News   Jun 24, 2024
 85     0 
News   Jun 21, 2024
 4.9K     6 
News   Jun 21, 2024
 1.9K     3 

Toronto 2024 Olympic Bid (Dead)

Well yeah, how can I speak about anything other than my personal experiences? There really aren't very many studies about how narrow or not narrow-minded community groups are. All I have to go on are my personal observations. And for that matter, all you have to go on that these groups AREN'T like that is your personal experience as well, unless you've done a peer-reviewed study on the phenomenon.

And my desire for Toronto to host the Olympics is centred around the infrastructure that Toronto would get as a result. It seems the only way to get any substantial money from the Feds for infrastructure in this country is if you host the Olympics. BC had been wanting to twin the Sea to Sky Highway for decades, to no avail. Olympics get awarded, and poof, funding miraculously appears. Ditto for the Canada Line.

If Toronto gets awarded the 2024 games in the next couple years, it would virtually guarantee that all of the first wave of the Big Move, plus all of the next wave projects, get built on a quite aggressive timeline. Suffice to say, that's probably not going to happen at nearly the same pace if the bid isn't successful. The long-term benefits of that infrastructure as a result of that bid are well worth it, in my opinion.

Is that really any worse than questioning someone's motives for having a position different from yours?

So stop saying community opposition is just NIMBYism. Admit that some opposition groups might actually have good reasons for their opposition. Admit that you don't really know either way because it's not possible to know. I never said that I DID know, but I didn't make sweeping statements either.

Re: infrastructure, seriously, get a clue. The games bring infrastructure, but not necessarily the RIGHT infrastructure at a reasonable cost. With all the white elephants littered around past host cities, it's pretty clearly a problem. It's stupid to spend $10B+ on the games just to get the $1B project the city really needs. REALLY stupid. As I've said ad nauseum on this thread, host cities don't get what they want, they get what the IOC wants. If a Toronto bid goes ahead, you will find that many people do not share your opinion about the games being "worth it".

Ad hominem attacks are intellectually weak. Astroturfing is a pernicious evil.

I notice you did not address the transport issues that host cities face for 7 years up to the games.
 
So stop saying community opposition is just NIMBYism. Admit that some opposition groups might actually have good reasons for their opposition. Admit that you don't really know either way because it's not possible to know. I never said that I DID know, but I didn't make sweeping statements either.

Re: infrastructure, seriously, get a clue. The games bring infrastructure, but not necessarily the RIGHT infrastructure at a reasonable cost. With all the white elephants littered around past host cities, it's pretty clearly a problem. It's stupid to spend $10B+ on the games just to get the $1B project the city really needs. REALLY stupid. As I've said ad nauseum on this thread, host cities don't get what they want, they get what the IOC wants. If a Toronto bid goes ahead, you will find that many people do not share your opinion about the games being "worth it".

Ad hominem attacks are intellectually weak. Astroturfing is a pernicious evil.

I notice you did not address the transport issues that host cities face for 7 years up to the games.

But in many cases, it is NIMBYism. From my experience, most of the community opposition isn't based on a solid planning justification against the proposal, it's based on emotions, dubious information, and a fear of change.

And you keep repeating this "they get what the IOC wants" statement, but you have yet to cite a specific example. You seem to have all the answers, so why don't you share a few of them? Especially since apparently I'm wrong about everything...
 
Not really... just wondering what unleashes all your anger and resentment towards something that most people view as a fairly harmless event.

$10B+ on an event we don't need.

Maybe people watching the games on TV think they're harmless. I've already linked to the MANY websites of people in host cities who think VERY differently.
 
But in many cases, it is NIMBYism. From my experience, most of the community opposition isn't based on a solid planning justification against the proposal, it's based on emotions, dubious information, and a fear of change.

And you keep repeating this "they get what the IOC wants" statement, but you have yet to cite a specific example. You seem to have all the answers, so why don't you share a few of them? Especially since apparently I'm wrong about everything...

Big whoop about your experience. The games affect tens of thousands of people in host cities. Whole communities are destroyed. Public lands become private. Environmental damage. Waste of public money. Corruption. These are all EXCELLENT reasons to oppose the games, especially since they're just GAMES. No one's curing cancer with this thing. It doesn't even bring in the tourist income, as London found out.

