Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Here's an idea. As it costs the eqivilent of the GDP of a small country to host the Olympic games, why not do the following. The Olympics stay in Greece and every 4 years the next nominated country controls it for the duration of the games. Greece is expected to keep the venues up to scratch and they are leased out to the county running them that year. Greece gets an income and no other country will go bust getting everything built and up to speed.

Spock "Jim, they're dying."
Kirk: "Let them die."

Frazzled wrote:Spock "Jim, they're dying."
Kirk: "Let them die."

Agreed, they got this way because the selected a public welfare and economic policy that was unsustainable, and bailing them out isn't going to help them make the changes they need to make to correct that. The best thing to do is to let them fall let it hurt and when they burn their hand on the stove they won't do it again.

Sorry, wasn't meant as a "save Greece" pitch more about the waste on money the Olympics are. Countries spend bilions that they can't afford, which Greece happened to do, so I was thinking how you could get around it. That's when I thought about basing it in one country, and given that Greece was the birth place of the games, I thought Greece would be ideal.

At least you know that the infrastructure would be in place and would cost a fraction of the money to run each time. The plus side for Greece is that it can lease the site out and make some money back.

I agree actually. That way billions in US taxpayers dollars won't be flim flammed away yet again.

Wolfstan wrote:Sorry, wasn't meant as a "save Greece" pitch more about the waste on money the Olympics are. Countries spend bilions that they can't afford, which Greece happened to do, so I was thinking how you could get around it. That's when I thought about basing it in one country, and given that Greece was the birth place of the games, I thought Greece would be ideal.

At least you know that the infrastructure would be in place and would cost a fraction of the money to run each time. The plus side for Greece is that it can lease the site out and make some money back.

Don't you mean Yorkshire?

Err... You need a very large/stable economic base to hold an Olympic Games.

Something that Greece Lacks.

In many ways I actually agree with the fundamental statement you're making, which is 'Greece needs to resuscitate its tourism industry'.

It's a tiny country with no manufacturing base for whom going back to its old currency and inflating its way out of debt doesn't actually do much for itself.

I think that sounds like a good idea, and I'd go one further and have an Olympic games every year instead of every four...but introduce a lot more dumb sports that people don't usually get to see, like chainsaw marathons and Rollerball!

Move the capitol of Greece to Sparta, and institute the ancient spartan laws... selection at birth, mandatory service till 30, etc... Have two "kings" in charge, the whole lot

Seriously though, about the only thing Greece has (that I'm aware of) is tourism. Right now, it doesn't look all that appealing a place to visit (which is a shame), so they obviously need to do SOMETHING to get that going, cleaning up the streets/cities etc. Also, from what I understand, Greece is a major port for immigrants coming from Asia Minor, and Africa to the rest of Europe, but there's not enough work for them to do to allow them to move on (which drives up crime as well), so something would need to be done about that too.

Except the Olympics grew Australian tourism incredibly well, and China used the Olympics to announce themselves as a major power, capable of project management of a quality equal to anyone in the world.

Whereas corrupt practices in Greece saw cost blow outs, and brought the world's attention to how badly Greece could organise anything.


It's almost as if doing something well gives you beneficial effects, while doing it badly gives you negative effects.

Jihadnik wrote:I think that sounds like a good idea, and I'd go one further and have an Olympic games every year instead of every four...but introduce a lot more dumb sports that people don't usually get to see, like chainsaw marathons and Rollerball!

If they had violent roller derbies in the Olympics, I would watch that for sure.

We'll see what Boris Johnson can arrange.

reds8n wrote: We'll see what Boris Johnson can arrange.

Isn't he introducing Blathering, Blustering and Wiff Waff?

Greece did get a tourism boost, IIRC. And Athens got a bunch of infrastructure improvements out of the games, including a nice new metro.

The sad part is that Greece spent *massive* sums on security ($1 billion sticks in my head, but I'd have to look it up) at those games mostly to alleviate the terrorism fears of American tourists, who didn't show up like they normally do anyway. And there's no return on that.

Yes, because its only American tourists that get attacked at Olympic events...

I seem to vaguely recall an Olympic based terrorist attack in a place called Munich.

The reason Greece is in so much trouble is that they have made "not paying tax" into a national sport.
The government, rather than fixing the taxation problem, borrowed money on the national credit card, which now needs repaying.
There are more people in Greece who own a porche cayenne than (officially) earn more than €50,000.

Wolfstan wrote:Here's an idea. As it costs the eqivilent of the GDP of a small country to host the Olympic games, why not do the following. The Olympics stay in Greece and every 4 years the next nominated country controls it for the duration of the games. Greece is expected to keep the venues up to scratch and they are leased out to the county running them that year. Greece gets an income and no other country will go bust getting everything built and up to speed.

