# Vancouver Whistler Olympics Winter 2010 - for or against?



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

*.*

.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Well, I see we finally agree on something. I'm against the incestuous spectacle called the Olympics. I won't list the reasons [ cause the server would be filled ] but in summary, we would be better served spending the money on getting ALL OF OUR CHILDREN involved in sports and physical activity....... what sucks is we could finance this with the interest payments that we will spend on the capital for the major event. Nuff said


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Worst thing to ever happen to any country.

It's all about the money and athletes trying to win for the endorsements. It leaves big debt behind that takes years to recover from in most cases.

It's commercialized to the brink and sucks the big fat one.

I voted against if you haven't figured that out yet.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Properly managed, the Olympics should not be a debt burden. They should be a huge revenue generator. Many recent Olympics have been profitable.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

While I agree with just about everything Sinc said I voted for. It's just too much fun watching the announcers tell us so & so is Canada's best gold medal hope then watching them finish bronze or maybe silver if not DNF. Meanwhile someone with no chance at all sneaks in and grabs the rings.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

bsenka said:


> Properly managed, the Olympics should not be a debt burden. They should be a huge revenue generator. Many recent Olympics have been profitable.


You're dreaming, name one, and don't say Calgary because it wasn't, don't say LA because it wasn't, don't say China, Yugoslavia, Salt Lake City, Montreal, on and on...... the only one who makes money is the IOC ..... bribes and all.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

The 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympic Games made money, and it is amazing the improvements to Atlanta that are still there today. Still, this was because corporate America took over and fully commercialized the games, lead by Coke, the Drink of Champions.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

SINC said:


> Worst thing to ever happen to any country.
> 
> It's all about the money and athletes trying to win for the endorsements. It leaves big debt behind that takes years to recover from in most cases.
> 
> ...


Couldn't agree more SINC. I've been against the Vancouver/Whistler bid since the very beginning, but there is little to be said at this point, when the feel-good, corporate-sponsor driven, political photo-op party is set to begin very soon. I'm staying clear of Vancouver while it goes on.

In my opinion, the Olympic movement is nothing but an international scam that moves from city to city, sucking money from taxpayers to fuel corporate profits. I'm not against sport at all, but these games are not really about sport. Major world sporting events go on all the time without sucking the level of resources the Olympics demand.

Amongst other cost overruns that were all predicted, our governments are spending 1 billion dollars on security costs against the original projection of 185 million. How a shortfall of that magnitude can be swept under the carpet is beyond me.

I hope all the Olympic boosters waving their little red mittens around are happy with their expensive party, while the BC government and city of Vancouver have already launched into drastic budgetary and service cuts for the coming year, much of which affect the poor.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Rps said:


> You're dreaming, name one, and don't say Calgary because it wasn't, don't say LA because it wasn't, don't say China, Yugoslavia, Salt Lake City, Montreal, on and on...... the only one who makes money is the IOC ..... bribes and all.


LA *did* made a profit, as did Beijing. Atlanta, Sydney, Barcelona, and Seoul are other recent examples.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bsenka said:


> LA *did* made a profit, as did Beijing. Atlanta, Sydney, Barcelona, and Seoul are other recent examples.


They always cook the books, ignoring infrastructure projects required as part of the bid, or ignoring the value of land giveaways. When you add in the Sea-to-Sky Highway and other infrastructure projects, Vancouver 2010 doesn't have a hope of breaking even.


----------



## RunTheWorldOnMac (Apr 23, 2006)

If we had this poll for China I would still be voting against! How on earth do you give a country like that which has yet to provide anything beneficial to human society the Olympics? Human rights violations up the wazoo, lack of freedom of speech or freedom in general, lead, toxic filled goods...

Canada... I support.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

OMG, GA and I agree on something?

Quick, pass me my nitro spray.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

SINC said:


> Worst thing to ever happen to any country.
> 
> It's all about the money and athletes trying to win for the endorsements. It leaves big debt behind that takes years to recover from in most cases.
> 
> ...


Cool! Right on the button. This is all about money.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Macfury said:


> They always cook the books, ignoring infrastructure projects required as part of the bid, or ignoring the value of land giveaways. When you add in the Sea-to-Sky Highway and other infrastructure projects, Vancouver 2010 doesn't have a hope of breaking even.


They ALWAYS cook the books, it's the Olympic way. It's nothing but a massive corporate welfare scheme, sold to the public with an appeal to nationalism and whole barge-load of pie-in-the-sky about economic benefits that never materialize. The sheep are running around waving their Canadian flags and wearing their cutesy red mitties while Gordon Campbell cuts funds to their kids school and their local hospital.



SINC said:


> OMG, GA and I agree on something?
> 
> Quick, pass me my nitro spray.


Yeah, I'm agreeing with MF too. There must be a glitch in the Matrix.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

It's a major media/sporting/entertainment event. Big ticket prices, big sponsorships, big merchandise sales, etc. Hotels, restaurants, shopping, construction...jobs, jobs, jobs. taxes, taxes, taxes....

