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.
Well, yes, it seems unlikely that the U.S. would ever host another Olympics. The Tea Party small-government crowd would never want to spend the money.
That's just a dumb statement.
I really like how some of you like to spend other people's money. Ask the folks in Baltimore how that Baltimore Grand Prix has been. Lost a **** load last year so the City government is doubling down this year.
Also, the War of 1812 is considered a victory for the British and Canadians, so I'm not sure what the point of this thread in the first place is. They would probably laugh you off if you directly asked this question.
Well, yes, it seems unlikely that the U.S. would ever host another Olympics. The Tea Party small-government crowd would never want to spend the money.
The 1984 Los Angeles Summer Olympics were entirely privately funded as were the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta.
This is the problem with liberals - they think that government confiscation of money and spending of that money is the only way to get things done - and they think that private investment consists of two dirty words.
"The federal government will pay nearly half of the $2.7 billion it is expected to cost to host the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah, according to the report."
....
"The $1.3 billion in federal spending is more than double the amount of federal funds —$609 million— that supported the 1996 summer Olympics in Atlanta. The Atlanta games cost the city a total of $2 billion, the report said."
....
"In contrast, the federal government spent just $75 million (in 1999 dollars) to support the 1984 Olympics in L.A"
....
“Recognizing that our government spends billions of dollars to maintain wartime capability, it is entirely appropriate to invest several hundred millions to promote peace,” Mitt Romney, the president of the Salt Lake City Organizing Committee, wrote in a letter in August to the GAO."
.....
Note that almost everyone in mentioned in the article have an -R next to their names.
"The federal government will pay nearly half of the $2.7 billion it is expected to cost to host the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah, according to the report."
....
"The $1.3 billion in federal spending is more than double the amount of federal funds —$609 million— that supported the 1996 summer Olympics in Atlanta. The Atlanta games cost the city a total of $2 billion, the report said."
....
"In contrast, the federal government spent just $75 million (in 1999 dollars) to support the 1984 Olympics in L.A"
....
“Recognizing that our government spends billions of dollars to maintain wartime capability, it is entirely appropriate to invest several hundred millions to promote peace,” Mitt Romney, the president of the Salt Lake City Organizing Committee, wrote in a letter in August to the GAO."
.....
Note that almost everyone in mentioned in the article have an -R next to their names.
The federal dollars went towards increased security costs - the Olympics themselves were privately funded and an economic success - and were financed without taxpayer money.
Yeah - but the British have a history of defeating the French and Germans on the field of battle - and in the case of Australia - have strong ties to that particular nation.
Strong ties exist between Britain and the U.S.A. also - but the two have fought two wars between each other within the last 230 or so years.
I think you're reading WAY too much into this... It's a sporting competition. Period.
I think the British have forgiven us by now of improving on the lyrics.
I have a songbook with the words. It reccomends a few ales first since its one of those songs you have to be real relaxed not to stumble. Keys used it since the melody was familiar as it was one of the most favored drinking songs in the local pubs (yes, then we had them).
He was writing a song about the end of the battle and had no idea it was going to be a national anthem.
The federal dollars went towards increased security costs - the Olympics themselves were privately funded and an economic success - and were financed without taxpayer money.
You obviously did not read the article. Allow me to add a few more quotes.
"Officials in Utah argue that the largest expense of putting on the Olympic games is the construction of a mass transit system in downtown Salt Lake City and the renovation of one of the state’s freeways, I-15. The officials say these two projects were already in the pipeline to receive federal funding."
....
"While the government report acknowledges that certain infrastructure projects funded in preparation for the Olympics did or will benefit the host cities, the report says that it was difficult to determine which of the projects would or would not have been funded if the cities did not host the games."
....
"The report mentions a federally-funded sewer construction project in Salt Lake City which the Environmental Protection Agency has said would not be neccessary without the games."
.....
"Bennett said on the Senate floor last week that he agrees that federal spending on the Olympics needs to be monitored. But he also said that he believes that the federal government has to play an important role in the Olympics and help support cities faced with dramatically increasing costs of hosting the games.
“Somewhere along the line, someone lost track of what happens to all of this,” Sen. Bennett said. If Congress decides that it should not help fund the Olympic games, “then no American City will ever host the Olympic games again because no American city can ever afford the thing kinds of things that are required."
Would you care to capitulate and retract your original statement of "The 1984 Los Angeles Summer Olympics were entirely privately funded as were the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta."? Or would you prefer to try discrediting the source next? I'm sure ABCNews, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Disney Corporation, would love to hear that they're a fly by night, disreputable news source crewed by out of touch Liberal teens who don't do any research and live in their parent's basements.
I am sure they are all secretly up in arms about it and are plotting their revenge against us as we speak. Word from the underground is that they are planning on shutting off all access to British goods. These include:
1) Dr. Who (new and old episodes)
2) Kate Middleton and photos of her sister's bum (see what I did there?)
3) Anything Harry Potter
4) Both Victoria and David Beckham (thank goodness)
5) Bad teeth jokes
6) That guy who was in the Kings Speech and those stupid Bridget Jones movies.
7) Tea
8) Russell Brand (Nevermind........they just disowned him)
Damn us and our backwards thinking, non-evolving National Anthem. It should be re-written to somehow incorporate the US forcing our government on other countries, invading occupied countries as "peace keepers" and basically forgetting about our own citizens and continuously giving money to other countries that in turn spit in our faces. That would go over well in 2016.
No Dr Who???? waaahhhhhhhh (special requst that David Tennant's doctor get resurrected)
Would this include not getting to see the next new Sherlock Holmes with the awesome Benedict Cumerbatch? If there aren't plans for one, please do.
You obviously did not read the article. Allow me to add a few more quotes.
"Officials in Utah argue that the largest expense of putting on the Olympic games is the construction of a mass transit system in downtown Salt Lake City and the renovation of one of the state’s freeways, I-15. The officials say these two projects were already in the pipeline to receive federal funding."
....
"While the government report acknowledges that certain infrastructure projects funded in preparation for the Olympics did or will benefit the host cities, the report says that it was difficult to determine which of the projects would or would not have been funded if the cities did not host the games."
....
"The report mentions a federally-funded sewer construction project in Salt Lake City which the Environmental Protection Agency has said would not be neccessary without the games."
.....
"Bennett said on the Senate floor last week that he agrees that federal spending on the Olympics needs to be monitored. But he also said that he believes that the federal government has to play an important role in the Olympics and help support cities faced with dramatically increasing costs of hosting the games.
“Somewhere along the line, someone lost track of what happens to all of this,” Sen. Bennett said. If Congress decides that it should not help fund the Olympic games, “then no American City will ever host the Olympic games again because no American city can ever afford the thing kinds of things that are required."
Would you care to capitulate and retract your original statement of "The 1984 Los Angeles Summer Olympics were entirely privately funded as were the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta."? Or would you prefer to try discrediting the source next? I'm sure ABCNews, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Disney Corporation, would love to hear that they're a fly by night, disreputable news source crewed by out of touch Liberal teens who don't do any research and live in their parent's basements.
The article discusses the 2002 Olympic Games - not 1996 or 1984.
You are aware that the organizing committees for each of those events were entirely separate, aren't you?
Want to try again?
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.
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.
