Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I'm a sports junkie, but sorry: **** these Winter Olympics.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Jackeens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 10:03 PM
Original message
I'm a sports junkie, but sorry: **** these Winter Olympics.
They're obscene, on so many levels.

On Thursday? Australian Luge athlete Hannah Campbell-Pegg speaking about the - whoo hooo! - fastest track in the world: "I think they are pushing it a little too much. To what extent are we just little lemmings that they just throw down a track and we're crash-test dummies? I mean, this is our lives."

Friday: Nodar Kumaritashvili dies on that very track.

Meanwhile....

On the eve of the Winter Olympics' opening ceremonies, the waterfront condo complex in Vancouver that is housing more than 2,700 Olympic athletes and team officials is winning almost universal praise from its guests. The suites are, to borrow a favorite snowboarding phrase, sweet, with marble-top counters in the shiny new kitchens. Each unit has a living-room area — a far cry from the dormlike conditions of Villages past. And the views are nothing short of breathtaking. Many apartments look out onto an inlet and the silver downtown skyline, with snowcapped mountains as a backdrop. "It's blown us away, to be honest," says U.S. speedskater Chad Hedrick..."They really went big on this. It's a million-dollar view, for sure."

Paid for, thank you very much, by the taxpayers of Vancouver. More than any other project in recent Olympic history, the $1 billion residential complex represents the risks that urban governments face when trying to host one of the world's biggest parties. The city planned to invest about $47 million in the project back in 2006. However, cost overruns and the recession forced Vancouver to step in and bail out the private developers who were charged with financing the project. The city avoided the humiliation of welcoming the world with a half-built Olympic Village, but at a great price: in early 2009, new Vancouver mayor Gregor Robertson declared that taxpayers were "on the hook" for the $1 billion project. "What ended up happening was that the city became a bank for private-sector development," says Mark Cutler, director of Olympic Village Development for the Vancouver Organizing Committee, the body that is operating the complex during the Games.

The city could recoup its investment if the developer sells enough million-dollar condos to Vancouver residents after the Olympics are over. That may have been a reasonable expectation in the real estate go-go days. Yes, the digs are nice, and the development has won kudos from environmentalists for the energy-efficient design of the complex, which has green roofs and will reuse rainwater, and for its easy access to public transportation. Metro Vancouver housing prices have rebounded from the worst recession lulls — year-over-year condo prices were up 15% in January — but it's still not the best time to be betting on real estate. "Things could still be peachy and wonderful," says Chris Shaw, an ophthalmology professor at the University of British Columbia and a vocal Olympic critic. "But they might not be. The whole Village fiasco leaves the city with fairly dangerous exposure."

So even on the eve of the opening ceremonies, a moment when most host cities are glowing with pride, many residents are rankled. "People are ferociously upset about the Village," says Shaw. The spectacle has created a cruel irony: as the Olympic athletes enjoy the good life — free food, spacious rooms — in a taxpayer-financed housing complex, just a few blocks away sits Vancouver's Downtown Eastside neighborhood, site of some of the most acute poverty in North America. Homeless people and drug addicts hole up in back alleys; one church alone shelters 300 people on any given night. The neighborhood also hosts the first supervised heroin-injection location in North America. "For the city to let that occur while building the Village — that's the height of irresponsibility," says Shaw. Vancouver has set aside 250 of the 1,100 Village units for low-income residents, though some people fear that the city will be forced to put even those on the market to refill its coffers.

Within the Village walls, the athletes remain blissfully unaware of the social cost that is enabling their Olympic experience, and potential success. They gather in a lounge called the Living Room, a roomy, restored-wood building with a warm, ski-resort feel. Three figure skaters from Great Britain are playing video games in the corner, and when they're asked about life in the Village, they sparkle like they've just landed a triple lutz. "It's amazing," says David King, a pairs skater. "We have the best view ever. The big bay windows are massive." Jenna McCorkell, another skater, chimes in, "It's strange, coming into the Olympics, you don't know what to expect. The rooms are everything and better." Rave reviews from the Olympians, for sure. But the taxpayers of Vancouver may sharply disagree.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1963439,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MrModerate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. You bet. Because not all social problems are solved . . .
Spend nothing on special events until they are.

One can fault the wisdom of how the Olympic Village was financed and built -- noting that many Olympic cities take a bath when they host the games -- but that has zero relevance, IMO, to whether one watches or not. And the notion that the athletes should be outraged that they're nicely housed (for two weeks!)while others are suffering is just a little too precious for my tastes.

