Hosting the Summer Olympics can be both appealing and pride provoking, but it can also be an arduous undertaking. Planning and preparing for it usually evokes a sense of fear strong enough for bidders to back out, like what the mayor of Boston did in regards to hosting the 2024 Summer Olympics. In response to this, the frantic U.S. Olympic Committee decided to reach out to the city of Los Angeles for help. Although the past two Summer Olympic Games held in Los Angeles have been successful, it is to be considered that the circumstances are much different now compared to how it was before. Therefore, taking on the responsibility as host for the 2024 Summer Olympics is simply not ideal for it could potentially lead to major concerns, including, increase in inconvenience during commutes, a technical displacement of revenues, and the possibility for the public to lose their properties. As mentioned above, Los Angeles hosted two of the most successful Summer Olympics Games held in history. This is all thanks to the city and its organizing committee, and their good judgment and frugality. According to an article by Alisa Walker, “L.A. did have one real handicap: The 1984 Summer Olympics were the first in history not to be sponsored by the government, as they still are in many countries and had previously been in the U.S.” Hosting the Olympics even with sponsorship from the government is already problematic as it is, so how can one individual city support itself with no
It is evident that hosting the Olympics games is no walk in the park. The countries trusted with this task have to spend billions to make the games a reality. Some people believe that the countries, even after spending billions of dollars benefit from the games, while others believe that the money can be spent elsewhere more efficiently. To reach a conclusion, one must study all of the different impacts in all of the different sectors the games have.
There is an argument as to whether or not the United States should bid to host the Olympic Games. There are many positive and negative reasons as to help decide whether it will be or not be a good idea. Some positive reasons would be improvements in all types of transport, increase potentially in tourism and business activity. Some of the negative aspects would be potential costs and burdens to the community and an increase in costs and taxes. Many people are going back and forth arguing over this topic. The United States should bid to host the Olympic Games.
London is currently hosting the Olympics this year and in preparation back in 2009 the event was predicted to “provide economic gold at a time of economic need,” however hosting the Olympics is an extremely costly business with the upgrades, new sports facilities, and security that it will cost much, much more than expected.
There are many factors in every country that transform the impact of the Olympic Games, but in general, the economic costs outweigh the benefits, while the social impacts are mostly positive. As such, countries in general should not host the Olympic Games for their own national interest, but they should first understand the impacts of the Olympics in relation to their own country before making a final
The Olympic Games are recognized globally by billions of people. This event is the biggest sporting event not only because it comes once every four years, but also because the world’s best athletes come together to compete for world fame and glory. Hosting the games seems like an honor for most people, however there is numerous risks involved
Most nations are incapable and unqualified to host such a spectacle as the Olympic games. Every country and their presidents strive to mask their weaknesses and show their strength as an international power. The reasons why these peevish nations are bidding to host the Olympics are expressed through their belief and want to announce their arrival to the world stage. What they do not realize is the time and effort required into hosting such a demanding event. For example, in Rio Olympics Cause ‘Real Problems’ In Brazil, Mario Tama writes, “the popular leftist government that presided over its boom years, began to unravel, as if on cue for the big events”(Fortune International). Obviously, Brazil did not have the economic and political strength to survive hosting both the World Cup and Olympic games within two years of each other. It is imperative for the Olympic Games Board of Directors to perform better when deliberating between their choices of hosts. Most countries end of biting more than they can chew regardless of their economic
Should the Olympics stay in one place? The Seattle Times says, “If the Olympics stayed in one place that would deprive nations of showing their pride.” One example of the Olympics traveling was in 1964. The Tokyo Olympics marked a shining moment in Japan’s history after that devastating bomb in WWII that was dropped on them. Second, a poll was taken in 2012 and it showed British men felt proud that the Olympics were in London. There are also bad things about the Olympics traveling though. However, sadly the last few Olympics have been leaving places bankrupt like Sochi, it costed them $50 billion dollars. Tim Wendel states, “The price on the Olympics will only go upward.” Staying in one place will also cost less, but it will also take away
The 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics had a dramatic impact on the economy not only the year of the event, but for years to come.
Have you been thinking about the olympics lately, because I have. The reason I am researching this is because of the rumor of keeping or getting rid of the olympics. The main reason that I am researching the olympics is because the olympics might be hosted in Denver Colorado.
Are the Olympic Games a waste of money? The Olympic Games are an international event where athletes from every country come together to compete. Many fans and spectators attend this event to cheer for their country. The number of spectators keeps on increasing every four years as the event gets more popular. As this is an international event the cost of hosting it is huge. The total output of the 1976 Montreal Games was $1.48 billion whilst the 2012 London Games was a total of $14.6 billion. Stadiums are built for different disciplines, national representatives are invited to perform in the opening and closing ceremony, as a result the stadiums need a high level of security. Where the hosting country receives the money from, whom it will benefit and what it does to the country, will be the three main points I will be covering in this essay.
With over two hundred countries participating, the Olympic Games is easily considered as one of the largest multisport event known to history. The Olympics are held at a different country, and even more rarely at the same city. For a country to be chosen to host the Olympics, the country’s National Olympic Committee (the country’s representatives for the Olympics) nominates a city (from the country they represent) that they think has potential in hosting the Olympics nine years prior to when they wish to host the Olympics. It is a two year process that consists of: Application Phase, Candidate Phase and the Election of the Host City. The country that wins the election is given seven years to prepare for the Olympics. (International
Mihalik, B. J. (2000). Host population perceptions of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics: Attendance, support, benefits and liabilities. In J. Allen, R. Harris, L.
Every four years a different country hosts the Olympics. Every two years its either the Winter or Summer Olympics. It is two thousand sixteen and in August, everybody eyes are going to be glued to their televisions when Rio host the two thousand sixteen Summer Olympics in Brazil. Many cities around the world put bids in advance to hold the Olympics. The Olympics are a big deal and you have to have the resources to host it. You need to have facilities for the sports, transportation, Olympics villages for the athletes to stay, a stadium for the opening and closing ceremonies, and most of all money. Cities tend to lose money when hosting the Olympics. Sometimes the facilities they use get abandon and are never used again. They are many reasons for a city to host the Olympics, but there are three reasons to not. Reasons for not hosting it because it is expensive, there no guarantee of profits or increase tourism in the host city, and to many buildings being left abandoned
It is no secret that smart organization and long-term thinking played a major role, in the success of the 2012 London Olympic Games. One key area, which enjoyed a discernible boost, was the British economy. Local business enterprises enjoyed increased sales and trade, while new foreign investment escalated.
The Olympic Games is one of the biggest and most unrivaled sporting events in the entire world. At first it may seem like a huge plus or advantage for a city or nation to host this event. However on the contrary there are a lot of negative aspects that occur when a nation hosts this event. While the event is taking place, from the outside it looks like a state of the art, prestigious event that it is. Some of the problems that are caused by hosting Olympic games deal with, stadium development, local resident life, security issues, and many others that will be discussed. One of the big problems when dealing with a mega event such as the Olympic Games is the stadiums, which get built, and how they get abandoned or not used after the games are finished. This is one of the major problems surrounding the Athens 2004 games. Many of the stadiums and infrastructure are left untouched and abandoned to this day.