Sunday, September 11, 2016

Money Well Spent?

Hosting the Olympics is crazy expensive.  It is estimated that Rio spent over $12 billion to host the Olympics...is it worth it?  What will happen to all those fancy venues once the glory of the Olympics has been forgotten?  Watch this short video clip of what has happened to other Olympic venues.



Perhaps the money would have been better spent cleaning up the pollution in Guanabara Bay?  Read this article from TIME magazine.

http://time.com/4438147/rio2016-olympicsguanabarabaypollution/


This week we are starting the next unit on Ecology, the study of how organisms interact with each other and their environment.  Is there a solution to this excessive spending of money to host the Olympics?  Can that money be better spent?  Can you provide an alternative solution?  What do you think about the pollution in the water in Rio?  Was spending money on buildings really the best use of resources?  Can you find any research about the long term effects of hosting the Olympics has on the surrounding environments?  Magazine articles?  Newspaper articles?  Video clips?

In a scholarly paragraph, respond to the video clip and article above.  Remember that a descent paragraph should have at least five sentences, proper punctuation, correct spelling and grammar.  I am not an English teacher, but I do know what a scientific paragraph should look like.  Read the questions that I posted above and find research to support what you think.  Include your research at the end of your response.  In addition to posting a response, I would like you to comment on at least one of your peers.  This is a public blog meaning anything that you post will be visible to the world, so put your best self out there.  I am going to share this link with your parents so they can see your work.

127 comments:

  1. I think that the pollution in Rio is crazy. What surprised me the most was that all the garbage in the waters leaves a gaseous smell. Another thing that shocked me was the things you can find in the water, like Christmas ornaments, clothes, milk cartons, cookie packages. But these are only a list of things you can see, there is so much bacteria in the water that you can't see. I believe that if they start investing more money into Guanabara Bay then there would be less pollution in Rio, this could also help with any illnesses people get by getting the water in their system.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree. The amount of pollution is insane. Putting more money into the cleanup of Guanabara Bay would definitely help to clear up some of the pollution.

      Delete
    2. This is true, the amount of pollution in Guanabara Bay is ridiculous. It would have been better if Rio would have created permanent solutions to cleaning the bay rather than cleaning it only for the Olympics. Now they have spent money only to temporarily clean it for the games but the problem still remains.

      Delete
    3. I agree with you 100% that if they start investing more money into Guanabara Bay that there would be less pollution in Rio, and I found it disgusting all the things found in the water.

      Delete
    4. I so agree that Rio should have invested more into the Guanabara Bay! They spent so much money making sports complexes when they should've thought more for the safety of athletes and spectators! Rio was not very wise with their money for this years games!

      Delete
    5. I agree, not only is the pollution disgusting, but it does hurt the people of Rio. If they start investing money into this, Rio will be a safer place.

      Delete
    6. I agree completely that Rio should be spending their money on their own needs before they spend it on others, but I also understand that hosting the Olympics is giant privilege and they had that privilege and they wanted to make the best they could of it so they did everything they could to make it the best Olympics not realizing that they were making it worse for their environment with more pollution.

      Delete
  2. The spending of millions of dollars on the venue for hosting the Olympics every four years is appalling. In the interview from Time Magazine we see the over the past twenty six years 800 million dollars have been spent to clean up Guanabara Bay in Rio de Genaro, while half of that amount was spent on the main Olympic center for the 2016 Summer Olympics in only these last two years. Often, as we see in the video "What Happens To Olympic Venues After The Games?", the old Olympic venues are left behind to rot and are not kept up. This is a major waste of our resources especially when they could be, like in Rio, used to make life and the quality of living better for whole populations of people. Whether we reuse venues or just decide to spend less money on them and more on what really matters, the usage of peoples money on something so unimportant in the grand scheme of things must stop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that the use of this money is not very important and that we can use the money for something better. Why don't we have the Olympics and places like the athletes practice? It would be the same as when they are training and so much cheaper. And like you said we can use the money for something better.

      Delete
    2. I completely agree with you! It's a total shame that all of these venues are left to deteriorate. I really think that besides using stadiums already available, we could make ones that can be used for multiple purposes after the Olympics.

      Delete
    3. I agree that spending money on something that you wont use in the future is appalling. Why don't we use the same venue with the Olympics? I agree that it is disgusting of how the people who host the Olympics wont clean up all of the gunk they put into the water in Rio.

      Delete
  3. Rio deciding to spend 12 billion on something that was not at all necessary badly reflected on their government and their decision making. They could've spent that money and the resources they used to help people in need in their country and their very serious and significant pollution problems. Even though the Olympics are a very very old tradition I feel as though in today's day and age the money spent on it is not worth all the troubles it causes and countries should not host the Olympics if they have needs to fulfill. As stated in the Time Magazine Article that over the past 26 years only 800 million dollars have been spent on cleaning Guanabara Bay in Rio de Genaro, yet they weren't ever so reluctant to spend 12 BILLION on hosting the Olympics? I feel like they should've seen the blatant shallowness of choosing a sporting event rather than their own environment. Not only is the cost outrageous but the fact that all the money “well spent” on the sacred tradition, all goes to waste after the glory of hosting the Olympics has passed. We need to start thinking about the true cost of Olympics before the damage is done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really like how you worded the end of your last sentence, "the true cost of Olympics". It really got me thinking about the question you were posing throughout your blog. I also agree that choosing to host over saving their own environment is absurd. Especially because it's not only the bay that needs saving, but those people who live near it. Rio might as well have disowned that place.

      Delete
    2. I'm so happy that you said that countries that have needs to fulfill shouldn't be able to host the Olympics because I totally agree. I don't understand why they let countries with big financial and economic problems spend money that should be used for other things on some sports.

      Delete
    3. Sarah i totally agree with you, it seems as if you have a deep understand of the problem. Are you as mad as I am? Think of all the animals that are being hurt or killed by the pollution. Bet that really makes you mad huh? You vegan. In all seriousness, the pollution is a really big problem that needs to be fixed.

