympics are a great and mighty tradition that have been around for hundreds of years, and being able to host such an amazing event, is an honor. Besides being and honor, the Olympics bring thousands of people to one place, meaning that all of them are going to have to spend money in the location of the Olympics. The amount of money that is made off of the Olympics is outrageous.
Posted by: 5h4rdEgbeIt's not just about immediate efffects.
Yes, the Olympics were expensive to run, money that could be used to help the country is spent hosting the games. However, that money will be earned back from things such as tickets, souvenirs, transport, sponsors etc. It will also invite businesses to locate to that area, thus earning more money than invested in the games.
Posted by: AnonymousGetting more attention
We will get so much money than from all tourists, so why not.
We get more attention from other countries and it could be good for Austria.
In Austria there is no LIVE but when there would be the Olympic games it is very good for us and our money.Posted by: AnonymousThe profit is more than the loss, and the facilities can be continued to use afterward.
I have participated in speech research that shows the margin of profit is much greater than the costs. Also, facilities remain in the host country and can be used to make profits later.
Posted by: Salival 64I believe it is worth the cost to host the olympic games.
It is worth the cost to host olympic games. The olympics bring a lot of tourism and hotel profits to the city hosting the event. Also it gives the city exposure on tv. Some of this exposure drives tourists to the city. It would benefit the city greatly. So therefore I do believe it is a great benefit.
Posted by: barbiegirllFaster Higher Stronger
The Olympics Games stands as the epitome of sports in the world which has is origin traced back to 776BC. They were dedicated to the Olympian gods and the Olympic motto is the Hendiatris Citius, Altius and Fortius which is Latin for 'Faster Higher and Stronger' which was proposed by Pierre de Coubertin in 1894. The Olympic games is definitely a good platform for athletes to forge friendship and foster global understanding and harmony.
Posted by: AnonymousYes it's worth the cost, the Olympics are great for Great Britain.
Everyone always gets excited about the Olympics, especially if it is coming to your country. Not only did Britain get excited for the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee, they also were looking forward to the Olympics because it was coming to London for the third time in history! I think that hosting the Olympics is a great way to show off to the world what your city looks like. It shows the many places to see and it also lets you see how versatile the city is. I know that the Olympics costs a lot of money to host, organize and build the venues, but aren't we earning back the money from all the tickets sold, souvenirs that have been bought, transport and accommodation etc. Local businesses also benefit from this famous sporting event, so in effect we are not wasting the money as we have just earned it all back! The facilities that are built for the Olympics can be re-used by future generations, so it is not like once the venue is built, it won’t get used again. The money will not be wasted if the venues can be used again and again. I also think that having a big festival brings many countries together in peace for both individuals and teams. It is a place where many athletes can compete against each other in a friendly environment, without killing each other. Having the Olympics can be very inspiring to people who don’t do sport, especially if there is an athlete that they like. When they see that person doing their sport, they think to themselves ‘I want to be just like them’ and then they take up the sport which is great and I am sure it would be awarding for the athletes to know that they have inspired someone to take up their sport. Who knows, we may find one of them in the Olympics a few years on?
Posted by: AnonymousIt is very beneficial for countries
It is very beneficial for the countries because the Olympics advertise the country a lot, and the tourist attractions does a little "Side effect" which is people buy tickets for the games and while they are seeing the tourist attractions they will pay money for it, so this could be one more beneficial. Also, it could lead to solving more economic problems and money problems inside the country, so the cost of hosting Olympic is not a harm and the countries would definetly host it. It is also a chance of bringing the countries in to one by cheering for their athletes and having good sportsmanship and everyone gathering together. So, I believe it is worth the cost to host the Olympic games.
Posted by: qwertysThe Olympic games does not have a price tag on it, due to fact that it brings most of the countries together in a competition to see who ranks supreme.
I believe that the Olympic games is indeed worth the cost, mainly because it brings together a bunch of countries and allow them to compete against each other in a vast range of activities. Also, the country hosting the event gets recognition and a whole bunch of money anyway because of the spectators that come from all around the world to come watch the sports. In fact, the Olympics are not hosted a poor developing country, but instead in a country prospering with wealth. This is indeed priceless in its sense.
