Cost of hosting Olympics too high for Los Angeles

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) recently narrowed the list of contenders for the 2024 Summer Olympics down to five potential cities.

Los Angeles is the only U.S. city in the running, competing against Budapest, Hungary; Hamburg, Germany; Paris; and Rome.

If Los Angeles was to be chosen to host the 2024 Olympics, it would be the first time the U.S. has hosted the Olympics since Atlanta hosted in 1996.

The main reason cities want to host the Olympics, according to The Economist, is that it is surprisingly popular with voters. The games grant the unique opportunity to show off everything that the city has to offer and display national pride.

As coveted as the position of hosting the Olympics is, the costs of doing so are not worth the effort.

Historically, the Olympic Games have been an excuse for cities to spend lavishly on structures that will, for the most part, lay dormant after the games are over.

According to The New York Times writer Binyamin Appelbaum’s article, “Does Hosting the Olympics Actually Pay Off,” billions of dollars are spent on constructing elaborate buildings that will take up valuable real estate.

“While many facilities remain in use after the Games or are converted for new purposes, quite a few sit virtually as empty as the original in Olympia, Greece,” Appelbaum said. “Tourists can ride a Segway around the Bird’s Nest in Beijing for $20.”

There are also claims that the games serve as a boost in tourism. However, Appelbaum indicates that there is little evidence to prove that tourism actually increases in host cities. In fact, many tourists choose to stay away.

The city of Boston, which was also in the running to host the 2024 Olympics, pulled out of the race due to lack of public and political support. Boston Mayor Marty Walsh refused to sign the host city contract that would have required the city to cover any cost overruns, according to Tony Manfred of Business Insider.

Perhaps Los Angeles should follow in Boston’s footsteps. After all, not a single Olympic Games has stayed within budget. According to Business Insider, only Beijing in 2008 and Vancouver in 2010 managed to have cost overruns of less than 29 percent of their budget. Every other host exceeded their budget with an average cost overrun of 167 percent.

The last thing that Los Angeles should expect its taxpayers to do is pay for an event that will ultimately cost the city more than it will have earned.

Historical significance and national pride aside, the real economic costs of hosting the Olympic games should be considered. While the games provide an opportunity to be viewed on an international platform, the tourism industry and infrastructure may not be worth the short-term attention that Los Angeles would receive from hosting the Olympics.

Although the IOC will provide $1.7 billion to the organizers of the chosen city, it is not enough to cover all of the costs that are likely to be accrued in the years leading up to the Olympics.

Whichever city is chosen to host the 2024 Olympics will undergo a massive makeover that will cost the city and taxpayers more money than they will ever gain from hosting the event.

YOUNG is an opinion writer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *