to think that with all the talk of benefit caps and cuts, a TRILLION national debt.11 BILLION spend on the Olympics

[therehastobemore]

is a fucking joke

FFS

"The national debt is out of control" - what does this sentence even mean? People say this constantly and it is meaningless.

MrsMicawber - what do I suggest you do with your displeasure? Protest? Get involved in local politics? Write angry letters? The things people who actually want to get things done do?

I live in a minor Olympic Borough and I was up for them for a minute there I thought you were doing the 100m or summat MrsDV...

The location of the games is one of the huge ironies I agree. There are children in that borough who don't eat every day . Also our involvement in the middle east as well as costing £££ has increased the risk of us being a terrorist target and the budget for that aspect alone is huge. It is going to happen now but there is nothing anyone can do to stop those of us with our eyes wide open to be appalled at teh extravagance

Not sure what happened to the post above but in essence our problem is that our expenditure without austerity measures aren't going to be reduced infact as new treatment come online people live longer etc our spend increases year on year.

it's grim isn't it - yet even on mn the most we can muster is moaning about babies needing tickets

This sentence means that the level of debt is not sustainable alongside giving people a decent standard of living. Having a debt this size means disabled children/the sick/ low paid etc and every average Joe who works in an average job has to struggle. That is what I call out of control. People should not be deciding whether to put the heat on or eat while a bloody sporting event is having its budget increased daily.

OhDoAdmitMrsDeVere, raises another issue there has been some land grab going on here as planning restrictions are relaxed to accommodate private money.

noddyholder, just because my opinion differs to yours doesn't mean I don't have my eyes open. I can see why people disagree with it, I just think a lot of people don't understand how the economy works.

Had we bid for the Olympics now, or two years ago, I'd have agreed.

As it is, we had no idea we were going to be in so much trouble. Since it's impossible to cancel them, I think we'd all be better off just to enjoy them, or try to exploit them for money in any way we can - we're planning to rent out our flat; a lot of people I know are renting spare rooms; others I know are starting businesses based on the Olympics. You can turn things to your advantage sometimes if, instead of complaining, you try to make them into a positive.

southeastastra, this is about the 20th thread I've seen complaining about the cost of the Olympics.

Ahhh, so the issue is we is a bit fick and don't understand about the economy?

How patronising and also wrong.

Again, I'm sorry if it's coming across as patronising, but no, I don't think a lot of people do understand the economy.

yellowraincoat, people will gain from the Olympics that is without dispute but I belive without curtailing the spend the country as a whole will see a loss and the legacy will not be realised.

I agree with MrsDevere too

What do people who disagree with the Olympics think should be done then?

they should have it at buckingham palace and get the food in from greggs

I think they need to make some cuts to at least acknowledge the current situation. Otherwise all the negative publicity could make it an expensive flop.

agincourt. Ready steady (fruit)shoot!

Cuts to what though, noddy? What should they cut?

I don't think anyone needs to be able to construct or understand complex economic models or fiscal policy or quantitative easing or the national debt or the difference between the the national debt and the deficit to be able to understand the following:

The government is making cuts from the poorest in our society and cutting essential social programs which will end up costing us more in the long term (early intevention in health and social problems has been shown to reduce costs in the longer term by numerous academics and other organisations. Even non-departmental public bodies testify this to be true) but has money to spend on fireworks and other non-essentials for putting on the Olympics.

We can also understand that much of the promised social benefits of the Olympics have been scrapped/never commissioned.

Anyone who can run a bank account can see that when spending you look at your income and you pay your essential bills before fripperies and luxuries.

How about cutting the big Olympics firework display? The one that was created to rival Bejing?

Joins the applaud for MrsDV, you have summed things up beautifully.

yellowcoat "we are planning to rent our flat" ah yes, i can see there are benefits now, yes! Maybe folk in that borough who are livin in poverty can rent out their homes too - oh no, hang on, they have to live in them. I would have chosen a better example to get my point across. Unless i have missed the point?

I don't understand the economy, but i do understand black and white common sense. I was certainly not pleased when we won the olympics as i can see a better use for the money.

yellowraincoat, scale back all non essential parts of the games, use exsisting stadia where possible etc, establish viable links to sell of buildings that won't be used after the games, reduce the number of dignitaries attending etc.

Any large scale project can 'trim' certain expenses. I can only liken it to house renovation which I do. If the budget is not there then the fancy extras go without compromising the basics. The opening/closing ceremonies for starters.

I dont have a suggestion to what should be done actually, just a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach when i see how much is being spent.