An Olympic event that doesn't make a profit is a sign of poor local organizational management, not an indictment on the Olympics itself.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

bsenka said:


> It's a major media/sporting/entertainment event. Big ticket prices, big sponsorships, big merchandise sales, etc. Hotels, restaurants, shopping, construction...jobs, jobs, jobs. taxes, taxes, taxes....
> 
> An Olympic event that doesn't make a profit is a sign of poor local organizational management, not an indictment on the Olympics itself.


Oh the IOC makes a profit all right, but the infrastructure is built on the backs of taxpayers who always suffer the loss.

People need to get their head around that reality.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

I whole heartedly love the Olympics. Love the competitions, love the athletes, and love what the Olympics and Olympic rings stand for. 

I think the negatives are blown completely out of proportion and in ANY sport.... NHL included, money and ulterior motives come into play. This is true in almost any big event. 

The majority of athletes want to compete because they want to be the best at their sport on the world stage. Endorsements in many cases are to pay for the years and years of training and equipment. 

I love it and can't wait to watch.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

Count me as another one against. I didn't always have this opinion but the last decade has shown the IOC is corrupt and the games themselves full of cheaters. China being awarded the summer games was the final straw for me. Money and greed are the name of the game now. I feel bad for the taxpayers in BC.


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

I'm going with what appears to be the general consensus, here. But as we're being burdened with this, it really wouldn't hurt to tart it up a bit, event-wise.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

What the olympic rings stand for is a bunch of rich dilettantes having a big party and getting richer and dispossessing the local poor, homeless and destitute of what little they have at the expense of the local people. It happens every time and we decry it every time and yet it happens again and again, just like the debt left over afterward. The whole thing is a sickening joke.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

I still say the negatives are way overblown. 

You can decry anything that's big on the world scale. 

Cities. 

Macs & iPhones. 

Space Travel. 

Coffee Industry. 

Etc... 

In the end, we are talking about a sporting event in which the world's best athletes compete at different venue across the world every 4 years. 

Representatives from almost every nation march together with their flags peacefully. 

Athletes train their whole life to compete. 

Of course an event of such huge proportions has some implications, but do we stop everything in society that's grand?


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## gwillikers (Jun 19, 2003)

Commuting in and out of downtown Vancouver can be a challenge on any given day, but the Olympic road closures are going to cause unbelievable inconvenience.

My wife and daughter will be traversing this Olympic commute gauntlet, as they both work in or near the downtown core. Transit will be an option for some, but not for others. It's going to be a "leave home early and get home late" nightmare throughout the games.

The citizenry pays for these games in more ways than one, with rarely any tangible benefit at all.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

I hate to be a fence-straddler, but I have to state my position thusly: I'm not against the Olympics at all. But I don't much care for the IOC and the burden on taxpayers.

Before long, they are going to have to stop and figure out how to make the Games a viable economic proposition, or it will just die like the World's Fair did and that would genuinely be a shame.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Our female ski jumpers have been disallowed from competition.


They don't meet the requirements. Everyone is playing by the same rules. There has to be a standard, otherwise you could just invent a sport that no one else plays and declare yourself an Olympian. 

Hold the required number of events ladies, and better luck next time.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

> The Atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in WW2 them will not come close to the devastation the Olympics will do to Vancouver and BC.


For me, this kind of ridiculous hyperbole perfectly sums up the majority of "protest" about the Olympics. People are tripping old ladies as they carry the Olympic torch among proud community members getting together to celebrate the spirit of what the Olympics represent. 

Olympics... Love it. Can't wait to watch it on TV and cheer for Canada's proud Olympians.


----------



## ScanMan (Sep 11, 2007)

2010 Demonstration Event: Ice Fishing - Pairs with Chairs.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

I agree ehmax. Can't wait. 

The Olympics have always been a status symbol rather then a profit generating event like many large events in the world today. When you host a dinner party for your friends do you expect to make a profit? 

Unless you live in a socialist country, commercialization is key to making events like the Olympics a lesser burden on the tax payer. It's a byproduct of capitalism. 

The US hosting the Olympics is no better then China when it comes to ethics. 

It is very easy to say that this money "could of been spent on the homeless and other issues" but it wouldn't for many reasons. And many of you who say so, would never spend your Mac budget on helping a local, mentally ill, homeless person turn their life around either. This can be argued for days. 

My issue is not with the Olympics but rather with an athletically challenged country bidding for such an event. First and foremost, the Olympics represent an opportunity for nations to showcase their cultural, political, economic, social and *sporting achievements*. Canada, being a host multiple times, has not improved their support for amateur athletics. Seriously, thank God for Hockey, curling, Quebec and our high latitude climate. Otherwise outside a snowboarding medal, we should just be cheerleaders. Nothing against the athletes that try their best with so little resources, but rather shame on a government that does not support amateur athletics on par with most developed countries or even many poorer countries. In many ways, I also feel that the government attitude is a direct reflection of the population voice majority.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

I just hope, despite all the nastiness that is generally involved in this spectacle, there are at least a few of those "wow" moments. On a personal level that'll make up for the rest.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Oh, MazterCBlazter, I am so excited to watch your ruinous party on television so I can wave a little flag! Wooooooooot! This is what being Canadian is all about and there are people who have trained their whole lives to ski down a hill then shoot a gun!!!

