Michael Powell of the NYT shows what is wrong about the Olympics model of the IOC having host cities build costly facilities just for a two week period. Cities that have suffered paying for the Olympics in recent memory are most strikingly Athens, Greece, and some observers say the Greece crisis started about the time the Olympics were held there. In Greece as in Rio, corruption, and mismanagement, are major issues. In the case of Rio the Olympics were held following a time of widespread protests as the economy hit a recession, and corruption scandal at Petrobras and in the government led to public anger. Most striking is the fact widely reported that the Rio government does not have enough money to pay salaries and much of the investment in Olympic infrastructure is not going to be available to the working class, middle class, at a time when basic public services such as clean water, good bus services, environmental pollution, significant shortages in affordable housing remain unaddressed. Bolsa Familia program of the socialist Workers Party helped the poor, yet the middle and working class have suffered with misspent funds, and mismanagement of the economy. Powell does well to show how things could be done better than they are now. He says he applauded the Bloomberg plan to build swimming pools and kayak routes in different parts of the city, in city parks further away where the middle and working class could use these facilities. This did not happen at the Rio Olympics. It also shows that the IOC could also get into this instead of being some distant organization, that simply hands out this gift called the Olympics and stringent requirements. What if the IOC also says it wants to see ways in which the facilities will be later available to the broad public, so that swimming pools and other athletic facilities, including housing and transportation systems are then available to the people in different parts of the city. Rio de Janeiro University has seen large cuts in pay and services. It took Montreal decades to pay for the Montreal Olympics. Sochi facilities will not be used for the large part by the Russian public, more painful because of the Russian deep recession similar to the Brazilian deep recession. Olympic host cities should be required by the IOC to show that the facilities built will be usable to the maximum degree by the broad mass of the public, finances are stress tested for recession in a country. At this time citizens of cities such as Boston and Oslo have taken up these things- as the IOC takes no responsibility and host governments are giddy about showing off their country- and pulled out. Least valid of all is the notion that the developing countries are being discriminated against. Look at all the empy stadiums in the far north of the country of Brazil in the World Cup, and you realize there are better ways to take pride in a country- how about matching your transportation infrastructure with that of China, some bullet trains, some new subways in large and midtier cities, done so as to give broad access to the public at affordable prices for transportation? India is a large and now forward looking developing country, a young population with tech and infrastructure dreams and 4 medals in all in the Olympics. Does it make more sense to match China's success in transportation infrastructure with bullet trains, new subways and road building programs, and to build athletic facilities in every high school and college in the country matching the U.S. and Britain, especially for girls, or to seek pride in putting up an application for a gift from the IOC? ...
Original article 7 minutes, gist 3 minutes