      Delete
  4. Money well spent?


    Every two years the home country of every Olympics spends billions of dollars on venues. Even though these countries spend billions of dollars for 2-week games, they can’t seem to find a use for them afterward. Most venues turn become abandoned turn into graffiti sites, and go to waste. Brazil's economy is crashing, their president is getting impeached, but they still scraped up 12 billion for the games. Rather than using this money they don’t have for something so trivial, they should be using the money to help their country. These venues could be used for many other things including , health clubs, sports stadiums, training centers and much more. Although this brings attention to the country, very few countries have made money off hosting the Olympics. All in all, the Olympics are great entertainment, but the funding for the games needs to be decreased since they are only used for 2 weeks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree with you. Instead of leaving these venues empty, we should use them for other, more important things. One-third of Rios population doesn't have access to a proper water supply. We could use the empty venue to host people that don't have proper water, meals, and housing, instead of letting people turn them into abandoned graffiti sites.

      Delete
  5. The expense of the Olympics is unnecessary, each country is trying to overdo the one previous, meaning it will only get more overpriced and unreasonable. It is clear Rio has more urgent and pressing matters too get to but will not let other countries see it as a deglamorized nation. Guanabara Bay is one of these urgent matters. In the photos shown, the river had a sickly color and trash floating in it. This is a serious matter since it is an unhealthy body of water that would greatly effect the locals or anyone coming in contact with Guanabara Bay. I believe this problem should be more recognized than the Olympics. Overall, I believe Rio needs to gets its priorities straight.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, I believe that we do need to "get our priorities straight". It shouldn't be one country trying to out do another country in the size of the architecture or the style....It should be about how environmentally friendly it is and maybe how it could be used as a school or warehouse....Not just a waste of money and resources.

      Delete
    2. I agree, you have a very good point. Rio does need to focus on more important things like their ecosystem instead of the olympics.

      Delete
    3. I agree with you, especially when you state that Rio needs to get their priorities straight. I also believe that they shouldn't be spending massive amounts of money of unnecessary things while the country is in serious help.

      Delete
    4. I fully agree, they are focusing on all the wrong things. The answer to poverty is not to build several multimillion dollar stadiums. They need to divert more effort and money into cleaning up the bay instead of trying to get publicity.

      Delete
  6. I agree with this response you should always put your money where it is needed most and Rio needs money for the people and environment. I also believe that they should make the Olympics smaller and simpler like they used to be in Greece they should be a time of peace when all the countries come together as one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you completely. Rio needs to have a balance on what they spend money on what is the most important. They need to clean up the pollution and make it a good place in general and to host the event. Also making the Olympics could help cut the cost and leave more money for other things like cleaning up.

      Delete
  7. Watching the video about old Olympic venues is very depressing. It is sad to see these once amazing venues in their dilapidated state. To think that billions of dollars are spent on these venues every 2 years. This seems like a huge waste of not only the money but also the resources, time and effort put into these structures. This money could be better spent by improving the community. It is estimated that Rio spent over 12 billion dollars to host the Olympics. This money could’ve been spent to provide permanent sanitation facilities for the people living in poor communities. Without this proper sanitation this problem continues because their waste continues to drain into the river. Perhaps if everyone could agree on a permanent Olympic venue then this venue could be developed and cared for to be used for all upcoming Olympic games.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think it is a total waste of money for the country's holding the olympic games. Especially if the stadiums aren't going to be used after the games. They destroyed peoples homes to make some of the stadium and then the stadiums are never used after the games and people in that area now don't have homes. Not to mention there are large useless stadiums that are becoming safety hazards world wide. They could be making a difference in the world with the money spent on the games rather than entertainment.Finally instead of just abandoning the stadiums they could make them better and they could make sports teams and teach kids about the importance of teamwork and show them how to do Olympic sports instead of wasting the space.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree with you. They should think about the effect of their actions in the long run. If these stadiums are forgotten, then you destroyed houses of millions for no reason. That's just bad decision making.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you on that because destroying someones home just to build a stadium that'll be used for maybe a month at max is just not worth it. Also I agree that they could somehow find a way to reuse the stadiums instead of just abandoning them.

      Delete
    3. You make a great argument, but I do not totally agree with you. In my opinion, The venues are worth the money, but only if they find a use for them afterwards. Why spend billions if the purchase won't last?

      Delete
    4. I had the same ideas that you had. The governments of these countries should really consider using these stadiums for something productive, something that could help their own community.

      Delete
  9. The article mentioned that there was a drawing for who got to host the summer olympics. Above all else and not focusing on the pollution is, why allow Rio the opportunity to host the games? Clearly they were not prepared for what hosting would mean for them, and with that being said there should have been set requirements for the conditions of the areas that submitted their names into the “drawing”. If this were the case then Rio’s water in Guanabara Bay would never have been an issue, for the athletes at least. Rio is at much of a fault for not cleaning the bay, as the olympic organization is for allowing them to host in such a state. Not to mention that the venues are disregarded, a complete waste after the games. From the video showing what happens after the olympics, it’s clear that considering the 400 million spent on the buildings, hosting was not worth it. At least use the establishments for future sporting events. So yes, Rio had the 16 day glory of hosting, but have a continuing crisis that will stick around for years to come.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree! Countries should not be entered in the "raffle" in the first place if they do not have the ability to host a healthy olympics. They should be tested and checked out first before they are entered.The venues that went to waste after the games should have been put to a different, and better use other then just tearing them down.

      Delete
    2. You brought up a new perspective to me that I agree should be more addressed. Someone should of spoken up that Rio was not fit to hold the Olympics. It is everyone's job to make sure the earth is being taken care of.

      Delete
    3. I completely agree with you. If the countries who want to host are putting the athletes at risk, and do not have the proper facilities they should not be able to enter the "draw".

