Silkroad Online Forums

The're in Rio de Janeiro

Oprah you failed us!

/discuss

I'm glad its not in Chicago, I'd hate to see an over 9000% tax hike for something we'll use for 2 weeks, then never again, or not for another 100 years. Theres better things to worry about in Chicago, rather than spending more money on making a gigantic stadium.

At least Jebus will be watching over it. xD

XxDeeDeeDeexX wrote:I'm glad its not in Chicago, I'd hate to see an over 9000% tax hike for something we'll use for 2 weeks, then never again, or not for another 100 years. Theres better things to worry about in Chicago, rather than spending more money on making a gigantic stadium.

This is what the economy god has to say to you:

Love wrote:

XxDeeDeeDeexX wrote:I'm glad its not in Chicago, I'd hate to see an over 9000% tax hike for something we'll use for 2 weeks, then never again, or not for another 100 years. Theres better things to worry about in Chicago, rather than spending more money on making a gigantic stadium.

This is what the economy god has to say to you:

i think he's got a good point...athens and beijing don't even use their stadiums....

XemnasXD wrote:

Love wrote:

XxDeeDeeDeexX wrote:I'm glad its not in Chicago, I'd hate to see an over 9000% tax hike for something we'll use for 2 weeks, then never again, or not for another 100 years. Theres better things to worry about in Chicago, rather than spending more money on making a gigantic stadium.

This is what the economy god has to say to you:

i think he's got a good point...athens and beijing don't even use their stadiums....

ill let you both figure it out.

If they'd be in Chigaco, lots of people would have problems getting a visa to US.

DotCom wrote:If they'd be in Chigaco, lots of people would have problems getting a visa to US.

Nah, it would be easy enough.

Anyway, since I am from Chitown i am kinda disappointed but it really would put a burden on the city. Rio is the best of whats left. Tokyo and Madrid are boring. Brazil is freakin amazing. Def gonna go down there for some games.

Love wrote:
ill let you both figure it out.

I suppose that creating temporary work and spending hundreds of millions of dollars to to convert large amount of public space into sporting grounds that will be used for what, a week. Well yeah that would probably stimulate the economy but its not like its going to solve it in the long run. The Olympic games are notorious for the work, waste, and debt they manage to incur on the cities that host them. The people of the city suffer in the long run and the only reason the people of Beijing aren't too upset is because China viewed the event as a National one and Nationally supported it, if it was held in the US the burden would fall on the City and its Citizens as it usually does and the revenue generated rarely out weighs the cost of the event, especially at a time when people are all about saving money. Stimulation is not a fix and its not worth 4 years of jobs to have to pay off huge debts for the 10 years...thats not the way we should be thinking right now...

XxDeeDeeDeexX wrote:I'm glad its not in Chicago, I'd hate to see an over 9000% tax hike for something we'll use for 2 weeks, then never again, or not for another 100 years. Theres better things to worry about in Chicago, rather than spending more money on making a gigantic stadium.

You don't understand do you? If we got it we would use those facilities. We would also spend a lot of money, but make a ton from the publicity and the event itself. There would also be some nice side effects that could have come from getting the olympics. But now that I know my city is out, it is over.

Well in Portugal when we hosted the Euro 2004 we made like 10 new Stadiums to support more people etc and now they are there getting dust as they dont even get full anymore.

Only the ones from FC Porto, Benfica and Sporting get some action seeing as they are the "Bigger" Clubs.

I watched the speeches of US, Tokyo, Brasil and Spain.

I felt sorry after listening to Michelle Obama, what a lame speech. After Obama's participation and speech, You could tell they didnt have a solid plan. Glad that Brasil won it. It will be good to see the olympics in south america.

rumpleKillskin wrote:

XxDeeDeeDeexX wrote:I'm glad its not in Chicago, I'd hate to see an over 9000% tax hike for something we'll use for 2 weeks, then never again, or not for another 100 years. Theres better things to worry about in Chicago, rather than spending more money on making a gigantic stadium.

You don't understand do you? If we got it we would use those facilities. We would also spend a lot of money, but make a ton from the publicity and the event itself. There would also be some nice side effects that could have come from getting the olympics. But now that I know my city is out, it is over.

