News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

Riverdale Rink Rat said:
I can sort-of squint and see putting a DRL/SmarTrack (tm) through, one that looped down / had a spur to the Olympic Stadium in the Portlands.
Click to expand...

This would be no small accomplishment though. I'd do cartwheels if a bid achieved just this... of course this would also imply a revitalized Portlands that's worth having a spur lead to, and likely much more progress on the entire Waterfront portfolio (100%?).

Also, in my heart of hearts I'd like to see a bid used as a reason for nixing the Scarborough subway line, justifying it as a reordering of priorities due to the timeline of olympic planning. Then hopefully it just disappears forever.
 
Tewder said:
This would be no small accomplishment though. I'd do cartwheels if a bid achieved just this... of course this would also imply a revitalized Portlands that's worth having a spur lead to, and likely much more progress on the entire Waterfront portfolio (100%?).

Also, in my heart of hearts I'd like to see a bid used as a reason for nixing the Scarborough subway line, justifying it as a reordering of priorities due to the timeline of olympic planning. Then hopefully it just disappears forever.
Click to expand...

Yeah, 'cause either of those things will happen due to an Olympic bid. C'mon, Tewder, that's beyond magical thinking right into fantasy.
 
Did anyone else see Jim Karygiannis' letter to John Tory in which he asked that Toronto not bid on the games? He signed it Hon. Jim Karygiannis. I don't think Councillors have the "honourable" designation but MPs do, however, do they keep that even after they are gone?
 
EagleEye said:
Did anyone else see Jim Karygiannis' letter to John Tory in which he asked that Toronto not bid on the games? He signed it Hon. Jim Karygiannis. I don't think Councillors have the "honourable" designation but MPs do, however, do they keep that even after they are gone?
Click to expand...

His title should be "dishonourable". This man is unfit for public office and is not worthy of respect.
 
EagleEye said:
Did anyone else see Jim Karygiannis' letter to John Tory in which he asked that Toronto not bid on the games? He signed it Hon. Jim Karygiannis. I don't think Councillors have the "honourable" designation but MPs do, however, do they keep that even after they are gone?
Click to expand...
You don't get it for simply being an MP. Former federal cabinet minister = PC = Hon. For life
 
I understand of why we shouldn't host the Olympic games, and I agree we shouldn't host the games. But what bugs me about this all is the fact that the same selling points of hosting the Pan Am games: "The great parties", "showcasing Toronto to the World", "supporting Canadian athletes on Canadian soil", "encouraging children in sports", "new public sports facilities", "new infrastructure", etc etc can easily be transposed on why we should host the Olympics, but isn't a good enough reason for hosting the games? Why did we even host the Pan Am games when we can't even believe the same rhetoric this time around for hosting the Olympics?
 
CodeMonkey said:
I understand of why we shouldn't host the Olympic games, and I agree we shouldn't host the games. But what bugs me about this all is the fact that the same selling points of hosting the Pan Am games: "The great parties", "showcasing Toronto to the World", "supporting Canadian athletes on Canadian soil", "encouraging children in sports", "new public sports facilities", "new infrastructure", etc etc can easily be transposed on why we should host the Olympics, but isn't a good enough reason for hosting the games? Why did we even host the Pan Am games when we can't even believe the same rhetoric this time around for hosting the Olympics?
Click to expand...
Mainly because nobody asked to hold the Pan Am games, and the only people running around saying how amazing they were are the people who stand to personally profit from the Olympics. The rest of the world most certainly did not notice Pan Am nor did they care.
 
The only amateur sport event that gets coverage is the Olympics so that isn't fair. Plus I went to a few events and liked it. I don't have anything to gain by saying by saying pan am was good.
 
CodeMonkey said:
I understand of why we shouldn't host the Olympic games, and I agree we shouldn't host the games. But what bugs me about this all is the fact that the same selling points of hosting the Pan Am games: "The great parties", "showcasing Toronto to the World", "supporting Canadian athletes on Canadian soil", "encouraging children in sports", "new public sports facilities", "new infrastructure", etc etc can easily be transposed on why we should host the Olympics, but isn't a good enough reason for hosting the games? Why did we even host the Pan Am games when we can't even believe the same rhetoric this time around for hosting the Olympics?
Click to expand...

Wait, who ever said those benefits aren't valid for the olympics? Promoting and investing in sport and athletics is much like investing in the arts: it's good for us. Do we really need to 'debate' this? Yeah it's not really been a focus of discussion here. The people here who are pro-games have been arguing mostly from a UT perspective of city investment, revitalization and infrastructure development. This doesn't diminish any of the so-called 'intangible' benefits of hosting.
 
Tewder said:
Wait, who ever said those benefits aren't valid for the olympics? Promoting and investing in sport and athletics is much like investing in the arts: it's good for us. Do we really need to 'debate' this? Yeah it's not really been a focus of discussion here. The people here who are pro-games have been arguing mostly from a UT perspective of city investment, revitalization and infrastructure development. This doesn't diminish any of the so-called 'intangible' benefits of hosting.
Click to expand...
Of course we need to debate this. Dumping money into an Olympics and investing in our local sports infrastructure are almost completely different things.
 
'Dumping money into an olympics' isn't just about sports infrastructure, it's about all the other intangibles CodeMonkey mentioned. The Olympics is the most prestigious and historic global sports event, it is inspiring and motivational to youth, athletes and communities as a whole (city and national) to a degree that no other event is. All cities have documented this well. To debate it is churlish. Besides, you cannot attach dollar amounts to intangibles, some believe these intangibles are worth the investment alone and some don't believe they should be considered at all. It's subjective.
 
Screen shot 2015-09-12 at 12.40.34 PM.png
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2015-09-12 at 12.40.34 PM.png
    Screen shot 2015-09-12 at 12.40.34 PM.png
    52.2 KB · Views: 506
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top