My reasons for not watching the games are much more reasonable: I don't find them very interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Australian's comments were prescient....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polly7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. I do think it's sad and unfair that the homeless and those already
suffering aren't being helped more, but the Olympics will provide mega-dollars with all the tourists, memorabilia - hopefully this money will cover costs and be put to use helping those who are needing it most.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yurovsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-13-10 07:14 AM
Response to Reply #3
18. Speaking of the homeless...
I wonder if the city of Vancouver swept the streets of the less fortunate so as to present a "perfect" image for tourists. This has been a regular practice for US cities hosting major events (party conventions, Super Bowls, etc.). I'm pretty sure it's not limited to the U.S.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. Expensive sports events amidst squalor and poverty are nothing new.
The Lisbon-Dakar comes to mind, even when moved to South America. Or any Everest expedition. Or the "Survivor" TV series, although that's probably stretching "sports." :D

The best one can ever hope for is some of the money is left behind and might help the locals. The Olympics are no different, be it Vancouver or Sarajevo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. The impact on the locals is almost always negative.
And you're right, it's not new. Maybe it just gets harder to ignore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. Plaza of Nations

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happy_liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
6. I hear ya- I totally get what the article is saying
...but I do think some of the thrill these athletes are feeling is the amazing million dollar view by The Great Spirit herself. Canada is an amazingly beautiful place!

I have huge windows with a million dollar view overlooking two glaciers.(of course the house isn't worth that)
The only thing more beautiful than Canada is Alaska! The further you drive north, the better it gets I tell ya.
Everyone should have such a chance to witness the awe inspiring masterpiece up north.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2Design Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. and we have how many homelsss while wall street gets bonuses n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swede Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
8. I hope you don't go to any football or baseball stadiums when there are hungry folks around.
That would be obscene, on so many levels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. It is obscene that taxpayer dollars are spent on professional sports teams owned by PRIVATE OWNERS
Edited on Fri Feb-12-10 11:13 PM by KittyWampus
Why the fuck should taxpayers subsidize teams owned by millionaires?

Tell you what, how about a tiny fraction of that taxpayer money goes to the Arts.

It says a lot about the values of a society that this is accepted without question. And it says a lot about supposed liberals who think its just peachy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. It's obscene you waste your time posting picture threads when you could be feeding the homeless.
And how crass of you to spend money on yourself for frivolous things when there are children going without Christmas.



Sorry Jackeens, I usually enjoy your postings but this thread of yours really hits a sour grapes note. I have to wonder if Sean Gregory likewise complained during the Beijing Summer Games. Reading his August 7th, 2008, article on the Olympic Village (which housed 16,000 athletes, so it's a safe bet that it cost A LOT more to build, money that could have helped A LOT more needy people in Beijing as in Vancouver) he doesn't appear to be doing anything of the sort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. big difference between a private individual citizen and a city opting to spend it's taxpayers' money
on an enterprise that comes in way over budget and yields far less in revenue than suggested.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-13-10 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. Taxpayers funding PRIVATE DEVELOPERS with no say in the matter is rather different
from joe blow average citizen chatting on the internet.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chasmj Donating Member (45 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-12-10 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
12. "City planned to invest $47 million in 2006" ---> "in 2009 mayor declared taxpayers owe $1 billion"
WTF.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike K Donating Member (539 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-13-10 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
14. What will be done with these apartments -
- when the athletes go home?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-13-10 03:42 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Often they aren't razed, but converted for local communities: Condos, student housing et al
Edited on Sat Feb-13-10 03:43 AM by DRoseDARs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-13-10 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #14
21. Did you read the article? They're going to try to sell them as condos.
The private owners, that is.

And if they sell them, they'll then pay back the government funding.

If they don't, I imagine taxpayers will take the loss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
-wulf- Donating Member (137 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-13-10 06:52 AM
Response to Original message
16. No way
governments wasting tax money? Yeah right; that never happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MicaelS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-13-10 07:08 AM
Response to Original message
17. It's all about the almighty tourist dollar
I think the IOC should pick two permanent sites for the Winter Games and one for the Summer Games. Let the IOC and the various national committees invest their money in upgrading permanent facilities instead of building new ones very four years. Of course that would never happen, all those cheerleaders for various cities around the world want to show off their cities and they want the money that Olympic tourists bring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-13-10 07:16 AM
Response to Original message
20. I was all excited until I seen the walking steroid Arnold Schwarzenegger carrying the Olympic Torch
That ruined it for me right there.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 11:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC