Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think we should cancel the Olympics?

68 replies

StuckInTheMiddleWithYou · 21/06/2010 17:52

As opposed to various benefits?

What's more important? People in lycra running in circles or keeping people out of poverty?

OP posts:
giantpurplepeopleeater · 21/06/2010 20:27

Sorry - remove the word 'don't' from the second to last paragraph

IMoveTheStars · 21/06/2010 20:31

Hopefully the investment in East London transport as a result of the Olympics being sited there will bring more investment to a pretty impoverished area. Better transport links etc. (rather than just increasing property values for people who have a new tube link)

I so think the olympics are a shocking waste of money and they should stop spending so much and bring it back to budget, but it's never going to happen.

Mingg · 21/06/2010 20:39

YABU

Disenchanted3 · 21/06/2010 20:40

YANBU and we shouldn't be bidding for world cup 2018 either!

TheCrackFox · 21/06/2010 20:41

YANBU

I have no interest if watching a bunch of obsessives live out their life's work.

I have always found it very bad taste that people are starving in the World but every 4 yrs some sucker country spends billions on this event.

£9.3 billion? To regenerate an area? It would have been cheaper giving every man, woman and child living there £10k.

expatinscotland · 21/06/2010 20:42

So the rest of the entire UK gets to pay to regenerate this, in comparison to the size of the island, relatively small part.

In London, of course, a place with some of the wealthiest districts in the UK.

But again, let's let everyone pay for it, not just London.

Never mind that the most deprived area in England.

Is Liverpool.

I won't even touch Glasgow, one area of which has the lowest life expectancy for a male in Europe.

ManicMother7777 · 21/06/2010 20:44

YABU. There has to be a balance in society. To take this argument to its logical conclusion, would you also cancel all theatre, music, all other sport, nice cars, holidays...? The list is endless.

SirBoobAlot · 21/06/2010 20:49

I agree. It was beyond stupid to put a bid in when as a country we were already heading towards financial trouble. I understand - and to a degree, agree with - the employment and spirit arguments, but it still doesn't balance out the huge amounts that will be spent. There is no way it will break even, and it will be yet more debt to add to the pile.

Shocking waste of money.

Am also to hear about the world cup bid!

TheCrackFox · 21/06/2010 20:50

If the World Cup is held here then the premiership footballers can pay for it themselves - they earn enough.

tethersend · 21/06/2010 20:51

How do you think this will affect the regeneration programme?

Because I'm not sure I want to live there. Not for the next couple of thousand years, anyway.

BelleDameSansMerci · 21/06/2010 21:07

Bloody hell, Tethers...!!

I'm very definitely in the "we shouldn't have bid in the first place" school of thought but I can't see any point in cancelling it now.

I don't think all of the cost is from public money. Many large corporations (including the one I work for) are sponsoring the games.

And as for the Millenium Dome - PAH! What a waste of money.

JeMeSouviens · 21/06/2010 21:18

No, they can't stop it now, too much infrastructure is already partly built. Imagine the half finished white elephants around the place, deteriorating at a very fast rate. That would be a waste of money.

DH reliably informs me that West Ham is going to take over the completed stadium so it will be in use, and making money in the future, far more than say Home Bush in Sydney.

As for the World Cup bid, I doubt they'd have to do more than some minor repairs/refurb around the place, they'd already have the stadiums to cater for it, so it could be a good return on a smallish investment, which I'm sure the financial people factor into their bids.

stubbornhubby · 21/06/2010 21:52

of course they should cancel it (if we can).

It's a two week festival of unpopular sports.

maktaitai · 21/06/2010 21:57

Sorry, I'm with the YABU camp. I wish it could have been in Manchester (or really anywhere but London) but the IOC basically refused to consider a bid from any other city.

diplodoris · 21/06/2010 23:09

ManicMother7777, unfortunately the amount the taxpayer spends on theatre and music is miniscule compared to what is spent on sport/the Olympics.

sarah293 · 22/06/2010 08:41

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Crazycatlady · 22/06/2010 08:52

I think it's a shame so many people find the Olympics such a bore. I remember being hugely excited as a child watching the 1984 and 1988 Olympics and doing all sorts of Olympic themed things at school. It was fun and really inspired me to get involved with sport.

Now, as a mother, and one lucky enough to live within 40 minutes of the Olympic site, I really hope my DD finds the Olympics equally exciting.

I can't wait to take her to watch some of the athletics events or watch the amazing gymnasts.

On the London point - it's our capital city, and our biggest city. It is our greatest tourism asset. These seem like pretty good reasons for hosting the Olympics. It's the only of our cities that has anywhere near the transport and accommodation infrastructure needed to cope with a huge influx of sports people and tourists.

sarah293 · 22/06/2010 09:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

maktaitai · 22/06/2010 09:13

I'm signed up to volunteer - since I am a typical useless monoglot, I should think I'll be picking up litter or cleaning toilets, but that will be fine tbh. I love the Olympics.

SwansEatQuince · 22/06/2010 09:22

YANBU

There are something like nine Olympic quangos, all running at a phenomenal cost yet on the day you just know Boris will shamble out with a bag of party poppers and some sparklers from Poundstretcher, everything will be as PC as is possible, the million doves released will all get bird flu and mange and the entire opening ceremony will be watched by billions all peeping through their fingers in disbelief.

sarah293 · 22/06/2010 09:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

edam · 22/06/2010 09:29

Brilliant analysis there, Swans. Someone tell David Cameron we have the perfect person to cut billions of pounds from the deficit!

StuckInTheMiddleWithYou · 22/06/2010 09:42

The Olympics has also taken funding from other arts, culture and heritage projects.

OP posts:
Crazycatlady · 22/06/2010 10:00

Fair enough if you don't like any sport at all Riven. But lots of people do!

I'm in two minds about London vs Birmingham. One one hand, Birmingham has transformed itself in the last 20 years and is geographically convenient, even for people flying in internationally to Heathrow it's not that far really. It would have done wonders to put Birmingham on the world stage, but it just isn't yet a world-class city that can compete for an Olympic bid the way London can.

I agree the Olympic village itself in Lower Lea Valley and Stratford seems a bit out of the way, but the Olympic Javelin train will take 7 minutes from central London and City Airport is right there. With the Central Line and DLR already there the transport links are pretty good.

Plus, much of the Olympics will be held in the River or Central zones as they are being called, at existing locations such as Wembley Stadium and Horseguards Parade, Greenwich Park and Hyde Park. These are truly fabulous locations in our beautiful capital city and I can't wait to see it.

Back the OP - the majority of the infrastructure work is complete - cancelling the Olympics now would be daft. All the cost but none of the financial return.

sarah293 · 22/06/2010 10:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Swipe left for the next trending thread