      Delete
  10. Rio de Janeiro was the host of the 2016 Summer Olympics. It’s estimated Brazil spent a total of $12 billion dollars on building venues and facilities that would only be used continuously for a total of 16 day for 300 events, 35 sports, and by thousands of athletes from across the globe. However, once the games concluded most of those facilities are never used again, thus rusting away, becoming polluted, and taking away usable space for human and animal activities. Ultimately leaving the country in debt. Meanwhile, the Guanabara Bay suffers from mass pollution and the citizens living impoverished conditions nearby don’t have the necessities need for survival. In addition to the pollution and living environment, the members of the police force go weeks without receiving a paycheck and funding for healthcare and education has decreased. The money Rio spent on the Olympics would’ve been better spent on more pressing issues the city and country is currently experiencing. From this point on, cities should have to meet specific standards and be approved by the International Olympic Committee to ensure the money and resources wouldn’t be waste on the event, but instead used to improve the quality of life in that place.

    Bibography:
    http://time.com/4438147/rio2016-olympicsguanabarabaypollution/
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rio-2016-olympics-problems-cost-worth-hosting-games/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree with you on the fact that money can be spent on more pressing issues. If they educated the impoverished people, they would be making much more money and the poverty would go down. Even the citizens who would get education would help clean up the area, less poverty equals less crime.

      Delete
    2. I completely agree. Cities become so excited to host the games and forget about the real problems they have around them.

      Delete
    3. I totally agree, I think it's unfair how people in that community have to suffer and not recieve their paychecks and education all because of the Olympic Games and how they should focus on bettering their country first before holding this expensive event.

      Delete
    4. I'm in complete agreement regarding the IOC's future role . They have the power to put in place specific standards that would ensure financial, environmental and social responsibility of the host cities. And then the IOC needs to take ownership of those standards and see that they are upheld. While the IOC has been known to talk the talk of such standards, it's failed to walk the talk. It's time to step up and do the right thing.

      Delete
  11. The pollution in Rio is a large but simple task to take care of. Money could be a huge factor in turning the tides of pollution not only in Brazil but all around the world. By simply using less money on attractions like the olympics or the world cup we can direct more money to the growing pollution problem. Not to mention, these giant stadiums will more than likely be forgotten by the country and government as shown in the video above. So why spend the millions of dollars on a soon to be forgotten stadium when you can put your mark down on the fight against pollution. This scenario is vividly shown in the Rio olympics in Brazil. They needed to have these olympics so bad that they would sacrifice their residents only homes without notice just so they could build the stadiums they could barely finish. They had a harbor for swimming that had trash floating in it. But yet Brazil and many other countries are to focused on maintaining the spotlight on their country to even give pollution a though. This needs to change.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely agree with you Jake. This problem is a very easy task to manage. I think that the Olympics can bare to spend some money and clean up.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you Jake. If they spent less money on attractions like the Olympics and spent it cleaning up their city, it would probably improve tourism as well

      Delete
    3. I agree with you Jake. I think the government could pay for the cost of the set up, and the committee of the games should pay for the clean up.

      Delete
    4. I agree with you that we need to be spending our money on other things. We have spent too much money on these main events, and poverty and homelessness is far more of an important issue. Putting people in a safer environment needs to be the goal, instead of these stadiums that don't mean anything in the long run.

      Delete
    5. I agree with everything said her the problem is so easy to fix we just have to make the moves that can make the problems go away.

      Delete
  12. Whenever the Olympics occur, they always put a happy face on it, but really, the Olympics are just a way for a country too loose a lot of money. When a city agrees to host the Olympics, they have to pay for all of it, the Olympic committee, pays for none of it. Rio is a city that has lots of issues, crime, pollution and poverty plague the tourist city; yet, Rio keeps on spending money on other habits. These habits include things like the World Cup and the Olympics. If anything, hosting the Olympics just shines a bad light on the city. Not only could they be paying to try and repair their broken system, but the rest of the world now knows how bad of a place Rio really is. The citizens of Rio are already povertized, and now the government is tearing down their housing to build multi-million dollar buildings that in a year from now will not be remembered. This is just simply a bad plan for a city like Rio.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I tottaly agree that the olymics is made to seem like it is a completley happy event, even though behind the curtians is an disaster. I personally think that they should use the same stuctures that have been previusly built in non poverty rissen towns that have not been a huge deal for citizens either.

      Delete
    2. I agree. There are so many problems in Rio that it just doesn't make sense for them to host the Olympics and spend $12 billion dollars on it.

      Delete
  13. When the Olympic Committee is spending all of this money on an already perfectly good stadium, maybe they should have spent some of the $400 MILLION on cleaning up their mess. All of the plastic bags and the rest of the junk goes right into the bay. Something has to be done about this, we can’t just turn away from this problem. Instead of saying “Wow! That was a great race!” We should really be talking about the problem going on around the Olympics. Maybe the Olympics should be held in a country that WILL clean up after the fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree with you, the games shouldn't be held in a place with filthy water, and maybe the stadiums should become like a place for homeless and less fortunate people so they have something to keep them busy. We should have a policy on after the olympics that makes them clean up the aftermath.

      Delete
    2. I really like your statement that "Maybe the Olympics should be held in a country that WILL clean up after the fact." Great blog

      Delete
    3. I really like what you talked about how we should think about the pollution that happens after the Olympics and cleaning it up, and not the sports themselves. Because in the end, what matters is the affect it had on the Earth. And that was a LOT of money spent: money that should've gone into cleaning up the water.

      Delete
    4. I also agree that they really should have spent there money on cleaning up all them damage they have done to the environment. If you think about it, Rio should not have been hosting the olympics in the first place. They needed to use that money to clean up the environmental problems that already existed, but instead the decided to spend money on the olympics. They need to learn to make smart decisions with there money instead of wasting it the olymics.

      Delete
    5. I definitely agree. The hosts of the Olympics should take responsibility when it comes down to cleaning up after your self. I also thought that the Olympics never should have been hosted by Rio. The Olympic committee should have seen a huge red flag when they looked at the condition Rio was in.