Honestly, tell me that people LIKE to excercise and will use the facilities. I highly doubt people would use it even if the facilities were free. The biggest UPSIDE of hosting the Olympics here (Chicago) is strictly financial. While it will cost a ton to build it, tourism would have a temporary increase, and there would probably be a few thousand new job openings for construction. But those upsides are just as I stated, temporary. What is the point of having a gigantic stadium seating arrangement if it is used once for the Olympics, then converted into a training ground/exercise place? Those seats would become completely useless, and are just a waste of space. As previously stated, people would'nt be inclined to use the training anyway because people don't like exercise. Now that I explained my points, I hope you understand why I made such a short, and blatant FIRST POST!

XxDeeDeeDeexX wrote:

rumpleKillskin wrote:

XxDeeDeeDeexX wrote:I'm glad its not in Chicago, I'd hate to see an over 9000% tax hike for something we'll use for 2 weeks, then never again, or not for another 100 years. Theres better things to worry about in Chicago, rather than spending more money on making a gigantic stadium.

You don't understand do you? If we got it we would use those facilities. We would also spend a lot of money, but make a ton from the publicity and the event itself. There would also be some nice side effects that could have come from getting the olympics. But now that I know my city is out, it is over.

Honestly, tell me that people LIKE to excercise and will use the facilities. I highly doubt people would use it even if the facilities were free. The biggest UPSIDE of hosting the Olympics here (Chicago) is strictly financial. While it will cost a ton to build it, tourism would have a temporary increase, and there would probably be a few thousand new job openings for construction. But those upsides are just as I stated, temporary. What is the point of having a gigantic stadium seating arrangement if it is used once for the Olympics, then converted into a training ground/exercise place? Those seats would become completely useless, and are just a waste of space. As previously stated, people would'nt be inclined to use the training anyway because people don't like exercise. Now that I explained my points, I hope you understand why I made such a short, and blatant FIRST POST!

To assume that people wouldn't be attracted to a world class exercise facility is kinda foolish. Also, the stadiums would possibly be used by our current chicago teams. We would not ignore these benefits one bit. It will also take more than a small amount of time if they did build the olympics here. Chicago would produce more jobs, and would become even more popular on the world scale. It would help the economy, and the overall city. I see where you are going, but I don't think you see the same picture as I do.

rumpleKillskin wrote:intelligent retorts

Indeed, but that is the purpose of arguing. To get points across, and exchange views/ideas. I respect your opinion, but seriously, check out this FP (fat population).
Code: Select all

"I'm actually for Rio," Bennett said, adding: "In Rio, it's beautiful women at the beach, and in Chicago, it's fat people eating."

the people of Chicago would only pay for any of it if it went over budget, the rest would have been payed for by the private sector. The plan was only 2.2billion if i am correct.

rumpleKillskin wrote:
To assume that people wouldn't be attracted to a world class exercise facility is kinda foolish. Also, the stadiums would possibly be used by our current chicago teams. We would not ignore these benefits one bit. It will also take more than a small amount of time if they did build the olympics here. Chicago would produce more jobs, and would become even more popular on the world scale. It would help the economy, and the overall city. I see where you are going, but I don't think you see the same picture as I do.

So far we've cited Athens where the stadium used is now falling into disrepair and ruin. The citizens are still paying off the debt and vendors were extremely disappointed because of the small amount of revenue. We've cited Portugal where a similar sitatuion, mass amount of stadiums, tons of money, hosting huge sporting event. Also a failure in the aftermath. We've cited Beijing. Built large beautiful world class shit and it to is now hardly being used and all that land is going to waste. Montreal JUST paid off its stadium from 1976. In all of these cities the PEOPLE pay taxes to keep these failed buildings operational and up to code....why would you put that burden on Chicago now of all times. Like i said its 4 years of jobs to build the stuff then you spend the next decade paying for it in taxes and wasted land...

Nobody uses this shit after its done and when they do its not nearly on a scale large enough to make it profitable...vendors don't make that much money...large amounts of land that could otherwise be used for valuable commercial property is now taken up and left to rot paid for by the citizens...what part of this aren't you getting...

i blame the Chicago cubs

BOO!
Give it to TOKYO! <3

My e-mail erupted with messages from all the Brazilians at work when it was announced.

XemnasXD wrote:

rumpleKillskin wrote:
To assume that people wouldn't be attracted to a world class exercise facility is kinda foolish. Also, the stadiums would possibly be used by our current chicago teams. We would not ignore these benefits one bit. It will also take more than a small amount of time if they did build the olympics here. Chicago would produce more jobs, and would become even more popular on the world scale. It would help the economy, and the overall city. I see where you are going, but I don't think you see the same picture as I do.

