The Glitch Games

[Cateyes]

Well they've generated almost 2 billion already according to the radio today so do you guys have some actual numbers and breakdowns or is it just good shock and awe tactics to keep using the 6 billion figure?

Speaking of numbers. Where are yours? Broken down sufficiently to be properly analyzed. Talk about inflated numbers is a 2 way street ya know.

[Cateyes]

Well they've generated almost 2 billion already according to the radio today so do you guys have some actual numbers and breakdowns or is it just good shock and awe tactics to keep using the 6 billion figure?

Keep in mind the $6 Billion also includes infrastructure like the Canada Line and the long overdue Sea to Sky upgrades as well. The anti-Olympic bashers will include these infrastructure costs to inflate the cost of the Olympics’ to try and better promote their point that it is all a huge waste of money. The bigger the bill the bigger the point type of thinking.

They will of course ignore that that these important infrastructure projects not only needed to get built and will have long term economic benefits we also got additional Federal tax dollars to help build them. That discretionary federal money that usually only ends up in Quebec.

I heard that explained quite well by an economist on the radio today who was basically questioning the Olympic opposition and their creative mathematics skills.

See this post for the gist of what I heard............ viewtopic.php?f=65&t=23745&p=647260#p647260

So that makes the original prices tag of 1billion inflated to 6 billion 9.2 billion ok?

[Cateyes]

Speaking of sea to sky. How was that needed? It's needed by rich tourists from the US to get to the American owned ski hill in their Beamers a bit faster to spend their American dollars, serviced by Australian seasonal workers, and most of those dollars go back to the US.

So how is that beneficial to Canada?

Canada line, different story. That was needed (and would have eventually been built anyways) but I think a line to UBC is also very important. With the current budget situation, largely because of Olympic cost overruns, that won't be happening any time soon. At least not as soon as it would have without the games.

[LoneWolf_53]

Well they've generated almost 2 billion already according to the radio today so do you guys have some actual numbers and breakdowns or is it just good shock and awe tactics to keep using the 6 billion figure?

Keep in mind the $6 Billion also includes infrastructure like the Canada Line and the long overdue Sea to Sky upgrades as well. The anti-Olympic bashers will include these infrastructure costs to inflate the cost of the Olympics’ to try and better promote their point that it is all a huge waste of money. The bigger the bill the bigger the point type of thinking.

They will of course ignore that that these important infrastructure projects not only needed to get built and will have long term economic benefits we also got additional Federal tax dollars to help build them. That discretionary federal money that usually only ends up in Quebec.

I heard that explained quite well by an economist on the radio today who was basically questioning the Olympic opposition and their creative mathematics skills.

See this post for the gist of what I heard............ viewtopic.php?f=65&t=23745&p=647260#p647260

So that makes the original prices tag of 1billion inflated to 6 billion ok?

Ummmm..............Cateyes if (and I say IF because I do not have exact numbers and am going by what I've read and heard) the games actually cost 1 billion and they've already generated almost 2 billion in revenue according to the radio today with much more revenue to come then yes it would make it OK.

I have no problem with them if they enhance BC by their being held here.

I also don't have a problem with there being a debt related to highway and transportation infrastructure that needs to be serviced since that would happen whether there's an Olympics or not and it was needed.

It took us all a while to pay for the Coquihalla too but it's paid off now so that kind of thing is not exactly new or unheard of.

[Cateyes]

Well they've generated almost 2 billion already according to the radio today so do you guys have some actual numbers and breakdowns or is it just good shock and awe tactics to keep using the 6 billion figure?

Keep in mind the $6 Billion also includes infrastructure like the Canada Line and the long overdue Sea to Sky upgrades as well. The anti-Olympic bashers will include these infrastructure costs to inflate the cost of the Olympics’ to try and better promote their point that it is all a huge waste of money. The bigger the bill the bigger the point type of thinking.

They will of course ignore that that these important infrastructure projects not only needed to get built and will have long term economic benefits we also got additional Federal tax dollars to help build them. That discretionary federal money that usually only ends up in Quebec.

I heard that explained quite well by an economist on the radio today who was basically questioning the Olympic opposition and their creative mathematics skills.

See this post for the gist of what I heard............ viewtopic.php?f=65&t=23745&p=647260#p647260

So that makes the original prices tag of 1billion inflated to 6 billion ok?

Ummmm..............Cateyes if (and I say IF because I do not have exact numbers and am going by what I've read and heard) the games actually cost 1 billion and they've already generated almost 2 billion in revenue according to the radio today with much more revenue to come then yes it would make it OK.

I have no problem with them if they enhance BC by their being held here.