I am so proud that it was the Canadian arm of Panasonic that funded the athletes, and that the foreign company that owns The Bay designed the uniforms!


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

Macfury said:


> They always cook the books, ignoring infrastructure projects required as part of the bid, or ignoring the value of land giveaways. When you add in the Sea-to-Sky Highway and other infrastructure projects, Vancouver 2010 doesn't have a hope of breaking even.


To be fair, the infrastructure improvements were needed with or without the Olympics. I just took a drive on the newly improved Sea to Sky Highway and what a difference, it's so much safer now. The Canada Line to the airport and Richmond has been in the plans since 1970.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

dona83 said:


> To be fair, the infrastructure improvements were needed with or without the Olympics.


_Needed_ is a relative term. They were _required_ as part of the IOC bid and were built all at once at taxpayer expense. 

It would be like the guy next door calling a contractor to put a new roof on my house and sending me the bill. I wouldn't just muse: "But it's a damned nice roof and I guess I needed one."


----------



## Manatus (May 11, 2009)

I think it's telling that regardless of whether you're for or against the Olympics, the topics of debate are economic viability, politics, fiscal responsibility, social policy, etc - anything but athletics and sports. We are the hosts and our national TV networks have to run commercials about our top Olympic athletes just so that we know some of their names. Realistically, outside of hockey and a few other events, once you strip away the patriotism, no one cares. Sure, we all love cheering for whoever-that-is-wearing-our-uniform, and we totally enjoy singing along to the Canadian anthem (hopefully) at medal presentations, but for the most part the vast majority of the population (and I suspect in other countries too) simply has no interest in the technical aspects of whatever event is taking place. They might as well be those two guys fishing.


----------



## markceltic (Jun 4, 2005)

Here is an idea, why not have the Winter Olympics in a set country. Discuss.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

markceltic said:


> Here is an idea, why not have the Winter Olympics in a set country. Discuss.


Sure. Have them subsidize it every year. Sounds good to me.

Summer Olympics in Greece, Winter in Switzerland. There, it's been decided!


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

dona83 said:


> To be fair, the infrastructure improvements were needed with or without the Olympics. I just took a drive on the newly improved Sea to Sky Highway and what a difference, it's so much safer now. The Canada Line to the airport and Richmond has been in the plans since 1970.


I think this point in particular is VERY overlooked / deliberately ignored by Olympic-haters. I recently visited Atlanta for the first time in some years and was astonished by the number of civic improvements made to the downtown core. Each time I asked about some structure I did not recognise, I got the same answer: "that was built for the Olympics, but is used for (X) now." Every single solitary thing Atlanta built for the Olympics is in use for something important to either the commercial or civic life of the city, from MARTA (rail) extensions to low-income housing. That's how you do it, and sadly not every city has been as wise with their expenditures.

Overall, the Olympics were VERY good for Atlanta, not only generating lots of visitor revenue (on an ongoing basis, I might add, thanks to a raised international profile), but leaving behind reuseable structures that otherwise would never have gotten out of "committee."

Having also recently visited Richmond and Vancouver, you can bet your bottom dollar that without the pressure of the Olympics, those rail and airport improvements, the improvements to Sea and Sky, and some of the new buildings would have NEVER gotten done, or would have been delayed for many years (and thus become more expensive). These things will make life *better* for the residents of those areas, no question about it.

I agree with those who decry the waste and fraud (where these things are found) and burden (usually temporary, but still) on the taxpayers; I agree with those who charge the IOC with being rather corrupt and sleazy in their dealings. But in the interest of fairness you CANNOT ignore the fact that events like the Olympics force/hasten civic improvements that were often LONG overdue, and you have to balance your criticism of the one with recognition of the other or you're just being partisan for the sake of being partisan about it.

Furthermore, I have to add that the television coverage of the Olympics gives me a great opportunity to see many sports I have an interest in but rarely get to witness, from gymnastics to archery, featuring world-class athletes and performances. This is another benefit one would otherwise have paid for directly out of pocket, and likely for a great deal more money per event -- or perhaps they just simply would never happen, and many "lesser" (= less commercial) sports would simply die out.

Those who claim the games are "unnecessary" are quite right; but then, so are the arts. Indeed, all "cultural" events are every bit as unnecessary as sporting events of any scale. I've never been a big sports fan, particularly for commercial sports (and if you want to talk about ongoing drains on the taxpayer, allow me to tell you about the Orlando Magic!). But even though I don't personally take great enthusiasm for most sports, I recognise their value to the community and to the quality of life in those communities. Big events (whether they be games or film festivals or fireworks shows) are things that excite us, bring us together and move the community forward.

