The IOC has so far has cared little about the 'arms race' of hosting requirements (endlessly rising expectations of security, facilities, infrastructure, etc. that invariably couple with urban/national improvement schemes) that more and more BRIC-type countries seem willing to burden themselves with. With all that London's doing, it's a sign that there isn't really a 'safe' city anymore that would host a 'sustainable' Games, so the IOC has every reason to build its brand and legacy in a place like China, Brazil, India, or up-and-comers like Turkey, Malaysia, etc. Just the thought of what India would do and build for the Olympics is almost frightening. These trends could change in 20-30 years, though.
The World Cup requires different things than the Olympics...for instance, with an Olympics you only need to spruce up one city (sometimes one city plus a nearby ski resort), and you have immense support and guidance from all the sporting federations, yet at the same time you have a fair amount of flexibility in terms of site locations, the scale of infrastructure, the cultural components, etc.
I do think I'll live to see at least one more Summer and Winter Games held in Canada, but it's certainly possible that we'll see a Kuala Lumpur 2020 or a Buenos Aires 2032 or even a Tehran 2026 before Toronto gets to host. It's easy to be cynical and believe Toronto/Canada would continue to lose hosting opportunities for reasons other than bid strength, but the bids do matter...the selection process is actually quite good at weeding out poor bids and preventing hosting fiascos. We can't know what geo-political and economic circumstances or the state of the IOC will be in 30 years and for all we know Toronto might *win* a Games for the kind of reasons we think influenced choices like Atlanta or Beijing. Scandal and politics and so on might work in our favour despite a poor bid, and no one in Toronto would complain about that.