      Delete
  14. My outlook on the olympics has drastically changed. I had no idea how much destruction is caused to the people around the making of these giant structures that may i add are only used for about 4 weeks. These extremely expensive creations are such a waste of money and time, especially when like this past year, the water that was promised to be cleaned up has barely improved. This bay area not only is a complete garbage dump, but it releases a gaseous aroma that is very disruptive to the surrounding citizens. Brazil's government has promised $12 million dollars for a bay clean up but never followed through. I could understand if the Olympic stadiums were built in remote areas so no homes were torn down, and places that were not facing travesty, but the past two Olympics have been in poverty riven areas so not only are the townspeople upset, but the olympians are in danger.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree. The fact that the Olympic Committee displaced so many people in poverty for such a large waste of resources is shameful. They could have used demolition costs to help clean up the bay.

      Delete
    2. I completely agree.So much money was wasted on the Olympic stadium when in the end its jut going to become an abandoned useless building when the most of that money should and could have been put towards the more needy and bigger situation and pollution crisis.

      Delete
    3. I am in complete agreement of your opinions. Since reading the article and watching the videos, my point of view has changed a lot. We don't need to be using all this money for a venue that happens every 4 years, you are right. The Rio government is lying to it's people, and they are putting them in danger. You're right about how they don't realize they are putting the competitors in danger also. Great paragraph.

      Delete
    4. Contrary to what some people may say, I don’t think the countries hosting the Olympics is a “waste” of money, I just think that countries need to spend what they can and not offer to host if they can’t truly afford it. Even before the Olympics, Rio de Janeiro was known for being heavily polluted and not the wealthiest country. They should have spent their money on fixing the country and doing what they really need to do to prosper as a country. Instead of spending an outrageous amount of money (400 million to be exact) on Maracana stadium for the World cup, they should have put that money to help clean up the bay that is heavily polluted. Of course, the pollution is outrageous and the Olympics definitely contributed to the problem, but the pollution in Rio has always been a big problem and they won’t fix anything by just saying no to the Olympics in general. As everyone knows, the Olympics can bring in a lot of extra cash to the country from the large amount of people staying in hotels or buying tickets to the events. The country should put their money to good use and help clean out areas that need help, but pollution is inevitable and will happen when you group such a large group of people together.

      Delete
    5. I absolutely agree about my views on the Olympics changing. Before this I had no idea that these venues and structures were just wasted and I agree that all of it is just a waste of money.

      Delete
    6. The modern day olympic games are extremely expensive. The notion that hosting a major sports event is good for the growth is crazy to me, especially in a struggling economy such as in Brazil. They have built too much infrastructure in these venues that will never be used again, putting Brazil an even worse position. Also, Rio is hardly doing anything about the pollution problem. So much stuff is dumped into the bay I can’t believe they didn't direct any of the estimated 4.6 billion dollars spent into cleaning up. The Rio olympics are a disaster, and nowadays it is hard to find a country that can handle the expenses of the olympics.

      Delete
    7. I agree with you that it is silly to be building these big stadiums for only 4 weeks or so. I also agree that its a waste of money meanwhile the area around it is a complete dump and waste land. The government should've stayed to their promise of the $12 million dollars for bay clean up, because yes, the townspeople are upset, and now you are putting the Olympians in danger.

      Delete
    8. I agree. The funds being used are such a waste, and they can be put to much better use. If they followed through with their promise and actually cared, Rio could be cleansed in no time if they were smart with their funds.

      Delete
  15. There really is no solution to the excessive spending to host the Olympics. Every country that hosts the olympics wants revenue to come into their country, so there could be no permanent stadium (in one area) because they would not be making money. Even if the countries had one Olympic stadium for life or a long period, things would become outdated and they would have to renovate the place, costing even more money. Either way the Olympics will always have excessive money spending. The money can be better spent, like on Rio’s water, so the water is actually safe. The pollution of Rio also affects wildlife, so it is bad for the environment, which can cause severe irreversible damage to areas. The money could also be spent on the poor of Rio, not only helping the people but also helping clean the water, because the poor contributes pollution to the water. Just in general the money spent on the Olympic games could be spent on disease research, like a cure for cancer. It could be spent on many noble causes, not ones of greed. I also think the pollution in Rio is horrible, but their government is not willing to clean the water.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree that there will probably never be a solution to excessive spending on the Olympics and how if each country were to have their own stadium it would become outdated over the years and that every Olympics they would want new creations which is a waste when they could be spending that money on something more worth it. Also, the damage and waste that gets left behind like the garbage that is in the Bay is really heartbreaking how they would rather spend all that money towards new creations and more stuff to the Olympics than rather having them make the water in Rio more safe for people. I think they should at least try to make an effort to raise some money to help it towards the Bay in Rio or in any other cause to which it will be more helpful. If they can spend all this money on the Olympics, then I think they can at least make an effort to raise money to a better cause.

      Delete
    2. I agree 100 percent, the money used on the stadium could've been used for a more notable cause but was spent on something that provided it community with nothing but entertainment.

      Delete
    3. I agree with everything your saying. Rio should focus more on the people that live there and it's environment instead of a two week compitition.

      Delete
    4. I totally agree that there will probably never be a solution to excessive spending on the Olympics and how if each country were to have their own stadium it would become outdated over the years and that every Olympics they would want new creations which is a waste when they could be spending that money on something more worth it. Also, the damage and waste that gets left behind like the garbage that is in the Bay is really heartbreaking how they would rather spend all that money towards new creations and more stuff to the Olympics than rather having them make the water in Rio more safe for people.

      Delete
    5. I totally agree with you on the fact that there will be no solution to Olympic spending. I also liked how yuou included the fact that revenue is brought in to the country whenever the Olympics are hosted. I don't think money should be spent on the water and the poor people, as if they were equal problems. I think Rio should focus on minimizing poverty and then fix the water quality later.

      Delete
    6. I agree that anywhere we host the only pics we're always going to run into this problem of excessive spending. I also agree that the money should've been used to help with pollution because it does have an effect on the whole community.

