login about faq

To prove you're not a spammer, email newuser.lgqa@gmail.com with the subject "Account Request" to request an account.


I just finished watching Vice's documentary of the Olympics and Londoners' view of the Olympics and they say that it is not something they were prepared for. Many people seemed angry that the Olympic venue was built where they lived at or in distance of where they live. I would be angry too that you know an Olympic stadium was being built where I lived at, and will basically only be used for 2-3 weeks. I heard that there were radiation issues, security was being very restrictive such as 9pm curfews for people under 16, missles being put on people's houses, etc. What do you English/Londoners think about the Olympics?

Documentary here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFHdZi7Pw18&list=PLB65FD5AF7890EAF9&index=1&feature=plpp_video

asked Jul 30 '12 at 12:14

DJ%20Scooby%20Doo's gravatar image

DJ Scooby Doo
9.7k245284383

closed Nov 29 '12 at 12:05

Missles on top of people's apartments though, that's a bit too far.

(Jul 30 '12 at 22:37) DJ Scooby Doo DJ%20Scooby%20Doo's gravatar image

It's not outdated sine the olympics are still running (Paralympics). :p

(Aug 14 '12 at 15:06) Mattophobia ♦♦ Mattophobia's gravatar image

The question has been closed for the following reason "Olympics are finished." by DJ Scooby Doo Nov 29 '12 at 12:05


I don't live in London, however I absolutely despise the olympics being in this country. you know why? Because a ridiculous amount of money was spent on it. £24 Billion in fact - A lot of that money is from the Taxpayers. £400 thousand was spent on the logo alone, another £400 thousand, £350 thousand on some sculpture, £271 MILLION on security. It's ridiculous. I wouldn't be so bothered, but this country is in a recession and a lot of people have been laid off on Government jobs. For example my Mothers old department of the NHS was closed down, hundreds of Public Libraries which have small running costs. They can't afford to pay people £25,000 a year but they can afford to spend £24 billion on an overblown sports day?! It makes me very angry.

Hell, my friends Girlfriend works at the olympics, she's 17 and is being paid over £8 an hour (The minimum wage is £4.50). I can't even get a job, let alone one that pays me that. ITS FUCKING PREPOSTEROUS and I hate it!

answered Jul 30 '12 at 12:47

Mattophobia's gravatar image

Mattophobia ♦♦
7.0k74122206

Christ. I thank god the Olympics weren't here in New York, if we did win the bid, god knows I'd be in D.R. or some other country waiting it out because it's complete chaos when the Olympics start.

(Jul 30 '12 at 14:38) DJ Scooby Doo DJ%20Scooby%20Doo's gravatar image

I doubt it would be as bad if it was in NY. England just went completely overboard!

(Jul 30 '12 at 14:47) Mattophobia ♦♦ Mattophobia's gravatar image

You don't know what we'd do, we'd go all out. Like New Years all out.

(Jul 30 '12 at 15:28) DJ Scooby Doo DJ%20Scooby%20Doo's gravatar image

As a Long Islander, I would have loved for them to be in New York. The government wastes our money anyway, why not on something we actually like?

(Aug 01 '12 at 02:45) hansring hansring's gravatar image

As a person who lives in the city, I'd be opposed. NYC is already dense as it is. We can barely hold the natives and the tourists. Plus the olympics wouldn't be in the city. They'd be in Jersey, as we have no space and barely enough money to substain ourselves. Plus Bloomberg would put some sort of Draconian laws in place if it were here.

(Aug 01 '12 at 11:14) DJ Scooby Doo DJ%20Scooby%20Doo's gravatar image

i'm not a Londoner but i am British, we are excited because if you hadn't noticed we're hosting it and we have a long history with it. It's a mixed bag situation, on the one hand it's costing over £14 billion in a time when the current government is cutting billions from various departments around the country and the benefits sick people receive going a far as to say amputees even veteren amputees may loose their benefits. Which is made worse when it's openly accepted by the government that the return from the games will be at best £5 billion spread out over the next decade with many of the buildings falling out of any real use except for the main stadium which is to be bought by a London football team, currently either West Ham or Tottenham. As for security the contracted company made a shambles of it so the army had to step in at further cost to the tax payer, but tbh this will probably be the situation at all forthcoming Olympic games including the missile protection due to the risk and threat of terrorist attacks (Munich will always be case and point). As for moving people this was an issue however the area was and still is in bad need of regeneration, so in a way it's progress but it's yet to be proven whether that will be the case or whether it will be a failure until then that point can still be debated in either ones favour.

