Hello, I just learned that Paris would welcome the 2024 olympic games. I'm extremly angry of that because it mean that the french state will waste a lot of money when we have already structural deficit, it's a shame that the government and Paris city decided to waste so much money for hazardous economic benefits.
The United States of Europe wants to be a thing. I say, let's not let them be a thing until they can respect the United States of America and speak the same language and stop asking the UK to pay for it.
On this basis, would you argue for government to immediately scrap any and all funding of sports, arts and other recreational activities? Strip the state down to the strictly essential and functional?
I tongue and cheek still wonder the future for France in 2024. A Parisian Olympics true and true, and for that I say Salut! from Londres... Kudos/Power to you Paris, but... Will it be Paris, France, or Paris, FR, EU?
No, but I base myself on former olympic games in other countries who followed systematically with a huge growth of public debt for no long term results on employement. Furthermore, their is many instance of public build work who cost much more than it should do, so I don't have any trust in the estimation the governement made. I'm affraid that our governement is more worried about getting money to the billionaires like Bouygues who both own medias and huge building companies. they're very powerfull and influential. I'm far to be a commie, but the influence of billionaires always worry me.
I don’t think it tends to be as bad as you make out and it certainly doesn’t need to be, especially not for a city like Paris, which will already have much of the infrastructure and facilities already in place. On pure financial grounds, the cost/benefit is probably negative for these events but I think with a wider view they’re good things. I mean, if it’s so bad, shouldn’t we be scrapping these international events entirely? Why should somewhere else suffer if Paris refuses to? My point still stands. France probably spends more on “day-to-day” sports and arts funding over several years as they would on a single major event every decade or so, yet exactly the same arguments about costs and benefits could be made about the collection of minor projects that could about the single major one. The only difference is that the big events get more attention. That’s a more general issue and in my experience, more about dishonest reporting as much as anything else. There is often an initial cost for something quoted which is just the raw amount but when the final bill comes in, it will include taxes and other additional costs. The media will often spin this in to an overspend, even when they know why the figures are different.
