Naysayers always complain that these fairs cost too much money and are entirely fluff events. History shows that's not true. For example, over a hundred years later, Chicago is still making money from the economic, social, and infrastructure benefits of its fairs.
>over a hundred years later, Chicago is still making money from the economic, social, and infrastructure benefits of its fairs.
Because of the way the economy works, this can be said of absolutely any expenditure anywhere anytime for any reason. If even one project laborer buys a cup of coffee on the job, at least $4 of value then gets sent out into circulation in a way that has been plausibly colored by the construction of the Big Money Pit of 1849.
Naysayers always complain that these fairs cost too much money and are entirely fluff events. History shows that's not true. For example, over a hundred years later, Chicago is still making money from the economic, social, and infrastructure benefits of its fairs.
Yes! Success for most Fairs depends on the timeline you're looking at. Even the 1984 World's Fair in New Orleans (which I know I call out in the essay), was considered a failure at the time. Now 30+ years later, New Orleans has a thriving waterfront district that wouldn't have been developed without the Fair.
Was very surprised to not see any mention of Expo2020, which has been hailed as a "World's Fair for the 21st Century". UAE and Dubai put tons of resources and capital into it but obviously had to deal with the issue of in person events in 2020. As I understand it has been rescheduled for the end of 2021... https://expo2020dubai.ae/en/
I really don't think Expo2020 counts. Rooting the future in the UAE seems like a losing battle, and it seems like the amount of entities that would choose not to participate would outweigh those that would.
Is there a place on Earth where that wouldn't be the case?
Naysayers always complain that these fairs cost too much money and are entirely fluff events. History shows that's not true. For example, over a hundred years later, Chicago is still making money from the economic, social, and infrastructure benefits of its fairs.
> over a hundred years later, Chicago is still making money from the economic, social, and infrastructure benefits of its fairs. Because of the way the economy works, this can be said of absolutely any expenditure anywhere anytime for any reason. If even one project laborer buys a cup of coffee on the job, at least $4 of value then gets sent out into circulation in a way that has been plausibly colored by the constru…
And stimulating local economies is a problem... why?
I'm not sure how you could have a unifying vision for something as broad and diverse as "the future," or "the good parts of the future," without projecting it down into a simplistic, synthesized work of very fictional storytelling where all resemblance to reality (and consequently all authority) has been sacrificed in favor of comprehensibility and persuasiveness. In other words, the clearest route to getting people…
To clarify. There's no unifying vision because most of the Pavilions are developed by large government committees where everyone wants to show off a little bit of everything. As a result, their Pavilions end up being a watered down version of their vision for the future.
For better or worse, the future itself is to a large extent developed by large government committees - or at least the funding allocation for the cutting-edge research projects that show up at World Fairs are.
> over a hundred years later, Chicago is still making money from the economic, social, and infrastructure benefits of its fairs. Because of the way the economy works, this can be said of absolutely any expenditure anywhere anytime for any reason. If even one project laborer buys a cup of coffee on the job, at least $4 of value then gets sent out into circulation in a way that has been plausibly colored by the constru…
And stimulating local economies is a problem... why?
All expenditures stimulate the economy equally, as measured by the "marked bills" theory. That means the only way to compare them is to evaluate opportunity costs. Spending a million bucks on constructing a big hole in the middle of nowhere, and performing an important infrastructure revitalization, will both put dollars in the hands of laborers, and thereby grocery stores and so on, at the same rate. That's why all of the useful parts of the discussion are on the specific, immediate consequences; the distant consequences are the same no matter what you do.
I really don't think Expo2020 counts. Rooting the future in the UAE seems like a losing battle, and it seems like the amount of entities that would choose not to participate would outweigh those that would.
Is there a place on Earth where that wouldn't be the case?
The internet? Make it a virtual event, so everyone can attend.