      Delete
  16. I thought the pollution problem was very surprising. I had no idea that the old Olympic locations were never even torn down. I think a solution to Rios pollution problem could have been to have a lower budget for the Olympics so that they make money on all the sales and use that towards poverty and pollution. An even better idea would be to not hold the Olympics at all knowing that these problems could only get worse. I think the pollution in the water is possibly deadly as many of the poverty stricken people who live near the water have to drink something and that could be the only source of water available to them for miles. It also posses a threat to the wildlife that is in the water and the animals that drink it. I believe that spending money on buildings was not the right choice as it can be used for much better purposes an the long terms of the Olympics far out way the short term joy that's received from watching the annual games. Overall, the debate over whether the Olympics are even necessary or if they mean something to the world may never end, but for right now we know that the effects are definitely not positive.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It's apparent how bad the water quality in Rio is, it seems to represent a bigger issue, and that's poverty. The TIME article talks about how "neighborhoods scattered atop the city's hills and mountains, often lack basic sanitary services, like plumbing and garbage pickup. Without these essentials, waste flows into water." How can a city with this level of poverty even consider hosting an event as big as the Olympics, which costs huge amounts of money, but not supply basic necessities to its citizens. The Olympics should be a privilege for countries that are able to support their citizens basic needs. Rio should have invested the money they used for the Olympics into a way to help these people. I think that's is a lot more important then a sporting event.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The Olympics can have a huge impact on the environment. You usually hear about buildings left abandoned and previous environmental concerns before the country hosted the Olympics that don’t get resolved because that country needs to recover from the cost. At the Sochi Olympics in 2014, the ENWC documented illegal waste dumping, construction blocking migration routes of animals, and an overall decreased quality of life for residents. However there is some things that Olympic hosts have done to help the the environmental concerns surrounding the Olympics. Sydney 2000; everybody received free transportation to decrease pollution, largest roof-based solar energy system, solar panels on all 665 houses in the athletes village, and native trees and shrubs were planted all around. The use of solar panels on a large scale is an example to other country in general that it is possible and there’s not really any excuse to not start converting to solar energy. Salt Lake City 2002; Used a air conditioning system that used ammonia which doesn’t damage the Ozone layer. Yes the Olympics can have a very negative effect on the environment, but if hosts think out of the box in an environmental way, it could actually start a path to a cleaner planet just by one country showing the way.


    http://www.1millionwomen.com.au/blog/what-are-environmental-impacts-olympic-games/

    ReplyDelete
  19. I totally agree that there will probably never be a solution to excessive spending on the Olympics and how if each country were to have their own stadium it would become outdated over the years and that every Olympics they would want new creations which is a waste when they could be spending that money on something more worth it. Also, the damage and waste that gets left behind like the garbage that is in the Bay is really heartbreaking how they would rather spend all that money towards new creations and more stuff to the Olympics than rather having them make the water in Rio more safe for people.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Obviously, since this is a huge problem we really need to stop and have a discussion about what we can do to keep this from happening over and over again. There are many ways we could deal with this, but unfortunately it would cause an uproar. We can’t just stop the Olympics (though I don’t oppose the thought) it would make athletes all around angry and we can’t just let this continue, it’s not healthy for anyone or thing. I believe that maybe if we can design the stadiums and all the complexes in a way that we could reuse them as office buildings or schools...maybe we’d have a chance. Honestly, it doesn’t seem like a very successful idea. If it does mean that we stop the Olympics, then I guess it must be done.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This year (2016) the summer olympics was in Rio de Janeiro. The country spent around $4.6 billion dollars on building the venues, administration, transportation. Even worse they put the games 50% over their budget! The way I view the Olympics now is very different compared to how i now see them. All of this money spent just to have it all torn down. They could have used the stadium and venues to help provide shelter for the people who have no homes or need more support. All of the money could have been overall better spent. In the Guanabara Bay there was still so much raw human sewage and dangerous viruses and bacteria, when they had promised to clean out 80% of the bay for the olympics in 2016. Well, guess what, it’s 2016 and the bay was in horrible conditions for the summer olympics. The excessive amount of money could have definitely been spent on much more needed things. Maybe even just some house for the poor people living there. Or maybe to help pay for for and daily needs.

    ReplyDelete
  22. After taking a look at this article and 2 videos, I feel that the Olympic Games have lost their meaning. As wrong as it may sound, the games are now another way of making money, and not enjoying or appreciating the world of sports. Although the countries don't see it, they are wasting a staggering amount of money on buildings that will only be used for a maximum of 4 weeks, when their people need that money the most. But it's not their fault, it's the Olympic Games themselves who in reality are selling a lie, and the countries are “investing” in their idea. But it will always be The Games who make money, and the country who goes broke. I think that instead of using the $400 million for the stadium, they should've build a sewage system. But I truly believe Brazil showed their people they don't care about them, and there isn't hopes for improvement. Before hosting the Olympics, the government should have made sure their people would be in good conditions, not those visiting.

    ReplyDelete
  23. The money spent on the Rio Olympic games was a waste of money. Rio spent $12 billion on buildings that will most likely never be used again and on the opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympics, when there are much better ways to have spent the money. In Rio there are people who don't have plumbing or even garbage pickup and so all of their waste ends up in the Guanabara Bay. The pollution of this bay affects more than just the people polluting it, it affects all of the people of Rio and it harms the planet. The planet that we all share. So the question at hand is, why isn't Rio doing more to address the big pressing issues they have?

    ReplyDelete
  24. I believe that there is a solutiom to the excessive spending that comes along with the Olympics, and that is to host them in locations that already have facilities. From 2012-2016, the International Olympic Commitee spent $7,070,000,000 on building new facilities and renovating others for the Olympics games. Out of the 17 brand new arenas, only 10 will continue to be used for sport. The other 7 arenas will be “repurposed”. If we reigned in construction costs, that would cut a huge portion of the budget down. The pollution in the Rio water is terrible obviously, and one third of Rio’s population is not conected to a formal sanitation system.. Combine that with the fact that many favelas (slums) were destroyed to build new stadiums, and you have a big problem of your hands. A better use of resources would have been to use a piece of the budget into improving the city’s deep issues, not just making it look better at a surface level. The Riio Olympics is going to leave a lasting effect on Brazil, and from the looks of it, it won’t be a positive one.