So far we've cited Athens where the stadium used is now falling into disrepair and ruin. The citizens are still paying off the debt and vendors were extremely disappointed because of the small amount of revenue. We've cited Portugal where a similar sitatuion, mass amount of stadiums, tons of money, hosting huge sporting event. Also a failure in the aftermath. We've cited Beijing. Built large beautiful world class shit and it to is now hardly being used and all that land is going to waste. Montreal JUST paid off its stadium from 1976. In all of these cities the PEOPLE pay taxes to keep these failed buildings operational and up to code....why would you put that burden on Chicago now of all times. Like i said its 4 years of jobs to build the stuff then you spend the next decade paying for it in taxes and wasted land...

Nobody uses this shit after its done and when they do its not nearly on a scale large enough to make it profitable...vendors don't make that much money...large amounts of land that could otherwise be used for valuable commercial property is now taken up and left to rot paid for by the citizens...what part of this aren't you getting...

besides Chicago has many more important things to worry about, like the ridiculous crime and poverty rate. I'm glad that it wasn't held there, Rio can go into debt if it wants to.

XxDeeDeeDeexX wrote:Honestly, tell me that people LIKE to excercise and will use the facilities. I highly doubt people would use it even if the facilities were free. The biggest UPSIDE of hosting the Olympics here (Chicago) is strictly financial. While it will cost a ton to build it, tourism would have a temporary increase, and there would probably be a few thousand new job openings for construction. But those upsides are just as I stated, temporary. What is the point of having a gigantic stadium seating arrangement if it is used once for the Olympics, then converted into a training ground/exercise place? Those seats would become completely useless, and are just a waste of space. As previously stated, people would'nt be inclined to use the training anyway because people don't like exercise. Now that I explained my points, I hope you understand why I made such a short, and blatant FIRST POST!

why not build temporary structures then?
a temporary stadium would be fun.
bamboo construction for the win:)

other than that, seeing rio winning over chicago is a sign of the times
yeah, chicago cant afford it but rio can? wtf? lol
i've lived in brazil
the people are great but seriously... the economy cant compare to "first world countries" as the brazilian themselves call them.

.Banshee wrote:

XemnasXD wrote:

rumpleKillskin wrote:
To assume that people wouldn't be attracted to a world class exercise facility is kinda foolish. Also, the stadiums would possibly be used by our current chicago teams. We would not ignore these benefits one bit. It will also take more than a small amount of time if they did build the olympics here. Chicago would produce more jobs, and would become even more popular on the world scale. It would help the economy, and the overall city. I see where you are going, but I don't think you see the same picture as I do.

So far we've cited Athens where the stadium used is now falling into disrepair and ruin. The citizens are still paying off the debt and vendors were extremely disappointed because of the small amount of revenue. We've cited Portugal where a similar sitatuion, mass amount of stadiums, tons of money, hosting huge sporting event. Also a failure in the aftermath. We've cited Beijing. Built large beautiful world class shit and it to is now hardly being used and all that land is going to waste. Montreal JUST paid off its stadium from 1976. In all of these cities the PEOPLE pay taxes to keep these failed buildings operational and up to code....why would you put that burden on Chicago now of all times. Like i said its 4 years of jobs to build the stuff then you spend the next decade paying for it in taxes and wasted land...

Nobody uses this shit after its done and when they do its not nearly on a scale large enough to make it profitable...vendors don't make that much money...large amounts of land that could otherwise be used for valuable commercial property is now taken up and left to rot paid for by the citizens...what part of this aren't you getting...

besides Chicago has many more important things to worry about, like the ridiculous crime and poverty rate. I'm glad that it wasn't held there, Rio can go into debt if it wants to.

the crime is far worse in rio its 33/100,000 people compared to 18/100,000 people in chicago. rio will go into debt big time, the government is going to spend 13.3 billion on this.

Amarisa wrote:i blame the Chicago cubs

I blame the Chicago bears.

Blurred wrote:

Amarisa wrote:i blame the Chicago cubs

I blame the Chicago bears.

i blame the Chicago blackhawks.

Blackhawks made the playoffs, can't blame them.

for only the second time in 10 years lol, not only that espn called them the worst sports franchise in professional sports lol.

i blame the chicago fire

Im brazilian and didnt like it. Brazil has other -way- bigger problems to take care instead of hosting the olympics.

cpinney wrote:for only the second time in 10 years lol, not only that espn called them the worst sports franchise in professional sports lol.

Toronto Maple leafs haven't won a cup for over 40 years and the Cubs haven't won in over 100 years. 10 years is nothing.