Posted by: N34rIyGaIvIt's the Olympics!!
Yes the cost can be horrific, but you can earn money back. Many Olympics have earned money, some have broken even. Besides, I want the Olympics to come to my hometown!! Pittsburgh Olympics? I think yes! The Olympics bring the nations together for two to four weeks. That is what this world needs!
Posted by: AnonymousBoosts economy
the financial trades go through the roof because they gain a huge profit from tickets. this is important because, when they win the bid, they have to prepare. they have to know how much money is going to be spent on the Olympic games. a lot of research goes into this and if we stop hosting the olympic games, many people will lose their jobs!
Posted by: AnonymousYes, it is worth the cost to host the Olympics, because the revenue they generate more than outweigh the cost.
The Olympics are a very special event. You have the most talented athletes across the globe competing and showing us what they are really capable of. Think of the revenue that is generated by just the athletes alone. Some travel with family and need a place to stay. Obviously, some local hotel is going to capitalize on that.
Posted by: StripperMorIt is worth the cost to host they Olympics, because it brings publicity and value to your city.
It costs a lot to host the Olympics, but cities also get a lot of revenue from the tourists and advertisers who come into the city for the games. Cities can also always promote themselves as previous hosts of the Olympics years later to draw more attention to their city's value.
Posted by: TMaciasIt's for pride.
If we win the olympics we have bragging rights for another 4 years until the next summer or winter games.
Posted by: AnonymousI think it's worth it!
I think it's worth the cost to host the Olympic games because there all countries over the world meet and there are only games for fairness!
It's also a tradition what we have for years and it will be very sad, if the Olympic games get lost.
So I think it's worth that one country is ready for that to manage it.Posted by: AnonymousThe tourism and exposure your country receives is worth the cost.
The Olympics bring a huge amount of recognition and stature to a hosting country. The country will become more well-known. This will increase tourism and travel to that country, and especially to that region. The Olympics themselves will bring a large boost to the economy. Fans from all over the world will come to the events. Hotels, restaurants, tourist shops and stores will all make lots of money during the games. There will also be media and important people at the events. This all makes hosting the games worthwhile.
Posted by: VasilBuddyThis is quite an equal topic.
Like others have said, the cost can be... costly. In reality though, the Olympics are a chance for the nations to get together a unified team, and sometimes individuals, to represent their country. Not by brute force, not by military power, and not even by religion, but by teamwork and mental/physical durability. Also the Olympics have been a great success, so why not fight to make sure they continue for generations to come? So again, a great opportunity for nations to compete, WITHOUT killing each other.
Posted by: Reni-1_3I think it is worth the cost to host the Olympic games.
The Olympics give countries a change to partake in friendly competition. The games are a constructive experience, not a destruction one like going to war. I think the Olympics are a healthy way of using sports to foster a healthier world.
Posted by: LorenaHThe less deceived
Hosting the olympic games is a huge honour. The value of sport and the arts is beyond measure. The cost is not beyond measure; however, oscar wilde's comment concerning those who know the price of everything and the value of nothing comes to mind. One post (against) suggests the olympics is 'a distraction' from reality. You could say the same about going on holiday or having a meal out - which is clearly ridiculous. Long live the olympics!
Posted by: Anonymous
WASTE OF MONEY!
Think about the African people, starving and living without shelter. All charities ask for a small amount of money, yet we spend millions on a sporting event. Athletes may get publicity, but aren't human lives more important? If we have money to send rockets to the moon, isn't better to use the money for the poor people?The Olympics are a WASTE OF MONEY!
Posted by: AnonymousHighlights poverty and inequality
I can't imagine a third world country if going to have the resources to send a team. Therefore the powerful/rich countries have the upper hand before it even starts. It seems to highlight the inequalities in the world not help them.
Posted by: AnonymousThe area that hosts the Olympic Games is environmentally impacted in a negative way by temporary overpopulation.
The environmental cost of hosting the Olympic games is always high and can be very high due to the fact that the Olympic games cause a small area to become extremely overpopulated for a short period of time. Nothing is worth deliberate environmental degradation, especially if the games are hosted in an area that still retains any sort of intact ecosystems.