What is it that we work FOR, if not to improve our world with diversity, colour, culture and excitement? Does one's world really end at the limits of one's yard, with no regard for anything beyond whether or not the town has a Wal-Mart? I've seen communities like that, and frankly they scare the hell out of me.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

chas_m said:


> Furthermore, I have to add that the television coverage of the Olympics gives me a great opportunity to see many sports I have an interest in but rarely get to witness, from gymnastics to archery, featuring world-class athletes and performances.


This is a weak argument. If I like to see Japanese monster movies, I still wouldn't support some Japanese Monster Theme Park paid for through taxes.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

chas_m said:


> What is it that we work FOR, if not to improve our world with diversity, colour, culture and excitement? Does one's world really end at the limits of one's yard, with no regard for anything beyond whether or not the town has a Wal-Mart? I've seen communities like that, and frankly they scare the hell out of me.


Frankly I see no excitement or improvement in my community due to the Olympics in spite of your claims. 

And further I see no excitement in watching jocks compete for endorsement cash on the backs of taxpayers either. 

On the other hand, we do have a rather nice Wal*Mart Super Centre that pays taxes into our community and employs just over two hundred souls that live here. And that is a much bigger benefit to our city than the Olympics.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

SINC said:


> Frankly I see no excitement or improvement in my community due to the Olympics in spite of your claims.
> 
> And further I see no excitement in watching jocks compete for endorsement cash on the backs of taxpayers either.
> 
> On the other hand, we do have a rather nice Wal*Mart Super Centre that pays taxes into our community and employs just over two hundred souls that live here. And that is a much bigger benefit to our city than the Olympics.


+1. Saying that the Olympics force people to make civic improvements that they really can't afford is a very bad argument for the Olympics indeed.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

The Olympics have finally worn me down. I used to enjoy the winter olympics the poor cousin to the real olympics. I now don’t enjoy watching the winter olympics any longer.

These events are just corporate shilling events. Sports, fitness, honour, or credibility doesn’t count for anything at the olympics, it’s the interest of the corporate sponsors that really matters.

Turn off CTV have their ratings fall to nothing and the olympics will eventually disappear as the shills will stop putting their cash in.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

I was at a local peewee hockey game this winter. These money greedy SOB's had "Timmies" emblazoned on their chest. 

The other day, I was watching hockey night in Canada. Between plays, they would show commercials and there was ads along the boards. Apparently, these athletes also get paid millions and millions of dollars.



By the way, the last Olympics were the most watched event on TV in human history. So much for the theory that no one cares.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ehMax said:


> I was at a local peewee hockey game this winter. These money greedy SOB's had "Timmies" emblazoned on their chest.


PeeWee hockey fully funded by participants and sponsors. Thanks to Tim Hortons for helping to do that.



ehMax said:


> The other day, I was watching hockey night in Canada. Between plays, they would show commercials and there was ads along the boards. Apparently, these athletes also get paid millions and millions of dollars.


NHL Hockey largely funded _voluntarily_ by ticket and merchandise sales (I don't approve of the breaks they get on taxes).



ehMax said:


> By the way, the last Olympics were the most watched event on TV in human history. So much for the theory that no one cares.


_Avatar_ was the most watched film last week. Let's fund _Avatar II_ with public money!


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

Let's look at the Sports Venues themselves. The old Trout Lake Arena previously in shambles is an arena the community can be very proud of. I played hockey there this past summer after playing many games there years before and what a beauty. This will only be a practice arena for many of the Olympic teams but it'll be a long lasting legacy the community will enjoy. Same with the renovated Thunderbird Arena in UBC.

The Richmond Speed Skating Oval has been an overwhelming hit with residents all over Metro Vancouver since it opened. Consistently high public skating attendance since it open and we expect the same when it reopens, while mostly on regular skates, quite a few people are trying their hand at speedskating for recreation.

The sliding centre and ski jump may not be as well used but it will provide close to home training facilities for local athletes. I wonder what the usage is in Calgary.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Macfury said:


> ehMax said:
> 
> 
> > I was at a local peewee hockey game this winter. These money greedy SOB's had "Timmies" emblazoned on their chest.
> ...


Agree.



Macfury said:


> ehMax said:
> 
> 
> > The other day, I was watching hockey night in Canada. Between plays, they would show commercials and there was ads along the boards. Apparently, these athletes also get paid millions and millions of dollars.
> ...


Agree, Agree.



Macfury said:


> ehMax said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, the last Olympics were the most watched event on TV in human history. So much for the theory that no one cares.
> ...


Agree, Agree, Agree.

I have no problem with pro sports as entertainment and quite enjoy following the Canucks and even spending occasionally to go to a game. Don't force me to pay for downhill ski competitions, figure skating, curling, and using tax money that should otherwise be going to schools and health care.

