Jun
8
Obama gave an animated speech in Chicago on Friday supporting the city’s bid to host the 2016 Olympics. For the Chicago Tribune coverage, click here.
He joked about living two blocks from the games, and making some money by renting out his house. He added:
“In the interest of full disclosure, I also want you to know that in 2016 I’ll be wrapping up my second term as president. So I can’t think of a better way than to be marching into Washington Park . . . as president of the United States and announcing to the world: ‘Let the Games begin.’”
A bold statement.
And there’s alotta lotta people who would kill to have Chicago win the Olympic bid. You have developers– their mouths watering over construction contracts. You have businesses– restaurants, bars, all itching to welcome a flood of tourist dollars into our city. You have the CTA, knowing that if we get the bid, any budget they ask the city for they’ll get. You have you and me, who– why the hell not? would love to be close to world-class athletes and feel the excitement.
But would having the Olympics in our city be such a good thing, environmentally?
Picture it: say the word tourist and suddenly you have the use of disposable goods skyrocketing. Public transportation would no doubt get a shot in the arm, although who knows, really, if the money would be spent wisely. And even though public transit ridership would definitely rise, so would the use of every other kind of transportation known to man. That means trailers, SUVs, limos, and taxis. That means trucks hauling in more goods to feed the beast of insatiable consumerism.
And economically, would it even be a good thing? It’s debatable. Let’s look at other cities in the world that have fought the bitter battle and enjoyed the sweet, ephemeral triumph of hosting the Olympics.
Many times, stadiums are slapped up with shoddy materials, and never used again. It’s a great time to hijack a city’s budget, and who says that everything will be OK?