Posted by: Wynn354The cost of hosting the Olympics is not worth it because there is no long term financial benefits to the host city.
Hosting the Olympics is very expensive because of all the sites that have to be built. There are short term benefits while the Olympics are being held but over the long term there are not many benefits. Many of the venues are only used for the Olympics and then sit dormant in the upcoming years. The Olympics do not result in much long term business development or long term economic development, only short term while the Olympics are being held.
Posted by: TasticBranThe cost to host the Olympic games is not worth it to the host country, the long term disadvantages have been proven.
A number of studies of previous Olympics host cities/countries shows that the cost of hosting the Olympic games isn't returned in the long run. The initial rush of people during the two or so weeks that the Olympics takes place is followed by a lag of tourism as compared to neighboring countries. Therefore the cost to build the Olympics infrastructure which in many cases takes years and billions of dollars is only to support a two week event, nothing more.
Posted by: VampMarceNot worth it
The Olympics cost a great deal of money! The minimum amount ever paid to host it was one billion dollars. The maximum ever paid was 43 billion dollars. Here is the way that the Olympics works: basically you pay them to set up all of this equipment and build the buildings for the athletes participating. They must also do the same for the tourists staying to watch these competitions. These buildings stick around for about 17 days, and then they tear everything down and move onto a new place the following year. Each place that hosts it has a different price range, depending on the population, and if it is popular to have the Olympics around... The Olympics has little to no economical benefits either, so why even host it? If I may ask.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, I disagree, because we put far too much money into this event when hosting it.
I feel that the cities chosen to host the Olympics will spend millions on this one event. And, because of our current economic situation, we will be unable to make any profit.
Posted by: eddietronThe olympics are a waste of money!
Now that around the world international sports competitions are held often, the billions of dollars countries spend on the Olympic games are a waste. Countries could better use the money they spend on the Olympic games on real problems, like having better education or helping the poor, who really need the money, instead of spending it on a useless sports competition.
Posted by: someguywithanopinionNo, its not.
As enjoyable as it is to watch the Olympics, countries are too poor to participate, and we, the U.S are in debt ourselves. We keep spending money we don't have. But we don't care, nobody cares. Why? We don't look past the present. We aren't thinking about the future, economically. Until we find a president who doesn't screw up our economy, it would be stupid to continue wasting money we didn't have.
Posted by: AnonymousThe cost of the Olympics is far greater than the benefits, no nation should try to host the games.
It is not worth the cost to host the Olympic games because the stadiums are not reusable yet require tremendous maintenance. Greece lost billions on hosting the Olympics, and now have an inventory of large unused public arenas that continue to require upkeep. Even the Olympic spirit goes away, just look at what happened when Yugoslavia hosted the games- it failed to stop the country from a violent civil war. Probably most countries would be better off not even sending teams to the Olympics and spending the money on education where there is a real return on investment.
Posted by: 54mP5KryPtoThe Olympic Games are an outdated concept because athletes meet routinely in international events and the concept of national competition is outdated.
Before globalization, hosting Olympic Games was a good way of ensuring international caliber athletic competition across a wide range of sports. But today, international competitions occur routinely. The concept of national identity is less clear so that we have nations represented by teams whose members often have tenuous connection with that country. So for a country to incur significant expenses to host such an event seem a waste of money. As television revenues decline with the collapse of broadcast advertising, the economic model behind Olympics will collapse as well.
Posted by: SweetieSkipp£24 Billion is too much
Well, with the state the nations in at the moment it was as if that £24b was nothing. However, it could have gone to better causes, like pulling the nation out of the recession or going towards the EU goals for 2015 that we are no where near achieving yet.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, the cost to host the Olympic games is not worth it, because far too many cities have to build entire new buildings just to host the games, buildings that will be used once and never again.
It can cost millions of dollars for a city to build up an area selected to host the Olympics. And then the stadium is used once and forgotten about. It is almost impossible for the same city to host the Olympics again within a reasonable amount of time, and when they do, they would have to rebuild everything all over again, because their previous stadiums will be out of date.