I admire that there are dedicated young folks who want to excel at their sports. Let them or their families pay for it. I don't think that cuts to schools and hospitals and multi-billion dollar costs to taxpayers are the way to fund their activities. If their chosen passion doesn't have a workable business model without the corporate welfare model of the Olympics -- sorry kids, get a real job like the rest of us.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Macfury said:


> PeeWee hockey fully funded by participants and sponsors. Thanks to Tim Hortons for helping to do that.
> 
> NHL Hockey largely funded _voluntarily_ by ticket and merchandise sales (I don't approve of the breaks they get on taxes).
> 
> _Avatar_ was the most watched film last week. Let's fund _Avatar II_ with public money!


So none of those PeeWee hockey player's parents are going to use the governments generous $500 tax credit funded by tax payers? :heybaby:

You think tons of tax payer money doesn't go towards hockey facilities and stadiums? No action plans?

A major portion of the Olympics are funded by television revenues, corporate sponsorships, ticket sales, licences and other private contributions. 

My point about television viewership was a reply to a point made by someone that no one is interested in the Olympics. TV ratings would clearly say that's incorrect. 

And by the way, the reference to Avatar makes no sense, but if we're talking about films, how many films and TV shows do you see that are in part helped paid for by the Canadian Government / ie: your tax dollars. 

Anyway, have I mentioned yet how much I love the Olympics and can't wait to watch!  :clap: :love2:


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

ehMax said:


> By the way, the last Olympics were the most watched event on TV in human history. So much for the theory that no one cares.


If that's true, that's more of a point for the detractors. Clearly it doesn't need any public funding.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

ehMax said:


> So none of those PeeWee hockey player's parents are going to use the governments generous $500 tax credit funded by tax payers? :heybaby:
> 
> You think tons of tax payer money doesn't go towards hockey and stadiums?


The $500 is a tax rebate on physical activities, not stadiums, and yes, we have local stadiums that are paid for by taxes, then the cost is recouped by renting them out to users. 



ehMax said:


> A major portion of the Olympics are funded by television revenues, corporate sponsorships, ticket sales, licences and other private contributions.


That's how big the Olympics should be--whatever amount can be raised that way.




MazterCBlazter said:


> I disagree. If someone has talent and desire in a sport, science, art, business, academics, or any special skill they should be encouraged and supported to excel and reach their potential. Many of our athletes have talent and desire but a poor support program. Hence the frequent poor placing in competitions. Many other countries do a far better job with their athletes.


Doesn't matter at all to me whether some privileged kid gets to swim laps or run around a track without having to get a job.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Interesting that when people here point out TV numbers and such, that the poll clearly shows more people are against the games, than for the games.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

On ehMac there is a majority against the Olympics, sure, but the last time I checked there were more people tuning in for the Olympics than people who visit to ehMac. 

And only 31 people participated in the poll.

Or do you also presume the other 30,000 members to be against the Olympics as well?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Trying to make mountains out of molehills are we?

I clearly wrote "people here", meaning in the thread. I presumed nothing about members other than those who participated in the poll.

Take a valium.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MazterCBlazter said:


> The way things are now, a child needs very well off parents with the intelligence and insight to be able to support his or her talents and ambitions. The system needs to be improved so those with talent whose parents are less well off are able to succeed.


I believe that universal education was intended to address a lot of those inequities--beyond that there's little we can do about people finding employment based on being members of their parents' polo club.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

SINC said:


> Trying to make mountains out of molehills are we?
> 
> I clearly wrote "people here", meaning in the thread. I presumed nothing about members other than those who participated in the poll.
> 
> Take a valium.


 Touchy, aren't we? :lmao:


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MannyP Design said:


> Touchy, aren't we? :lmao:


Not at all, just tired of presumptuous posts.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

SINC said:


> Interesting that when people here point out TV numbers and such, that the poll clearly shows more people are against the games, than for the games.


Yes, maybe a little interesting but not relative to the ratings point. Because, even a bit more interesting is that some of those people against the games "here", will probably still tune in to the Olympics on TV.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MACinist said:


> Yes, maybe a little interesting but not relative to the ratings point. Because, even a bit more interesting is that some of those people against the games "here", will probably still tune in to the Olympics on TV.


Not me. At all. Ever.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

> BB reader Jeremy Gruman says, "Last month, homeless people started showing up in droves in towns 100 miles or so outside of Vancouver. They had been given one-way bus tickets and were forced onto the busses. Local shelters in those communities have been completely overloaded. All so that the world can see a shiny and clean (and totally false) version of our city."


(BoingBoing)

_FYI - in the comments to the BoingBoing bit noted above, readers have called into question "Xeni"s posting, as the referred article by the CBC (below) doesn't mention "one-way bus tickets"._

*Whistler's homeless relocated ahead of Olympics*



> Whistler's homeless usually live in their cars or find shelter in the village's parkades and parking lots. But with the Games around the corner, Olympic organizers are taking over roads and parking lots, displacing them.
> 
> That has social services agencies in Squamish, about 40 kilometres south of Whistler, scrambling to provide emergency shelter and help find housing in the area.


(CBC)


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

*.*

.


