It would mean a hell of a lot of money flowing in for infastructure. But I guess that's "bad"... with that said corruption of the flow money would be rampant.

 

Think of it this way.

 

No Olympics = Raised taxes for corrupt politicians pensions

Olympics - Raised taxes for need improvement of infrastructure and side money for politicians

 

Either way, we're going to be paying, so might as well as have some sports and the opportunity to rent out our homes for profit.

The Olympics would allow for a major public transporation overhaul that's about 25 years overdue.

The Olympics would allow for a major public transporation overhaul that's about 25 years overdue.

 

Reason #1 for the Olympics in Chicago.

It's the Cubs fan mindset.

 

There's always 2020.

I don't mean to hijack this, but it seems everyone here hates Daley and that is the prevalent mindset in Chicago. It's being thrown around as one of the reasons against having the Games in Chicago. So, that said, why doesnt he get voted out?

I don't mean to hijack this, but it seems everyone here hates Daley and that is the prevalent mindset in Chicago. It's being thrown around as one of the reasons against having the Games in Chicago. So, that said, why doesnt he get voted out?

 

In reality, what you hear on here isn't how the City sees Daley. He wins 80% of the vote in every election. He also crushes everyone in the primaries. Its not even close.

In reality, what you hear on here isn't how the City sees Daley. He wins 80% of the vote in every election. He also crushes everyone in the primaries. Its not even close.

Exactly. Chicagoans have this odd cognitive dissonance thing going on about Daley, and I'll admit that includes me. We know the way he runs the city - people are getting palms greased left and right. Daley himself isn't directly aware of it, but design, but he knows its there. However, Daley is ALSO very, very good at finding a way to make the city work. He's been a substantial part of the renaissance the city has undergone since the 80's. So basically, yeah, we know that with Daley in office the city government is corrupt and that 10% of our taxes are just grease. But we're also willing to pay that 10%, and let Daley keep running things, because even in bad times like now, Chicago still works better than most cities*.

 

 

* = Washington DC has some special advantages that allow certain aspects to run better, because its federally administered.

 

I'm not sure what it would take for Daley to NOT get re-elected. A federal indictment?

I'm not sure what it would take for Daley to NOT get re-elected. A federal indictment?

not sure even that would do it. I think he'd actually have to be in jail. As long as he's alive, not incarcerated, and still wants the job, its his. I suppose if the city truly started falling apart, that would do it, but that would take a long time to occur.

 

 

Exactly. Chicagoans have this odd cognitive dissonance thing going on about Daley, and I'll admit that includes me. We know the way he runs the city - people are getting palms greased left and right. Daley himself isn't directly aware of it, but design, but he knows its there. However, Daley is ALSO very, very good at finding a way to make the city work. He's been a substantial part of the renaissance the city has undergone since the 80's. So basically, yeah, we know that with Daley in office the city government is corrupt and that 10% of our taxes are just grease. But we're also willing to pay that 10%, and let Daley keep running things, because even in bad times like now, Chicago still works better than most cities*.

 

 

* = Washington DC has some special advantages that allow certain aspects to run better, because its federally administered.

 

 

Bulls***. Daley is a classic micromanager. He knows everything.

I'm not sure what it would take for Daley to NOT get re-elected. A federal indictment?

 

And it would have to be something big. You know the type of people that almost relected Ted Stevens after his conviction? The same mentality of people vote for King Richie the second here in Chicago. NSS hit in on the head. Laws be damned, he takes good care of us.

Bulls***. Daley is a classic micromanager. He knows everything.

I'm going to have to disagree here. He knows everything that is being done, functionally. He is intentionally unaware of the methodologies employed by the captains. This is by design, and it works in both directions.

 

I'm going to have to disagree here. He knows everything that is being done, functionally. He is intentionally unaware of the methodologies employed by the captains. This is by design, and it works in both directions.

Right. His "favors" are implied. He intentionally doesn't know so it doesn't get traced back to him. That's how he never gets caught doing anything.

The Olympics would allow for a major public transporation overhaul that's about 25 years overdue.