    ReplyDelete
  25. After taking a look at this article and 2 videos, I feel that the Olympic Games have lost their meaning. As wrong as it may sound, the games are now another way of making money, and not enjoying or appreciating the world of sports. Although the countries don't see it, they are wasting a staggering amount of money on buildings that will only be used for a maximum of 4 weeks, when their people need that money the most. But it's not their fault, it's the Olympic Games themselves who in reality are selling a lie, and the countries are “investing” in their idea. But it will always be The Games who make money, and the country who goes broke. I think that instead of using the $400 million for the stadium, they should've build a sewage system. But I truly believe Brazil showed their people they don't care about them, and there isn't hopes for improvement. Before hosting the Olympics, the government should have made sure their people would be in good conditions, not those visiting.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Watching both videos on the pollution in the water in Rio and what happens to the venues after the Olympic games really makes me think about how more of the money from the Olympic games should and could have gone to the more needy situation which is the pollution crisis.I do not feel that the money that was spent on the building was the best use of resources for Rio because the pollution crisis is far more in need of the money instead because in the end the building that was used to host the Olympics will just be known as the empty abandoned building that once hosted the 2016 Olympic games and it will be forgotten but mean while however the pollution situation will still be an ongoing and continuing cause that needs to be solved.My total outlook on the Olympics has changed from what I have seen and read in these videos and articles.I feel bad for the people who have to go through this and are seeing no results anytime soon or so it seems.In the extra article I read it goes on to explain that the water is so polluted with human waste that it can be an assault on your nose and immune system.This is because the people living in the poorer and not very sanitary conditions do not have any other idea on how to get rid of their waste causing even more pollution when they have no other choice but to dump it into the water.The pollution is not only effecting the people in Rio but also the wildlife and their habitats, which could lead to more problems in the future.The pollution situation in Rio may seem like a hard task to handle but the sooner Rio starts to pay attention and actually address the situation and begin to plan and start a clean up project or come up with a solution the easier it will be and the faster the crisis can be resolved.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think it's stupid that they spend about 12 billions dollars and here's why, they had 12 billion dollars in an impoverished area to build a stadium that there probably gonna only use once for games. No one really cares about the games except for 3 months in every 4 years. They spent 12 billion dollars on about 19 medals that weren't even all gold. I think instead of building a whole new stadium from scratch they should go to stadiums that are already built this would be less harmful to their environment. The place Guanabara Bay is such in bad shape there's christmas ornaments, milk cartons, cookie packaging, clothes on the ground and the reason for that is that in the past 30 years, they invested very, very little money. Not to mention a stinky stench that's always lingering the air. Just imagine the money going into Brazil making it more functional and livable for the people and animals as a community.


    ReplyDelete
  28. I think that letting rio host the games was a terrible idea. In the summer we have the events that involve water and if the water supply is contaminated then what is the games doing in rio. You can't just have nasty filthy water for the games everyone will get sick and I think that instead of putting that money towards the games they should have cleaned the bay and made rio look amazing then bid on the games in 4 more years. It's terrible that there is raw human sewage and cookies and clothes in the water. This needs to be cleaned up and it needs to happen soon.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I think its a disgusting sight when you see what the worlds olympic stadiums have been reduced to. Dilapidated structures and buildings. Graffiti and moss defacing the walls that once held millions of happy people. Its such a waste when you put billions of dollars into an a stadium and then completely forget about it like a bad dream, its just a terrible investment. Rio right now is hosting the olympics and payed 12 billion dollars for there stadium. This is a problem as Rio's government has been neglecting there noticeable high amount of pollution. The stadium was a misuse of money and will only add to the pollution.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The Summer Olympics are such an exciting time for the olympians, and for the people watching. You get to gather with friends to root on you country, so everything is great right? No. Everything's not alright. Boatloads of money are invested into the Olympics every four years, while oceans, rivers, lakes, and bays, like Guanabara Bay, are sitting with filth and bacteria. And the people around it probably aren’t so happy either. They have to live with the gaseous smell and pollution every day. Together as a nation and as a world, we need to solve this horrific problem across the globe, not just in Guanabara Bay. We need to be spending our money to help cleanse the world, not for a sports venue. Sure, it only happens every 4 years, but that is exactly the point. What about the other 3 years? I know for a fact that our countries produces enough money combined to help eliminate pollution, more than 800 million I know that. We have so many resources and tools to utilize, but they are not being put to use. Journalist’s Resource says that the, “Sochi Winter Olympics, for example, cost over $50 billion”. 50 BILLION! I might be wrong, but I believe that 50 billion dollars is too much for a sports venue, I just do. I could see from those videos and the TIME article the environment around the stadium after it was over. There were mass amounts of garbage everywhere, it was terrible. The Olympics is a great time in sports, but all that money IS NOT necessary.

    http://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/infrastructure-government/economic-and-cultural-benefits-of-the-olympics-research-roundup

    ReplyDelete
  31. I didn’t realize how much of an effect the olympics had on the environment, it’s sad to think that an event that brings so many people together hurts the world around us so much. They spend so much money to build these structures, but is it really worth it??? They could be using this money to relieve some of the poverty in Brazil, or to possibly help maintain their pollution issues. I would think that they’d use the olympic structures for something else afterwards, for other various events possibly? Either way I think the olympics is a waste of money and time.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I really don't understand why countries find it acceptable to cause so much pollution in such a short period of time. It really does not make sense why they would demolish buildings that they hosted the Olympics in or just leave stadiums unattended with no supervision. Can't there be a better, more environmentally friendly way of managing what happens to the buildings and stadiums after the games? I don't understand why they can't use them for other things instead of letting them rot away at the environment's expense. Rio already had huge environmental issues on their hands before the Olympics. Now to add to that, they have just inadvertently made their situation a lot worse. What will they do with all the pollution created from the games? Where will they find funding to clean up the mess that they created? They are ruining what's left of their already decaying environment and they can't really do anything to fix what they created.