----------



## nice&easy mac&cheesey (Apr 10, 2008)

*misleading*

MazterCBlazter, your last post is very misleading. The Emergency Measures Act has not been declared. The "article" you link to is a Facebook discussion page... not exactly journalism nor news.

Fear mongering does nothing good.

As for the poll, I'm against the Olympics.

Regards,
n&e, m&c


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## nice&easy mac&cheesey (Apr 10, 2008)

*no*



MazterCBlazter said:


> It's pretty clear that it was linking and quoting a facebook discussion.
> Nothing I posted says that it was declared, see the question marks?


Actually, it's not pretty clear that you were quoting a Facebook discussion. In fact, the word Facebook doesn't appear anywhere in your post. It could have been clear had you mentioned it. And it's only clear that the link is to said Facebook discussion by following the link.

I did see your question marks. However, something you posted DID say that it was declared. The link posted at the bottom of your thread says "Emergency Measures Act called during Olympic Prorogue".

I'm not trying to start a whole thing with you here, nor am I trying to derail this thread. I am saying though that I thought your post was somewhat misleading and engaging in a bit of fear-mongering.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## nice&easy mac&cheesey (Apr 10, 2008)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Which is a direct link to the facebook page and the title of the page. The forum software put it there automatically, I didn't edit it or change it.


Which doesn't negate the fact that you said that "nothing I posted said that it was declared" and I showed that, in fact, you did.

Plus, what value does a Facebook discussion page bring to the issue? Some yuck on Facebook wonders if Harper could enact an Act of Parliament during the Olympics. Subsequently, you link to it with a title that makes it appear as though it is fact and not the mindless speculation of some mouth-breather on Facebook.

I still say your post was about fear-mongering. Why else include the bits about the "suspension of the operation of the Canadian Bill of Rights" and exaggerated police powers?

Oddly enough, if you read the Emergencies Act (which was drafted to replace the much more controversial War Measures Act) it notes in the third paragraph of the preamble that "the Governor in Council, in taking such special temporary measures, would be subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights". That's a much different landscape than the one you're trying to paint. It's even worth noting that the Emergencies Act sets out that people will be compensated if they were wronged because of measures undertaken in the name of the Act.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## nice&easy mac&cheesey (Apr 10, 2008)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Are you trying to make a mountain out of a molehill?


No. I'm using facts instead of speculative ramblings on Facebook as the basis for my argument.



MazterCBlazter said:


> Then stop telling yourself lies.


I have no idea what this means. Mostly because it makes no sense.

Anyway, you're right; this has become much more of a mountain than the molehill it should be. My point was that the way you presented the link and the idea about the Emergencies Act being implemented was misleading. The link was titled "Emergency Measures Act called during Olympic Prorogue". It makes it seem as if it is to occur. And the bottom line is it hasn't been done, there's no indication that it will be done for the Olympics (LOL) and even if it were it's not nearly the regime-like-state that you represented.

Value added = 0.

Now, having said all that, I'm done with this.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Library asked to cover up non-sponsors' logos during Games - The Globe and Mail



> Librarians in Vancouver are being warned to solicit only official Olympic sponsors for any Games-themed events they organize next month, and to cover up the names of any competitors - even slapping tape on offending logos on audiovisual equipment.
> 
> The memo, written by marketing and communications manager Jean Kavanagh, tells staff to avoid such companies as Pepsi or Dairy Queen - neither of which is an official sponsor, unlike, say Coca-Cola or McDonald's. And she suggests taking unusual steps to avoid displaying the logos of non-sponsors, writing: "If you have a speaker/guest who happens to work for Telus, ensure he/she is not wearing their Telus jacket, as Bell is the official sponsor."
> 
> ...


I hear that VANOC is changing the name of the City of Vancouver to the City of VANOC. Remember to wear your little red Olympic mittens if you want to pass through the checkpoint. 

I know someone who works for a company that was doing some printing for a client who was producing Olympic merchandise. To do this work their company had to first submit to an official VANOC Olympic audit of their staff and premises. I was told an extremely rude woman showed up at their offices and spent several hours ordering everyone around and interviewing some of the staff. She apparently commandeered an office, forcing the woman whose office it was to use the lunchroom for the day. 

The arrogance of the Olympic cartel is spectacular. And they pull all of this off with mostly free, volunteer labour. And there's an endless supply of people lining up to volunteer for them.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> Library asked to cover up non-sponsors' logos during Games - The Globe and Mail
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just one more example that the Olympics do more harm than good. I'm beginning to despise them now.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

The thought does occur that the local organization of the Olympics and the games themselves are two different entities. 

Some of the things we are seeing would indicate that, everyone within a thousand miles of Vancouver with a moderate to severe case of God Syndrome, has attempted to find a place on the Organizing Committee. Sadly those types however well intentioned usually do more harm than good.


----------



## nice&easy mac&cheesey (Apr 10, 2008)

SINC said:


> Just one more example that the Olympics do more harm than good. I'm beginning to despise them now.


+1

Couldn't agree more.

n&e, m&c


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

> protesters are supposedly not allowed or severely limited to what they are allowed to do.