By major overhaul you mean temporary shuttle buses which was proposed by the Chicago Olympic Committee.

Here's a shock, Chicago 2016 committee lies/over exaggerates the projected tax income.

The economic boost from the Olympics will be about one-fourth the size claimed by the Chicago 2016 bid committee, according to a study to be released Thursday.

 

The Olympics would produce $4.4 billion in spending on tourism, construction and operating the games in Chicago and Cook County, says Anderson Economic Group LLC, a Michigan-based economic consulting firm. That’s far less than the $19.2 billion estimated in a study commissioned by Chicago 2016, which was released in December.

 

"We took a realistic look at where the money is coming from and where it's going to be directed," says Scott Watkins, a director at Anderson who wrote the study. "All that spending isn't going to be new economic activity."

......

The primary reason Anderson estimates far less spending from Olympic visitors — about $409 million, compared with about $5 billion estimated by Chicago 2016 — is due to allowances for normal tourism spending that would be displaced by the Olympics. The local bid committee also estimated nearly $2 billion in tourism spending after the games, which Anderson does not.

 

Anderson estimates that only about 75% of funds for building and operating the games will be spent with local businesses.

 

The firm also raises warnings about potential costs to taxpayers, estimating that the public could be on the hook for up to half the cost of the Olympic Village. Chicago 2016 plans for private developers to shoulder all of the $1-billion project cost. “There has, however, been some doubt that sufficient private funds will become available,” the report states.

 

Anderson predicts taxpayers could be exposed to cover $500 million in costs related to the village, or purchasing insurance for the games that is expected to total about $68 million in premiums. Those factors reduce the economic benefit of spending from the Olympic Village project and the overall economic benefit to taxpayers from hosting the games.

Oh s*** $500mil of tax liability.

 

Lets say there are 1mil tax payers in Chicago, that equates to $500 per person.

 

If I wanted to travel to see the Olympics I would have to pay thousands of dollars.

 

I can already see the crippling impact that $500 will have on my life.

Here's a shock, Chicago 2016 committee lies/over exaggerates the projected tax income.

Most people who support the Olympics in Chicago don't even expect the $4.4B net income that even this quesitonable report suggests. I for one, and other too, know from history that it will probably be a more-or-less break even enterprise. That by itself, to me, is enough to make it worthwhile, but more importantly, that doesn't take into account he before and after benefits. So even if the $4.4B comes into play, or we get a worse case than that and make less or no money, its still a win for the city.

 

Oh s*** $500mil of tax liability.

 

Lets say there are 1mil tax payers in Chicago, that equates to $500 per person.

 

If I wanted to travel to see the Olympics I would have to pay thousands of dollars.

 

I can already see the crippling impact that $500 will have on my life.

Problem is a lot of people don't care to go see the Olympics. They don't want to pay a penny for it.

Oh s*** $500mil of tax liability.

 

Lets say there are 1mil tax payers in Chicago, that equates to $500 per person.

 

If I wanted to travel to see the Olympics I would have to pay thousands of dollars.

 

I can already see the crippling impact that $500 will have on my life.

And that won't even come into play. They'd have to fall well under even the worst projections, AND blow through the insurance, AND not get some after-the-fact private support, AND blow through the governmental guarantee. Only way that happens is if something truly disastrous occurs, like a terrorist attack or a tornado through the olympic village or something.

 

Problem is a lot of people don't care to go see the Olympics. They don't want to pay a penny for it.

And they won't - but they will get some benefits from it.

 

see Soldier Field

And there are plenty of things that I dont care for that my tax dollars are spent on.

 

Its just an irrational argument that because some people dont want the Olympics that the rest should suffer.

see Soldier Field

Huh?

Huh?

Didn't tax payers get the shaft on that too?

Didn't tax payers get the shaft on that too?

I don't even remember, but what does that have to do with the Olympics, which are an entirely different type of venture?

 

I could point at all sorts of projects that either ended up costing the taxpayers money, or in other cases, ended up generating even more revenue than planned. None of them are the Olympics.