I also don't have a problem with there being a debt related to highway and transportation infrastructure that needs to be serviced since that would happen whether there's an Olympics or not and it was needed.

It took us all a while to pay for the Coquihalla too but it's paid off now so that kind of thing is not exactly new or unheard of.

Coquilalla was a toll highway. Remember???. How exactly is that an apples to apples comparison to a 2 week 6billion 9.2 billion dollar party? Now you have completely gone off the rails into false equivalency territory.

[ILBT uh-huh]

Didn't security alone cost 1(choke)billion alone?

[Cateyes]

Didn't security alone cost 1(choke)billion alone?

No no it's 150million. The other 850million was infrastructure improvements that were needed anyways.......{/snark off}

[Cateyes]

btw: 6billion does NOT include sea-to-sky and canada line.

When you include all the infrastructure it's about 10billion. Not 6Billion. Just over 9billion now but that does not include helicoptering in snow, shipping in Zamboni's and probably a thousand other things not yet accounted for.

Here is a pretty good breakdown.
http://this.org/magazine/2010/01/12/alt ... uver-2010/

[LoneWolf_53]

Speaking of sea to sky. How was that needed? It's needed by rich tourists from the US to get to the American owned ski hill in their Beamers a bit faster to spend their American dollars, serviced by Australian seasonal workers, and most of those dollars go back to the US.

So how is that beneficial to Canada?

Canada line, different story. That was needed and I always supported but I think a line to UBC is also very important. With the current budget situation, largely because of Olympic cost overruns, that won't be happening any time soon. At least not as soon as it would have without the games.

If I have to explain to you how basic economic work I can see why you are griping about stuff so often.

Before Sea to Sky many lives were lost on that highway so for starters in many parts of the province unrelated to any Olympics when such is the case the problem gets addressed.

We value life and don't like to put a price tag on it.

Secondly Whistler is a tourist destination which from the above even you concede.

So where do you think these rich Americans in their Beamers spend money?

Need a clue? Two letters. Starts with B and ends with C.

Has it occurred to you that these projects also employed people and put food on their tables?

Now finally in so far as your claimed cost overruns go don't you think it might be best to actually let the games finish so we can all see some actual figures instead of arguing points based purely on speculation?

As I said and I admit I was surprised to hear it but the news on the radio today mentioned almost 2 billion in revenue already.

Also there are spinoff benefits to the Olympics that will be felt for some time to come.

The eyes of the world are on us right now thanks to satellite TV and internet and there's no doubt in my mind this will have an impact on tourism.

[Cateyes]

Total cost including infrastructure

http://this.org/magazine/2010/01/12/alt ... uver-2010/

[Queen K]

Well for $900,000,000, you'd think Joe Biden would have been well protected. But Noooooo.

[LoneWolf_53]

btw: 6billion does NOT include sea-to-sky and canada line.

When you include all the infrastructure it's about 10billion. Not 6Billion.

Here is a pretty good breakdown.
http://this.org/magazine/2010/01/12/alt ... uver-2010/

Cateyes I've tried to explain logic but I'm getting tired of beating my head against a rock.

Some of you guys just enjoy complaining and refuse to acknowledge anything beyond your narrow negative view of things.

You have quite a nice list there.

Has it perhaps dawned on you that many of the items on that list can be considered as revenue generating businesses?

Ski hills generate money. The ice rink will continue to generate money. The sliding center will generate money. Heck the Canada Line should generate money and support jobs.

A convention center, a village, a stadium, etc. are all revenue generating entities.

These things attract future visitors, create jobs, and should for the most part make money.

The way the arguments are presented by a number of you one would think this money was just thrown away.

I think you just don't appreciate the big picture.


Look at it this way Steven keeps bringing up addicts and how they need more help and support.

My response to that is not to argue that it isn't a valid concern, but look at it this way, is it not also reasonable to conclude that were it not for the many jobs these venues created and support that there might well be some more people at their wits end and turning to drugs for comfort thus making an already bad situation even worse?

It's all in how you look at a situation. Most of the time there's a silver lining in the cloud that can be found if one but take their eyes off of the rain drops.

[Cateyes]

btw: 6billion does NOT include sea-to-sky and canada line.

When you include all the infrastructure it's about 10billion. Not 6Billion.

Here is a pretty good breakdown.
http://this.org/magazine/2010/01/12/alt ... uver-2010/

Cateyes....................I'm getting tired of beating my head against a rock...............

Got pictures....?

[flamingfingers]

Ski hills generate money. And that is why the ski hill is up for auction? Right.

[flamingfingers]

And attracting investment from big money? Ha. All big money knew Vancouver and BC were here WAY before the Owelympics. They are smart enough to realize that any money put into BC and VAncouver is simply not very profitable.