Tribesman 13:11 03-19-2007
Originally Posted by :
Is this true?! They're spending 1,700,000,000 pounds they don't have to because of a pig headed mayor? And I thought Nickels was bad...
yep they could have gone the other approach , used no tax money , got the olympic village built by a local college as its new student accomodation (eligable for grants from the tax payer) , got the olympic park built by corporate sponsorship and local authority(part of which is tax funded and another section eligable for grants from the tax payer and another part can be written off to avoid paying tax) , then you can get stadiums built by local teams (for which they can get grants from the tax payer and write off the expense to avoid tax) .
But hey it brought the regeneration needed to an area that was suffering from lack of investment , though the fragmented approach and avoidance of direct central funding meant that the transport infrastructure was abysmal the organisation attrocious making it (according to everyone I know who was there ) the worst olympics they had ever been to .
Then agian some "Christian" nut saw those games as an evil socialist conspiacy funded by multinational corporations(I can't quite work out how he made that link , but hey he is nuts)as demonstrated by the choice of a John Lennon song as the theme tune

Oh and the olymics are gay and promote abortion apparently , so they have to be bombed or the evil government will take your guns away .
Originally Posted by :
Well, have fun Britain. Whilst you have to struggle through traffic for hours or watch on a TV you have to pay taxes on, I shall be reclining in a nice chair and watching the Olympics on a hi-def TV.
Originally Posted by Tribesman:
yep they could have gone the other approach , used no tax money , got the olympic village built by a local college as its new student accomodation (eligable for grants from the tax payer) , got the olympic park built by corporate sponsorship and local authority(part of which is tax funded and another section eligable for grants from the tax payer and another part can be written off to avoid paying tax) , then you can get stadiums built by local teams (for which they can get grants from the tax payer and write off the expense to avoid tax) .
But hey it brought the regeneration needed to an area that was suffering from lack of investment , though the fragmented approach and avoidance of direct central funding meant that the transport infrastructure was abysmal the organisation attrocious making it (according to everyone I know who was there ) the worst olympics they had ever been to .
Georgia Tech and Georgia State needed those dorms, Tech got a great swimming center, and the oldest (and one of the most dangerous) housing projects in the country got torn down. Win, win!
And the fact that I wasn't physically there at the time made it even better!
Single Sign On provided by
vBSSO