I've already linked to loads of websites that have all the info to back up what I'm saying. Read back through this thread. Google "olympic host city contract". It's non-negotiable and overrides the law - even federal law. Planning process, environmental assessment, community consultation - all that goes out the window. So does the original budget.
 
TOperson is a flaming NIMBY...

Dude, we've been at this awhile. Please look back at the thread. TOperson may be the most strident of anti-IOC types around, but he's an equal opportunity IOC hater. He doesn't care where the spaceship lands, he thinks the IOC should never get a red cent from anyone, anywhere.

I, OTOH, am a flaming anti-Oly NIMBY. They can run their circus anywhere on earth where my taxes are unaffected and my life undisrupted. Take your circus on the road. I'll be happy to watch the highlights from Rio, Istanbul, and Cairo...
 
Dude, we've been at this awhile. Please look back at the thread. TOperson may be the most strident of anti-IOC types around, but he's an equal opportunity IOC hater. He doesn't care where the spaceship lands, he thinks the IOC should never get a red cent from anyone, anywhere.

Pretty much! :)

I think it's time to start re-using Olympic venues. Everyone watches the games on TV anyway. It's not even necessary to have all the events in the same city. They could be rotated around the various venues around the world, many of which are underused after the games, if they don't outright fall into disrepair. So why not get more use out of them?

The IOC should pay for it all - they don't pay for the massive building projects as it is. The IOC would still get huge money from TV rights and sponsorship, etc, so the Olympics could be self-financing.

The fact that these options are never seriously considered is part of why I'm suspicious of the whole thing.
 
Big whoop about your experience. The games affect tens of thousands of people in host cities. Whole communities are destroyed. Public lands become private. Environmental damage. Waste of public money. Corruption. These are all EXCELLENT reasons to oppose the games, especially since they're just GAMES. No one's curing cancer with this thing. It doesn't even bring in the tourist income, as London found out.

I've already linked to loads of websites that have all the info to back up what I'm saying. Read back through this thread. Google "olympic host city contract". It's non-negotiable and overrides the law - even federal law. Planning process, environmental assessment, community consultation - all that goes out the window. So does the original budget.

"Big whoop about your experience". So that's the level of debate we're having now eh? Ok.

You have your opinions, I have mine. I'm not going to waste any more of my time replying to your posts. If anyone else would like to debate the merits of one site vs another, or what infrastructure projects should happen should I successful bid happen, I'd be more than happy to talk about it. But it's clear that when the discussion is that vs "THE OLYMPICS ARE EVIL AND SHOULDN'T BE HELD ANYWHERE BECAUSE THE IOC IS A BUNCH OF CRIMINALS", well there's clearly not much more I can offer to that kind of discussion, so I'm simply going to avoid it.
 
"Big whoop about your experience". So that's the level of debate we're having now eh? Ok.

You have your opinions, I have mine. I'm not going to waste any more of my time replying to your posts. If anyone else would like to debate the merits of one site vs another, or what infrastructure projects should happen should I successful bid happen, I'd be more than happy to talk about it. But it's clear that when the discussion is that vs "THE OLYMPICS ARE EVIL AND SHOULDN'T BE HELD ANYWHERE BECAUSE THE IOC IS A BUNCH OF CRIMINALS", well there's clearly not much more I can offer to that kind of discussion, so I'm simply going to avoid it.

By harping on your personal experience, you already brought it to that level. It's not about YOU. If Toronto got the games, it would affect the entire region.
 
Europe has never gone three straight Summer Games without hosting and if Toronto did in 2024 that would be three straight (but I suppose it could always be broken).
 
Europe has never gone three straight Summer Games without hosting and if Toronto did in 2024 that would be three straight (but I suppose it could always be broken).

I'd expect that of Asia, but not Europe.

Do they have some kind of pro-Europe bias, or does North America just suck? If Toronto doesn't win in 2024 that will be 28 years without an olympic games in NA.

Anyways we do have a few things going for us. If the PanAm goes well that will be a huge bonus for Toronto. Fingers crossed.
 

Back
Top