2012 London Olympics???? WTF

Currently reading:
2012 London Olympics???? WTF

5 million scots, 5million londoners alone,its obvious the larger percent of the population is going to subsidise the lesser percent.


It's obvious, but why complain (not you) that the rest of the country supports the South East when it isn't the case. If you complain that it will only benefit London so why do it, then why should we subsidise Scotland. I don't agree as I love Scotland, but it has to work both ways sometimes.
 
I agree on some of your points as well. The 2012 olympics is going to be another Labour dome!!

9 billion could pay off alot of hospital debts, employ new nurses/doctors and matrons.

Bulid new schools and employ more teachers.

As for Comic Relief(Off subject I know), instead of doing the back slapping Friday on BBC1/2, all those celebs and everyone who took part (They did do a good job at raising funds though) should have lobbied the government to use the Trident and Olympic funds to helping their cause.

Try and imagine what the money could have done in Africa and the UK if the cash wasn't wasted on the 2 week extravaganza, or some Nuclear bombs that will just destroy everything!!!

in the grand scheme of things £9bn is not a lot of money to a government like ours(especially when spread out over a number of years) when the total spend a year runs into hundreds if not thousands of billions a year.

people always say you should spend the extra olympic money or lottery money on the nhs or schools. mismanagement and over burucracy are the main problems. wasn't it just a few years ago that gorden brown announced billions extra for the nhs? where has this money gone?? i , for one, pay enough in taxes and never see any return so i see the olympics as a bit of payback

it may be a 2 week extravaganza but it will leave behind a legacy that will serve the deprived east end for many decades to come with improved transport, sporting facilities and affordable housing (something thats desperately needed in london - not everybody in london is a city-boy earning megamoney. most people are having to spend a high percentage of their pay on crampt and poor accomodation)
 
in the grand scheme of things £9bn is not a lot of money to a government like ours(especially when spread out over a number of years) when the total spend a year runs into hundreds if not thousands of billions a year.

people always say you should spend the extra olympic money or lottery money on the nhs or schools. mismanagement and over burucracy are the main problems. wasn't it just a few years ago that gorden brown announced billions extra for the nhs? where has this money gone?? i , for one, pay enough in taxes and never see any return so i see the olympics as a bit of payback

it may be a 2 week extravaganza but it will leave behind a legacy that will serve the deprived east end for many decades to come with improved transport, sporting facilities and affordable housing (something thats desperately needed in london - not everybody in london is a city-boy earning megamoney. most people are having to spend a high percentage of their pay on crampt and poor accomodation)


Think all the billions that are being wasted are being spent in wars that cant be won,iraq and afghanistan.Well trained and brave men and woman are being killed for tony blairs ego. (n) :mad:
 
It's over 10% of the NHS budget per year, it's a fair whack of money!

about £6bn is coming out of central government funds (with the rest from the lottery, london council tax, sponsers ,etc) which will be spent between 2006 and 2012 so its about a billion a year or 1% of the nhs budget

jawkitthenoo had it right with the wasted billions AND lives in iraq and afganistan which i feel we will be paying for a lot longer than 2012
 
Erm, no, the total expenditure of the games is around 10% of a year's NHS budget, regardless of where it comes from and over what time period.
 
Erm, no, the total expenditure of the games is around 10% of a year's NHS budget, regardless of where it comes from and over what time period.

but it will not be built in a year. anything can be compared to a percentage of the nhs budget over a period of time (all paperclips bought by the government for the next zillion years will come to 10% of the annual nhs budget) it's not a helpful indicator unless proportionally broken down.
 
but it will not be built in a year. anything can be compared to a percentage of the nhs budget over a period of time (all paperclips bought by the government for the next zillion years will come to 10% of the annual nhs budget) it's not a helpful indicator unless proportionally broken down.

No, it's a hidden cost if you say it's "x percent per year" when we're talking about a single event. It's not the actual expenditure over a given period, it's a single even that happens for a few weeks.

When somebody buys a car, they don't say "it's £70 per week" or even "it's £70 per week for x weeks", they say "it's £7,000", because the only way you can put something into proportion is to do it as an overall cost like that. The even isn't ongoing for years, just the build up to it does, the fact of the matter is that the 2012 olympic's cost will be in excess of the 10% of this year's NHS budget, regardless of where it comes from (us, at the end of the day) or how slowly it is paid.

But it does make much easier reading to split it up over a number of years and making it seem like a lot less.
 
I dont think that we should have it, it is a huge waste of money, it will not benefit london at all, they are using this as a "redevelopment" ploy when they could of just spend the money to redevelop without having to host the most pointless thing in the world
 
See I don't completely agree with the redevelopment factor either, there are plenty of examples where it has done little for the area. The only real world experience I have is in Manchester where the common wealth games was said to rescue a number of areas. You only need to walk close to Sportscity and ignoring the Asda retail park and a few posh apartments, it is still covered in a blanket of poverty in every direction, now they want to put a casino there also.
 
I read in the paper yesterday that they are spending £5m building the mountain biking venue. After the games it will be torn down. In the last games the mountain biking venue was used for about 6 hours or something, so it works out about £70000 per minute to host the mountain biking! :eek:
H
 
if they want to redevelop an area thay should do it, not use the olympics as an excuse to do it!
 
Why don't they put the mountain bikers on a train and send them up to Sheffield?
The olympics only lasts 2 weeks - Which is about the same amount of time it takes to get anywhere on trains in this country!
H
 
No, it's a hidden cost if you say it's "x percent per year" when we're talking about a single event. It's not the actual expenditure over a given period, it's a single even that happens for a few weeks. .

I understand what your saying but the infrastructure upgrades will last for more than 2 weeks. What we should look at is the cost of just the area's which will be used for 2 weeks for a good comparison.

Those upgrades would have been paid eventually from central goverment, this is merely the catalyst for it happening in one go.

It's a tough thing to weigh up the costs of the Olympics because many of the things being done are not for the Olympics specifically but upgrades which are required anyway but for which there is no allocated budget. It's a way to get the budget on the back of the event.
 
Rather Than Making It The London Olympics They Should Call Them The British Olympics. They Could Have Spread The Development And Costs All Over Britain,then Any Potential Benefits Would Be Reaped By A Larger Percentage Of The Population.
 
Back
Top