Now someone could choose to look at this and say that we should have no part in hosting such a competition given the cost and risk to attack from terrorist which has of course happened in recent times (July 7th 2005) with a tribute to those affected in the opening ceremony (which MSNBC edited out for an interview with Michael Phelps for US viewers?!). So someone could take that view and be opposed to us hosting it, that it costs too much and there's too much risk involved, that it shouldn't have moved people, but my guess is that as soon as a possibility of hosting a cultural or sporting event they are personally interested or involved in comes up that person will soon change their tune, because most people cannot help but be hypocrites at times. What's done is done, the games are here, it's time to get the proud cap on, support our athletes, make a memorable games for all those involved, keep calm and carry on.

answered Jul 31 '12 at 10:23

mutley2209's gravatar image

mutley2209
761126132139

edited Jul 31 '12 at 10:39

and to be honest it's something during times when we haven't had growth in the UK since the recession began without it being offset with losses the following quater it's good to have something to be excited about as a nation

(Jul 31 '12 at 10:59) mutley2209 mutley2209's gravatar image

Yes, NBC did edit out the interview and we do get the games in tape delay, unless you're one of the lucky people with cable or satellite, or VPN'd your way into the BBC or the CBC stream.

(Jul 31 '12 at 12:33) DJ Scooby Doo DJ%20Scooby%20Doo's gravatar image

not sure why they edited it out tbh especially as it's an obvious PR blunder :/

(Jul 31 '12 at 14:53) mutley2209 mutley2209's gravatar image

I really couldn't care less.

answered Aug 01 '12 at 04:23

ForceGhost's gravatar image

ForceGhost
161

I don't like the idea of the games being here regarding the price its cost to hold them. The idea that theres no guarantees of whether we're going to re-coop that money and make money on top of it.

Although, since watching the opening ceremony, I've been hooked. I haven't got any tickets to watch anything, but I'm happy to sit at home and watch it on TV.

If we take into account of the Manchester common-wealth games that were held in 2002, figures suggest that we (tax-payers) got back £3 for every £1 that was invested.

So its just about waiting and seeing if it was worth while

answered Aug 01 '12 at 08:25

DavidClare1's gravatar image

DavidClare1
61127

I guess Matt won't have a girlfriend for too much longer with that attitude. Strange, isn't it, how those who bleat most about 'taxpayer's money' being spent are as often as not paying no tax themselves at all!

As usual there is a total failure to deal with the realities of economics which are that money is only useless when it is not being spent. Yes, it costs a lot to stage an Olympic Games but it also represents a huge opportunity for industries that have been in recession. Public works has always been a staple of attempts at economic growth.

It is always easy to find someone to complain. As usual the (vast) silent majority who just get on and enjoy the event get very little say in opinion forming. The facts? The security measures are the least oppressive and the least expensive for many, many Olympics. As you might expect the measures in Beijing dwarfed those of London but Athens also was regulated and regimented to a far greater degree than here. Those with missiles on their roof should remember that had they lived in Beijing they would have been forcibly evicted for a month! Far from 'going over the top' London has been criticised by some for being too liberal over security.

The Olympic park itself has been part of a rebuilding program in that area of London which stretches back for 30 years. Large parts of the area were literally derelict for many years. There certainly were concerns over pollution but this was cleaning up of what was already there. The idea that the Olympic building caused the problem are absurd.

And as for cost, Olympic Games have now been profitable for many decades. In financial terms this may appear to be small beer (Beijing estimated $16m) but a profit is a profit and, of course, the sporting facilities and the accommodation are going nowhere and will return both social and financial benefits for many years.

answered Jul 31 '12 at 08:48

dunfiddlin's gravatar image

dunfiddlin
1.2k518

Even people who don't pay taxes such as property tax, still pay taxes of some sort. Like taxes on food and clothing. Plus we do make most of the buying power at least in the U.S. Pause with that comment about telling that @Mattophobia won't have a girlfriend much longer. That's none of your concern.

(Jul 31 '12 at 09:45) DJ Scooby Doo DJ%20Scooby%20Doo's gravatar image

I don't have a girlfriend. I said It was my friends girlfriend.

Just because I don't pay tax doesn't mean I don't care about what the publics money is spent on. I'm fine with there being an olympics, but when far too much money is spent on it is when I get annoyed.

(Jul 31 '12 at 10:22) Mattophobia ♦♦ Mattophobia's gravatar image

If you are being paid out of taxpayer's money in the first place then purchase taxes are merely returning the money to its source.

(Jul 31 '12 at 10:25) dunfiddlin dunfiddlin's gravatar image

No it's not. All of that money is being funded to the workers, the food, the price to keep the electricity on, etc.

(Jul 31 '12 at 12:31) DJ Scooby Doo DJ%20Scooby%20Doo's gravatar image

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or __italic__
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported


Join Us in the Chat Room

Tags:

×410
×314
×275
×268
×82
×16
×12
×2
×2
×1
×1
×1
×1

Asked: Jul 30 '12 at 12:14

Seen: 1,261 times

Last updated: Nov 29 '12 at 12:05