Posted by: H_BairdA complete waste of money
We could have done something for the people of Britain rather than spend it on something which, in my mind, is completely useless. I wonder sometimes whether we were allowed to have the games because other countries did not want the expense of it.
Posted by: AnonymousUnless it is planned VERY carefully, the cost of preparing for the games are more than the economic benefits.
Some Olympic games have been economic benefits for the cities that organized them. But many have had more in costs in preparing for the games than the benefits they received from the games. It can be done, but most organizers do not do very well and it is regarded as a net drag on the national economy.
Posted by: ddeathnoteA waste of money
The best that can be said about the Olympics is that it is a medium for pompous elites to pontificate on their own importance and self-worth. The money used to support the Olympics is usually wasted in useless and over priced infrastructure projects which are normally underutilized once the Olympics are finished and end up costing the tax payer far more than they are worth.
Posted by: AnonymousDue to the high costs of infrastructure and security concerns, it is no longer cost efficient to host the Olympic games.
Due to the high costs of infrastructure and security concerns, it is no longer cost efficient to host the Olympic games. In this day and age, preparing for and hosting the Olympic games is no longer worth the financial investment that comes with the honor of hosting the Olympic games. In order for the games to be held a host city must have the facilities necessary to host dozens of nations and conduct multiple events across the region. In addition, the current war on terror brings an increased price tag when the cost of security standards are factored in. While it was an honor to host the Olympic games many years ago the number of Olympic scandals have brought the glory of the Olympics to a second rate stage.
Posted by: 53r3n3PiersHosting the Games is not a worthwhile endeavor because it is wasteful.
Hosting the Olympic Games is, economically, not worthwhile in the slightest. The Games are ridiculously expensive. For instance, the 2008 Beijing Games cost over 42 billion dollars. All of the money spent on these games is much better put into worthwhile causes that will be beneficial in the future, such as facilities designed with the residents of the host city in mind. Also, it is not just the games that negatively impact the host city. The bidding process to host the Olympic Games takes a minimum of 2 years to complete and ties up land and government resources.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is not worth it.
There are far better things to spend the money on besides sports, such as education, poverty etc. As well as this, the Olympics are supposed to encourage peace but by bringing countries together and making them compete the Olympics organisers are actually giving these nations a reason to fight, and they make them believe that this is 'supporting their country'.
Posted by: Anonymousagainst
Olympics is one of the best things and it’s not a waste of money, because as we all know that Olympics is done once every four years, a country hosts all the events, as we all know. the city that will host the Olympics will pay lots of money to host, but I’m going to explain for you how the country that’s hosting will re-take the money that will be lost.
As we all know there are lots of ways that the city that hosts the Olympics events will pay lots and lots of money, but it will get double the money of what they paid when people start coming to the Olympics.Posted by: AnonymousI see the Olympic Games as a waste of time, money, and resources, as it is designed to distract the world from what is really going on.
The Olympic Games, to me, is a big waste of time, money, effort, and resources, because all it does is distract people from what they really need to be paying attention to. This goes right up there with professional sports. It's nothing but a rehash of the games from ancient times.
Posted by: KindErikit's a waste of money
the Olympics are a waste of money and it could of have been better spent. countries struck with poverty are calling for help yet valued money is spent on a sporting event. environmental issues are another things as some countries are filthy and this is dangerous for the community around.
Posted by: lollyloverEXTRA MONEY TO CHARITIES
If we stopped hosting the Olympic games, a lot of extra money could be donated to child hunger, cancer cures, charities, and child hospitals. We could even work on paying off the debt to China. If we stop hosting the Olympics they will still continue, just not in America. Stopping hosting the Olympics in America means that America won't host them any more. The rest of the world can still host them.
Posted by: TuckzeeClaire kim
It is not worth the cost to host the olympic games because it is a short time benefit for the country and the stadiums are not reusable but it costs a lot to build them and maintain them. Greece lost billions on hosting the olympics and now they have an inventory of large unused public areas that continue to become hard to maintain. Also, when they host the olympics they have to borrow money from different countries. But to maintain and also pay them back it takes a bunch money. Then the government's will be hard to concentrate on other things because they are worring how to maintain all of that money.so taxes go up which makes the citizens life terrible.
Posted by: Anonymous