Welcome to the future.


----------



## imobile (Oct 6, 2007)

*Negatives.... Maybe they are justified...After The Party: What happens when the Olymp*



ehMax said:


> I whole heartedly love the Olympics. Love the competitions, love the athletes, and love what the Olympics and Olympic rings stand for.
> 
> I think the negatives are blown completely out of proportion and in ANY sport.... NHL included, money and ulterior motives come into play. This is true in almost any big event.
> 
> ...




Very good read ...

After The Party: What happens when the Olympics leave town

After The Party: What happens when the Olympics leave town - Olympics, Sport - The Independent

As for the Sea to Sky Highway ! ~ a tremendous waste of money which should have been diverted for transit ( even twinning Port Man Bridge first and charging $10 a vehicle! ) in Lower Mainland.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Yep, these cities can feel the love:

Athens:
The organisers got their wish, but for all the wrong reasons. Athens's legacy is among the worst of any Olympiad. Four years after the closing ceremony of the Games that former International Olympic Committee president Juan Antonio Samaranch called the "best ever", as many as 21 out of the 22 venues lie abandoned. The open-air swimming pool is empty and stained, while squatters camp outside the graffiti-festooned Faliron complex, which hosted events such as taekwondo and beach volleyball.
The Athens Olympics, which cost a record £9.4bn to stage (way over its original budget, which rocketed after the September 11 terrorist attacks increased security costs) have left Greece groaning under a huge debt. In the months after the Games, the shortfall amounted to €50,000 for each Greek household, and taxpayers are still footing the bill. Maintenance of the sites alone has cost as much as £500m. "We didn't find a plan for the post-Olympics development of the venues," Fani Palli-Petralia, a New Democracy politician, said recently. "When a city gets the Games, it should make a business plan for big changes and then decide what the country needs for the day after the Olympics. This did not happen."

Sydney:
But, eight years after Cathy Freeman brought tears to the eyes of a billion TV viewers by winning the 400 metres in front of a home crowd, and Steve Redgrave got back in that boat to make Olympic history, Sydneysiders, who still fondly remember the success of the 2000 Games, have been left with negligible benefits. Sue Holliday, the former chief planner for the Sydney Games, told a conference recently that the host city should have focused more broadly on a legacy programme for the Olympics site. "Sydney is now paying the price," she said.
First, the budget spiralled in familiar Olympic fashion, almost tripling to about A$6bn before a medal was won. The New South Wales government has said the financial result of the Games was a net cost to the public finances of at least A$1.5bn (about £720m). Then, Sydney Olympic Park – the centrepiece for the Games – became yet another white elephant after the Games closed. A long-term plan for its redevelopment, turning the site over to residential and commercial use, did not appear until 2005. "We didn't really have a policy for what would happen to the Olympic site after the Games," Holliday admits.
Until the Olympic Park is reborn as a new suburb, it serves largely as an attraction to the curious tourist, but the huge influx of foreign visitors the organisers hoped to generate never materialised. One study has said that, in the three years after the Games, foreign tourism to the state of New South Wales (whose capital is Sydney) rose less than for Australia as a whole.

*Vancouver:

Insert financial ruin figures here for another Olympics that are a pox on, and financial disaster for the host city.*

*Do YOU believe? - I don't!*


----------



## imobile (Oct 6, 2007)

*If one wants objective analysis....*



imobile said:


> Very good read ...
> 
> After The Party: What happens when the Olympics leave town
> 
> ...




On the Beijing Games...

"Capital infrastructure expenditures are nearly nine times larger than the revenue and operating expenses of the Games; they will not pay for themselves during those two weeks."

CONCLUSION

To date there has not been a study of an Olympics or other large-scale sporting event that has found empirical evidence of significant economic impacts such as increases in household income. For the reasons stated above, it is unlikely that anyone ever will.

(Estimating the Cost and Benefit of Hosting Olympic Games: What Can Beijing Expect from Its 2008 Games?)

Estimating the Cost and Benefit of Hosting Olympic Games: What Can Beijing Expect from Its 2008 Games? | Industrial Geographer, The | Find Articles at BNET


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

For the record, the information on Athens and Sydney in my post #83 are taken directly from your link above.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

imobile said:


> Very good read ...
> 
> After The Party: What happens when the Olympics leave town
> 
> ...


Opponents of the Olympics in Vancouver have been talking about this for years but it's had little play in the media. People don't seem to want to know about this, they've bought the sales job hook, line and sinker. This last fall the BC government has already resorted to budget and service cuts to health and education, which will get worse next year. But of course not a penny could be cut from the Olympic expenditures and its ballooning budget.

With the games now a few weeks off, we have had an extremely warm January, even for south western BC. The Cypress Mountain ski area has had to shut down to attempt to preserve what little snow they have and it's been raining steadily in Whistler Village. If they're lucky things might get colder next month, but that would be rather unusual. Usually if we get cold and snow here that happens in December and January. If January is warm, then February usually is even warmer. The daffodils outside my deck are starting to push through already!

