U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-02-2009, 09:13 PM
 
7,848 posts, read 18,291,340 times
Reputation: 2785

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishtom29 View Post
Important to the city's big shots and tastemakers but not so important to the regular folks.
It's so sad...in every other country around the world, the city's bid is a national event that people of that country take pride in and support. In the U.S., support is scant outside of the bid city.

Some of us regular folks all across the U.S. were very much in support of Chicago's bid and were very disappointed in the outcome today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-02-2009, 09:16 PM
 
5,969 posts, read 7,760,114 times
Reputation: 1614
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeaconJ View Post
It's so sad...in every other country around the world, the city's bid is a national event that people of that country take pride in and support. In the U.S., support is scant outside of the bid city.

Some of us regular folks all across the U.S. were very much in support of Chicago's bid and were very disappointed in the outcome today.
I agree, I think it would have been good for Chicago and the USA,
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2009, 09:18 PM
 
11,187 posts, read 22,411,839 times
Reputation: 10943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishtom29 View Post
Important to the city's big shots and tastemakers but not so important to the regular folks.
I was gonna say - most everyone I've talked to and almost ALL the comments on media/city websites were quite happy we aren't getting the games. I'd have to agree.

I just went out all around the downtown area for happy hour after work tonight, and I didn't hear a single person even bring up the olympics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2009, 09:33 PM
 
Location: Spain
1,855 posts, read 4,294,681 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by DailyJournalist View Post
I agree, I think it would have been good for Chicago and the USA,
I backed the bid because I wanted the games to come to the U.S. and the financial catastrophe it would have been for the city of Chicago would not have affected me.

Having said that, now I have a good excuse to travel to Rio in 2016!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2009, 09:41 PM
 
Location: On the Great South Bay
7,141 posts, read 9,930,047 times
Reputation: 6429
Default The World's Fair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
I was gonna say - most everyone I've talked to and almost ALL the comments on media/city websites were quite happy we aren't getting the games. I'd have to agree.

I just went out all around the downtown area for happy hour after work tonight, and I didn't hear a single person even bring up the olympics.
My heart goes out to all people in Chicago and Illinois who did not win the Olympics this time.

However like Chicago60614, I think your better off NOT having the Olympics. In fact I was also against New York having the Olympics a few years ago.

You would have spent tons of money building for this Olympics, been inudated with traffic and would have become THE major terrorist target for a long time.

The best thing about the Olympics would have been the international publicity it would have gained. Something Chicago does not need as much as other cities. In fact, Chicago just gained a huge amount of international publicity for FREE just now, and President Obama actually helped in that regard.

Instead, some of the money that would have spent building facilities for only athletes could instead be used to sponsor another great World's Fair like "The Columbian Exposition of 1893". Build permanent monuments, parks, fountains etc. to create the "White City" that seemed so promising back then.

Instead of having a few buildings just for athletes, build the White City which EVERYONE can enjoy, both residents and visitors, for many many years to come.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2009, 09:54 PM
 
3,628 posts, read 9,220,895 times
Reputation: 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
I was gonna say - most everyone I've talked to and almost ALL the comments on media/city websites were quite happy we aren't getting the games. I'd have to agree.

I just went out all around the downtown area for happy hour after work tonight, and I didn't hear a single person even bring up the olympics.
everyone I associate with wasn't too happy, but then again we're all either urban planners or on our way to being one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2009, 09:54 PM
 
7,848 posts, read 18,291,340 times
Reputation: 2785
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
My heart goes out to all people in Chicago and Illinois who did not win the Olympics this time.

However like Chicago60614, I think your better off NOT having the Olympics. In fact I was also against New York having the Olympics a few years ago.

You would have spent tons of money building for this Olympics, been inudated with traffic and would have become THE major terrorist target for a long time.

The best thing about the Olympics would have been the international publicity it would have gained. Something Chicago does not need as much as other cities. In fact, Chicago just gained a huge amount of international publicity for FREE just now, and President Obama actually helped in that regard.

Instead, some of the money that would have spent building facilities for only athletes could instead be used to sponsor another great World's Fair like "The Columbian Exposition of 1893". Build permanent monuments, parks, fountains etc. to create the "White City" that seemed so promising back then.

Instead of having a few buildings just for athletes, build the White City which EVERYONE can enjoy, both residents and visitors, for many many years to come.
It's nice for people to think along the lines of "Oh well, we didn't want it anyway because it would have been bad for the city"...or whatever...but the benefits to Chicago or any city are MAJOR. The Olympics brings a ton of international attention to the host city, and the development and prosperity that usually follows is tremendous. If it's not done right, the city is left holding the bag, but I think Chicago would have done it right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2009, 09:57 PM
 
Location: Spain
1,855 posts, read 4,294,681 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative View Post
My heart goes out to all people in Chicago and Illinois who did not win the Olympics this time.

However like Chicago60614, I think your better off NOT having the Olympics. In fact I was also against New York having the Olympics a few years ago.

You would have spent tons of money building for this Olympics, been inudated with traffic and would have become THE major terrorist target for a long time.

The best thing about the Olympics would have been the international publicity it would have gained. Something Chicago does not need as much as other cities. In fact, Chicago just gained a huge amount of international publicity for FREE just now, and President Obama actually helped in that regard.

Instead, some of the money that would have spent building facilities for only athletes could instead be used to sponsor another great World's Fair like "The Columbian Exposition of 1893". Build permanent monuments, parks, fountains etc. to create the "White City" that seemed so promising back then.

Instead of having a few buildings just for athletes, build the White City which EVERYONE can enjoy, both residents and visitors, for many many years to come.
If by "FREE publicity" you are referring to the media attention surrounding the host city selection, then it was anything but. Placing an official bid and promoting a city to the IOC cost the city of Chicago around $100 million.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2009, 10:09 PM
 
Location: On the Great South Bay
7,141 posts, read 9,930,047 times
Reputation: 6429
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeaconJ View Post
It's nice for people to think along the lines of "Oh well, we didn't want it anyway because it would have been bad for the city"...or whatever...but the benefits to Chicago or any city are MAJOR. The Olympics brings a ton of international attention to the host city, and the development and prosperity that usually follows is tremendous. If it's not done right, the city is left holding the bag, but I think Chicago would have done it right.
"If its not done right.......but I think Chicago would have done it right"

Yeah, you are probably right about Chicago, but still thats a mighty big IF right there.

But I like I said, I think Chicago should spend its money on building up its public spaces, something she would do if she held a World's Fair. Flushing Meadows Park in Queens for instance is a direct result of the 1939 and 1964 World's Fairs. Build something permament like that for everybody (including visitors) instead of a few buildings for athletes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-02-2009, 10:16 PM
 
Location: Lower East Side, Milwaukee, WI
2,945 posts, read 4,157,617 times
Reputation: 1113
Quote:
Originally Posted by DailyJournalist View Post
I think our only shot at the Olympics is Los Angeles and New York City. When we try again we must try with these cities.
Atlanta managed to do just fine back in 1996, and NYC already lost the 2012 bid to London.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top