    ReplyDelete
  33. The video shows what happens to the different stadiums that were built for the Olympics years after they were done being used. It showed them all overgrown and abandoned. Full of graffiti and garbage. The garbage can pollute the ground around it and put a smell in the air. If this country had spent their money in other ways, this pollution most likely would not have occurred. Also all of these stadiums are a waste of space. They have been sitting there for years with no use. If they take them down, that would waste more money. So this country is at a crossroads. If they had decided to use their money for more productive things such as pollution clean up or other things that help the environment, then they could've avoided this dilemma. Like in Rio, they spent all that money to host the Olympics when they can hardly afford to keep their water clean without it. According to fivethirtyeight.com, Rio went 50% over budget. Which was money that could've gone into cleaning up the pollution.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Instead of wasting $400 million dollars on trying to make Rio look good for the Olympics, think about your own country instead of worrying about the Olympics. I think they could have chosen a better place to host the Olympics besides Rio. Rio must get themselves "cleaned up" with money spent on the Olympics before anything grand can be held there. If there is a major health risk (the pollution in Guanabara Bay), they should worry about that instead of hosting a special event where places will be packed with people, causing an even bigger health problem. The money could even be spent for a cure to sickness that is useful worldwide, not just cleaning up Rio. Their government should step up and fix their pollution before disaster strikes.

    ReplyDelete
  35. After watching this video I thought that even though the Olympics is a really cool event it's not worth it to spend $12 million on a stadium and all that is going to be destroyed or it is going to be left there vacant. Also I think that it’s especially useless to build these massive stadiums when the country is in a financial crisis. For example Rio is where the 2016 summer Olympics was held and the country of Brazil including Rio had some problems with pollution (E.g. water and environmental) and Zika. Also this country has had some economic issues earlier in the year prior to the Olympics. So in my opinion I think that they could’ve used their money better by spending it on their environmental needs such as cleaning their water. During some of the swimming events in the Olympics the pool water turned green. This shows that Brazil should really step it up and use the money they have to do the basic groundwork to improve their country or creating a plan like the welfare program in the U.S. for the poorer parts of their country. Overall, I think that all the countries that are going to be or are thinking about hosting the Olympics should think about hosting the Olympics from all aspects and ask themselves, is it really worth it.

    ReplyDelete
  36. The amount of money we are willing to pay for the Olympics, that last only a few weeks, is astonishing. For example, the pollution in Rio is horrible. The water is full of sewage, dangerous bacteria, and garbage. In an article from TIME, Sean Gregory tells us about the stench by the Guanabara Bay. “It’s a gaseous stench: inhale it at your stomach’s own risk. There’s also the sludge, so thick you slip on it.” All the money that was spent for the huge Olympic celebration is mostly going to waste now. As shown in the video, all the venues just sit there left to rust because there's really nothing to do with them after the Olympics are over. Instead of overly spending money on something that lasts only a few weeks, we should use that money to make the environment a more stable living place for people. In Rio the pollution is so bad that if ingested, even in the slightest, you could get an infection. That wasn't good news for the swimmers that were in the Olympics and it's not good for the people that live in that area. Even if this pollution is a safety hazard I think people nowadays just think about money and the publicity for themselves. So, even if we had the option of less money spent on the Olympics, I don't think any of the countries would want to do that because they all want to do the best for their country.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I’ve noticed that most everybody is saying that the olympic spending is unnecessary and they shouldn’t have had the olympics in Rio with the pollution, and though I agree with both of those statements to some degree- we should look at it from another perspective. The olympics are a worldly tradition that have been going on for centuries and it only makes sense to celebrate them by putting a lot of work into making them look and feel as luxurious as possible. In the world we live in today, that means a lot of time and money has to be used. We can´t be honoring one of the oldest traditions in history with a two dollar pinterest DIY! Also we have to keep in mind that they choose where the olympics will take place six to seven years in advance, and they couldn’t have just said “welp looks like we won’t have the olympics this year, sorry.” I do agree that Rio should have done more looking into the future when they made the decision to host, we have to remember that while they made this decision Rio was doing fine economically. As for after the olympics are finished, London uses them for gym complexes and such and in my opinion I believe that other countries should do that as well but some countries don’t put enough thought into it (que Beijing and Rio). Overall, I do feel like wise decisions weren’t made regarding the past olympic games but we should not just view the story from one perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  38. The pollution in the Guanabara Bay is unbelievable. Why would they let Rio host the Olympic Games if the pollution was at the point where it is a danger to people's health? I think the money that they used for the games would have been better spent if they had used it to better their city or trying to clean up the river. I do think the river is important but I think they could make more progress if they focused more on the city itself. If they spend a ton of money on the river and the city stays how it is all the hard work could end up being a lot of time and money wasted.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Unlike most people, I feel the money is well spent for the olympics. It is just what we do with the venues after the olympics that needs to change. The olympics are something to look forward to every four years, and are a joy to many! All we need to do is continue to use the venues and stadiums or use stadiums and venues already in use! They definitely aren’t a waste of money, just not used enough.

