Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–58 of 58 posts

Re: Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

#51

Post by nemesisj »

tokenadult wrote: post #39
nemesisj wrote: post #6

I think there's an important psychological dimension that's often missed from these calculations, particularly for countries that have a chip on their shoulder. It's a way for the entire world to be focused on something that you're doing well (hopefully) for a few weeks. Before the Beijing olympics many Chinese would ask you how you liked China, and when you replied, "yes" they would say China is "luo hou", which mea…

in 1999, the Beijing subway was almost nonexistent Well, you did say "almost," and I'm aware that the subway system in Beijing has been considerably extended, but parts of the system were old in 1987 when I first rode it. I'm not at all sure that I agree that it "is more than worth the 40 billion that was spent" for peasants in a backward region of a still poor country to have the illusion that they live in a develop…

Yeah, it was installed in the late 60s, but it was really poor during the 80s (and yes, I rode it in the mid 80s as well). There's really no comparison between it then and what it became just prior to the olympics. Same with the highway situation, airport, transport links to Tianjin, and even more minor things like making sure Pinyin was on all street signs. These things matter. The 40 billion didn't just give people an illusion - it transformed Beijing and partner cities and made a lasting contribution to the people who lived there.

Re: Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

#52

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #42
andy_ppp wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem with Straford is that a) new builds in the UK are made as cheaply as possible. b) new builds go down in value as soon as you buy them c) we in Europe hate soulless man planned cities - a lot of the area around the olympic park feels this way. I think the government could have just paid for the cleanup of the area and done something like subsidise housing for the poor there with the money, rather than pay the…

> I think the government could have just paid for the cleanup of the area and done something like subsidise housing for the poor there with the money The whole point of development, especially development pursuant to the Olympics, is to push the poor out of the area. When any mayor says "we will clean up and develop this area," none ever mean "... in order to make a nice place to live for poor people." Indeed, if poo…

That's Auburn Gresham. It's not a particularly bad neighborhood. It's mostly black, like the rest of the south side, but also middle class and connected to the Metra. Just one neighborhood south is Beverly, one of the safest neighborhoods in the city.

Here's a bad neighborhood in Chicago:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=west+garfield+park&ie=UTF-8&h...

It is not well-maintained and it isn't pleasant; it's block after block of board-ups and red-X placards.

Re: Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

#53

Post by rayiner »

tptacek wrote: post #52
rayiner wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the government could have just paid for the cleanup of the area and done something like subsidise housing for the poor there with the money The whole point of development, especially development pursuant to the Olympics, is to push the poor out of the area. When any mayor says "we will clean up and develop this area," none ever mean "... in order to make a nice place to live for poor people." Indeed, if poo…

That's Auburn Gresham. It's not a particularly bad neighborhood. It's mostly black, like the rest of the south side, but also middle class and connected to the Metra. Just one neighborhood south is Beverly, one of the safest neighborhoods in the city. Here's a bad neighborhood in Chicago: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=west+garfield+park&ie=UTF-8&h... It is not well-maintained and it isn't pleasant; it's block after…

I guess it depends on where you are in the neighborhood, because: http://news.yahoo.com/four-chicago-neighborhoods-named-list-....

"Chicago's Auburn Gresham neighborhood made the list twice this year, but the census tract around South Halsted Street and West 77th is ranked highest at No. 4. Within a one-year period, NeighborhoodScout says there is a 1 in 9 chance of being a victim of violent crime here, and per 1,000 residents, the violent crime rate is 116.56.

The average per capita income in this area is lower than 99.4 percent of other U.S. neighborhoods, and 51 percent of children in this section of Chicago are living below the federal poverty line, giving this census tract a rate of childhood poverty that's higher than 93 percent of neighborhoods around the country."

I'll defer to your knowledge of Chicago, though. My point really is that while people talk about "bad neighborhoods" on the south side of Chicago, much (most? at least what I've driven through) is in pretty good shape. Even West Garfield Park isn't so bad in places. E.g. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=west+garfield+park&ll=41.8819...

Re: Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

#54

Post by arethuza »

dingaling wrote: post #43
arethuza wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I was very skeptical about the London Olympics before the event. However, I thought the whole thing went splendidly and arguably did give the whole of the UK a bit of a lift in national morale just when we really needed it. Compared to other megaprojects that we seem to be happy to splurge taxpayers money on (e.g. silly aircraft carriers) it actually seemed pretty good value for money.

Current estimate for the QE Carrier project is £5.5 billion, or about 60% of what the Olympics cost. In comparison to a few weeks of enabling professional athletes 'perform' , the carriers should give at least 45 years of service life. A tangible contribution to UK security, rather than just a TV event. I'm not a fan of how the carrier project has been managed but to say it's worse value than the Olympics surprises m…

Well, I'm not a fan of the carrier project or the utterly idiotic way it was managed.

If I'd been given the chance to give my vote on the Olympics I'd have said "no" - but given the fact that it was a done deal I decided to enjoy it.

Re: Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

#55

Post by fsniper »

dombili wrote: post #49
fsniper wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking "Ministry Numbers" into account is the most vulnerable thing to do in Turkey right now. According to them Turkish Lira was rock solid but it just sank 15% in a day a few days ago.

It seems like you're implying that Ministry of Finance's numbers are wrong. In that case, what numbers I should take into account?

I have no numbers that I can count on right now. But I have some facts about the fragility and vulnerability of Turkish economy. I'm 15 percent poorer than last week.

Re: Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

#56

Post by codeulike »

RougeFemme wrote: post #31
codeulike wrote: post #29

Its a bit like saying why would anyone want to host a huge dinner party.

Except that etiquette would dictate that the individual host foot the bill for a huge dinner party, whereas the taxpayers foot the bill for the Olympics.

Yes, but in the metaphor, individual = country ... so that is taken for granted.

Re: Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

#57

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #53
tptacek wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's Auburn Gresham. It's not a particularly bad neighborhood. It's mostly black, like the rest of the south side, but also middle class and connected to the Metra. Just one neighborhood south is Beverly, one of the safest neighborhoods in the city. Here's a bad neighborhood in Chicago: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=west+garfield+park&ie=UTF-8&h... It is not well-maintained and it isn't pleasant; it's block after…

I guess it depends on where you are in the neighborhood, because: http://news.yahoo.com/four-chicago-neighborhoods-named-list-... . "Chicago's Auburn Gresham neighborhood made the list twice this year, but the census tract around South Halsted Street and West 77th is ranked highest at No. 4. Within a one-year period, NeighborhoodScout says there is a 1 in 9 chance of being a victim of violent crime here, and per 1,00…

If you look at what they're reporting, they're analyzing "census tracts" that appear to be 2-3 square blocks; for instance, the really bad Auburn Gresham one is the corner of Ashland (a busy street) and 75th (a busy street). There are (believe it or not) bad corners in Oak Park too (I live kitty corner to one), but you'd be nuts to say Oak Park was unsafe.

I wouldn't want to drive down Washington in Garfield Park at night.

All of this is really not super relevant to your point, except to demonstrate that the neighborhoods people think of as "bad" in Chicago aren't pretty tree-lined residential streets that happen to have poor people living in them.

Re: Why Would Anyone Want To Host The Olympics?

#58

Post by ljf »

test1235 wrote: post #36
ljf wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's rough, but not that bad - I live locally (well in the even 'rougher' Forest Gate) and in the 15 years I've been in the area I've never personally had or seen any trouble - the kids who might look scary are well brought up - there isn't the crippling poverty (or as in other parts of London, poverty next to excessive wealth) that blights other parts. Much of the crime is theft, rather than violent crime that south…

>in the even 'rougher' Forest Gate The setting of the movie 'Ill Manors'?

Yup, but I'm living in the leafy suburban Victorian bit with a massive park at the end of my road, I love it here, really culturally diverse but with a real London history here too, and loads of people that have chosen to make London there home or grew up in the area.
Post reply on HN