The income always goes into the hand of corrupt criminals: The IOC.



Greec can recover itself if would stop the widespread corruption and populist politic.

Americans bring a lot of $$$ to most Games, and in the wake of 9/11, they were the ones most convinced that swarthy people were going to get them if they attended an event located in "that" part of the world. I'm sure you can Google a hundred articles about the security concerns and lack of attendance by Americans.

I also think it's important to note that the Athens games weren't a disaster as predicted and went off without a hitch. The Greeks didn't screw up their Games, they just cost too much for such a small country.

Which begs the question that if you need to be a superpower or at least a very wealthy country in order to afford a Summer Games, has the whole affair gotten ridiculously overblown and bloated?

gorgon wrote:Americans bring a lot of $$$ to most Games, and in the wake of 9/11, they were the ones most convinced that swarthy people were going to get them if they attended an event located in "that" part of the world. I'm sure you can Google a hundred articles about the security concerns and lack of attendance by Americans.

I also think it's important to note that the Athens games weren't a disaster as predicted and went off without a hitch. The Greeks didn't screw up their Games, they just cost too much for such a small country.

Which begs the question that if you need to be a superpower or at least a very wealthy country in order to afford a Summer Games, has the whole affair gotten ridiculously overblown and bloated?

Also the effect of a recession. Again, why on earth would I trust Greeks for...anything?

As long as the US taxpayer doesn't have to pay for it I don't care if they have it, or if its on the moon. Frazzled hates the modern Olympics something fierce doesn't he Precious.

Frazzled wrote:Spock "Jim, they're dying."
Kirk: "Let them die."

This. They can't fix thier problems because the people riot if they try. Let them default.

It's my suspicion that countries are propping up Greece just long enough to shore up their own finances and insulate themselves from the fallout.

The country was run in a reckless manner with people frequently retiring at 50. I wish everyone a long retirement but retiring with almost half your life still ahead of you is madness. And they were allowed to do this while tied into major European economies.

The country will be in eternal debt after this, the grandchildren of the people who caused this will still be paying back to France and Germany.

'Let them die' seems a plan as long as they don't take us with them. If anything it might save Greece from being chained to many decades of debt.

I do have to wonder if the future will prove the leaders of Brazil foolish or wise to hold both the World Cup and Olympics so close together.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:I do have to wonder if the future will prove the leaders of Brazil foolish or wise to hold both the World Cup and Olympics so close together.

One would almost assume wise, because they can focus their construction efforts on the same venues.. Killing two birds with one stone sort of thing.

broodstar wrote:

Agreed, they got this way because the selected a public welfare and economic policy that was unsustainable, and bailing them out isn't going to help them make the changes they need to make to correct that. The best thing to do is to let them fall let it hurt and when they burn their hand on the stove they won't do it again.

How do you figure? The "economic policy" being unsustainable strikes me as adequately vague for this thread, but public welfare? Care to elaborate?

I just think the whole Olympics process is a farce. The next country always wants to out do the the previous one, spending huge amounts of money on something that will only bring in a fraction of what it cost. As to getting people involved in sport more, what a bloody laugh. Ask any local council in the UK how much money they make on their swimming pools or other sport facilities and they will choke on the answer. Most of the stuff built for the Olympics this year will be sold off to the private sector afterwards and that will be at a loss. All the developers can't believe their luck. They would of had to spend billions to build these buildings themselves, now they will get them at a knock down price. Further to this it's unlikely they would of got planning permission in the first place.

Lets be realistic here. We will be lucky to get a handful of gold medals, we will still be way down the league table. We don't have the infrastructure in place like the US has, or Oz or Russia or China. There's a kind of best effort approach in the UK. It's the taking part type mentality we are good at, but if you are successful, we (this being the government) will want to hang on the coat tails. Further to this the world isn't going to suddenly say, "bloody good show UK, what great chaps you are, have some world influence back again" Bloody expensive waste of time and all governments should be ashamed of themselves for going along with it.

There's a lot more involved economically than just "selling buildings at a loss".

Product sales involved, tourism, etc, will stimulate the economy.

A lot of people will benefit from this greatly, store owners, bar owners, etc., the common people. I doubt that London will lose money on the buildings too - a lease afterwards (or even during) the Olympics will be enough incentive for some companies to start the projects. There have to be benefits for the construction companies involved, but even the creation of said infrastructure will give construction workers, well, work. Everyone is making money. Why would you think that countries try so hard to host a world cup, euro cup, olympics, etc?