I don't really care if they have to use machine-made snow during the games or not. Economically the money is spent and best outcome for Vancouver and BC at this point is for the massive media coverage to result in a couple of good tourist seasons. So I hope there's lots of sun next month and they broadcast many glorious pictures of the the city nestled against the sea and the mountains to people around the world.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

MazterCBlazter said:


> On the news tonight.
> 
> 1/3 of the schools in Prince George BC are predicted to be closed starting the fall semester.
> 
> ...


I wonder what Campbell's excuse will be when the huge economic benefit that he forecast post-Olympics, doesn't show up?

A.) I'm sorry, I never said that.

B.) Hey look over there, it's a LOL Cat!!! How cuuute!

C.) It's because of the legacy of Glen Clark and the tax and spend NDP!

D.) The Premier is currently on vacation in Maui, re-calibrating his liver. Please leave a message after the tone.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

The first thing that should be done after the Olympics is an audit. The Auditor General should have to go through the books of every Ministry. Let's be honest about the true costs and not bury them throughout government.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Vandave said:


> The first thing that should be done after the Olympics is an audit. The Auditor General should have to go through the books of every Ministry. Let's be honest about the true costs and not bury them throughout government.


There should have been an audit beforehand, but the Campbell government resisted that.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

By the sound of things, they may have more problems than an audit. From what I saw on the news last night, Whistler is in full meltdown and it is possible there will be no skiing events at these games.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

SINC said:


> By the sound of things, they may have more problems than an audit. From what I saw on the news last night, Whistler is in full meltdown and it is possible there will be no skiing events at these games.


Whistler will probably be OK, what they're worried about is the events at Cypress Mountain, close to Vancouver. It's possible that they might have to move those events to Whistler. I'm sure that was a contingency plan. They had to have planned for the weather to be warm.

It's pretty much worst case scenario as far as the weather goes. It's been really warm here, now the daffodils are 4 inches above ground.

The other thing that's happening is that Intrawest, the company that owns Whistler might go into bankruptcy and be put on the auction block during the Olympics. That probably won't affect the games, but it sure looks bad.

But whether a few snow boarders get to compete for a medal is really small potatoes compared to the waste of money on this circus.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Thanks for clearing that up GA. The news reports made it sound like the problem was at Whistler. I did not realize there was a venue near Vancouver too.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## gwillikers (Jun 19, 2003)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> C.) It's because of the legacy of Glen Clark and the tax and spend NDP!


They've beaten that to death for two terms, why not drag it out again when the Olympic-sized debt is finally tallied!?!

Heck, throw in some Fast-Ferry jargon and they'll deflect the whole mess.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> It's right up my back yard and is sure to cause traffic chaos in the neighbourhood for the duration of the event.


Cool. Maybe I shall drop in to see you and have a chat.

Leading News Channel for News, Sports and Entertainment brought to you by COLD-FX

Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> It's pretty much worst case scenario as far as the weather goes. It's been really warm here, now the daffodils are 4 inches above ground.


A warm winter might also show the nice side of our climate here, which could have some other benefits down the road. That said, some people here don't want those benefits.

I'm happy because I can get out on my bike for long rides. I couldn't do that last year until March.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> There should have been an audit beforehand, but the Campbell government resisted that.


GA, a lot of the costs have been buried throughout government. I have seen it first hand and it really troubles me. The Campbell government has been more than complicit in trying to hide costs. I wonder if the Auditor General would be forced to act if enough complaints were forwarded to their office. 

The NDP are really useless in opposition in BC. Joy McFAIL got more done than the current bunch together. The NDP seem silent on the HST and Olympic costs.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

I saw an interesting interview on the CBC with the guy who organized the Calgary '88 torch run. He was disgusted with all the corporate self-promotion that is saturating the current Olympic run. Apparently, back in '88, I was shocked to learn, no corporate logos were permitted at during the run. The clips they ran from '88 were somehow heartening in their relative sparseness. Contrast that with 2010, with the blaring Coca-Cola truck, followed by the RBC truck, and then finally the runner as something of an afterthought. It got me to thinking, that were Terry Fox alive now, and attempting his run, dollars to donuts his prosthetic limb would be a scarlet red, with that familiar copperplate script running up and down.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"It got me to thinking, that were Terry Fox alive now, and attempting his run, dollars to donuts his prosthetic limb would be a scarlet red, with that familiar copperplate script running up and down." I would hope that Terry Fox would be above this sort of commercialism. We shall never know, sadly. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

Dr.G. said:


> I would hope that Terry Fox would be above this sort of commercialism. We shall never know, sadly. Paix, mon ami.


Undoubtedly he would be above it. He is the greatest Canadian in my estimation, sorry Tommy. However, the lure of massive infusions of corporate dollars to fight a terrible disease might have mitigated any reservations he might have had, and rightly so I suppose. Kind of a quandary actually.

Anyways, re: Olympics - this commercialism is distasteful to me.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------