    ReplyDelete
  40. There is a solution and it is that the people who host the Olympics should use the $400 million to clean up the filth that they made. The alternate solution would be to re-use the Olympic venues used in earlier years. The pollution in the water in Rio is just outraging! It is such a wast of money to spend each year when people wont even use it the next. I also find it frustrating that the people who host the Olympics go back on their word of cleaning up the water that they polluted. Spending money on buildings is a bad use of resources. It is crazy that the people who host the Olympics would spend so much money for that one year. The aftermath of the Olympics on the environment is just pollution and waste of space.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Rio made a horrible mistake by hosting the 2016 summer olympics. Rio has so many issues at the moment that it's just crazy that they hosted. For one the water in Rio in particular Guantanamo Bay is so dangerous to the people around it, also Rio is a third world country that needs to focus on their economic situation. Borrowing 12 Billion dollars to make multiple permanent Olympic stadiums is not the answer.I believe that the only way to stop the pollution in guantanamo bay is to have people face harsh consequences for dumping anything in the lake this would cost little money in essence to the 12 billion plus spent.Then after enforcing this law figuring out what's wrong with the water and how to get rid of all the nastiness.I believe this is the most cost efficient way of solving their problems and Brazil definitely needs to be cost efficient. Tearing down people's homes was a terrible idea so the least you could do for the citizens of your country is to make their living environment save. At least use the stadiums for youth sports to help teach kids valuable lessons in their life ahead. Do some good for your citizens Rio And clean up the bay!

    ReplyDelete
  42. I don't really think there is a solution to the excessive spending to host the Olympics. But I do believe that money could have been better spent on cleaning up the bay. As an alternative solution, I believe they should've just cleaned up the bay with the money in advance so they could host the Olympics in a safe and healthy environment. But in any case, we need to realize that the pollution in Rio is appalling, and we need to do something about it. And I think it's pretty obvious from this paragraph that spending the money on builidings, in my opinion, was not the best use of this money.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I do not think there will be a solution to the spending of the olympic games because it is such iconic part of the whole world. But if there was a solution the money could've been spent on world changing research. It could’ve went to more efficient electric cars, diseases like cancer etc. That would of been way more revolutionary than Michael Phelps getting some metals. The money could’ve gone to the water pollution problem in rio, for god sakes the water in the pool turned green! I personally think that the olympics is a waste of money when there are plenty of good stadiums in rio we can save millions by just using the already build buildings or just use the stadium as a landmark don't just abandon it.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Billions of dollars were invested into hosting the olympics in Rio. Billions of dollars were invested into building the olympic venues that will probably not be used for anything after as we see in the video. Instead of putting the money into something that will probably not be helpful for the community and probably be a waste, they could be investing into helping the millions of Rio’s poor residents get proper plumbing and garbage pickup, or helping clean up the Guanabara Bay which is contaminated with “Raw human sewage teeming with dangerous viruses and bacteria.” Instead of having to spend millions of dollars to make the olympics happen they could just have ONE olympic stadium where it can be hosted every time.

    ReplyDelete
  45. We can’t really stop the excessive amount of money spent on the Olympic stadiums since a lot of countries want to host the Olympics to gain revenue in their country. However we can still find a way to re-purpose these stadiums in a positive way. They could use the stadiums for something to help their community instead of just leaving twelve billion dollars there to waste. If these stadiums are just left there, it would be like having a big black smudge in a bright piece of artwork, instead of contributing to the beauty. They could re-purpose these stadiums for something like community sports clubs or a building similar to a park where people can come and have fun and do things together, instead of having a location which looks scary just getting near it. I think that the governments of these countries should really consider doing something with these stadiums because there are only going to be more of them.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Ever since I joined the rowing team, i've had more of a special interest in the olympics. When I found out this years olympics were being hosted in Rio I was surprised. Reading up on current events I knew that Brazil itself was in desperate need of reform. Between the government and the living conditions there, it made for a very off putting place to be. As a rower I could not imagine how vile and disgusting the water must have been for the racers. The olympics are a tradition that is taken very seriously around the world so I wouldn’t say it's a waste of money. I don’t think the money would be better off used to clean them up because that's something the people and government of Brazil need to take care of. Throwing money at the polluted rivers won’t fix anything. They need to have people volunteer or raise awareness to have that cleaned up. The olympic committee should not have chosen Brazil, because of the bad conditions. It’s a huge honor to host the olympics and Rio literally could not clean up its act.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I think that the $12 billion Rio spent on the Olympics was a waste of money and could’ve been spent better. Rio is a city with a lot of problems that the city could’ve used to help the problems in their city like the pollution which was an issue for the Olympics. I think that they should’ve spent the money elsewhere and not on something that will soon be forgotten. Watching the video on the Olympic stadiums made me realize how all this money is spent on stadiums to be used for about 2-3 weeks and not ever again and how things like the Olympics can be forgotten quickly.

    ReplyDelete
  48. After reading the article and watching the two videos my perspective on the Olympics has changed. Billions of dollars are spent to make all these venues and it is a huge waste of money. They can use all that money for a better purpose. Rio has a huge problem with its environment. I learned that the Guanabara Bay has a tremendous pollution problem and they have done very little to try and help the problem go away. It's surprising that there's a gaseous stench that puts the whole place at risk. It is very dangerous and nobody does anything about it. I think they should spend their money on helping the Guanabara Bay instead of using all that money on venues for the Olympics.

    ReplyDelete
  49. There is no solution to the amount of money spent on Olympics because the venues must be welcoming and there also must be venues for every sport and there is a total of 28 sports in the 2016 Olympics, but I think the cost of the Olympics is worth every penny. The Olympics bring the whole world together and bringing everyone together is priceless. The Olympics might only be 16 days, but during those 16 days 206 countries join together, not just to compete, but to learn each other’s cultures and ways of life. After this Olympics is forgotten the place will be destroyed or vandalized and will just be a symbol of reunion where everyone came together. To create a place that is welcoming to everyone will cost billions of dollars, but if everyone is reunited and everyone feels welcome then that place that cost billions of dollars will make everyone happy and happiness can lead to peace on Earth which is our ultimate goal, to end fighting and live peacefully and equally.
    http://www.topendsports.com/events/summer/sports/
    http://metro.co.uk/2016/08/12/how-many-countries-in-the-olympics-some-nations-wont-get-a-chance-at-glory-6063233/

    ReplyDelete
  50. When reading this article I had some previous knowledge beforehand on the subject of Brazil's polluted waters. While reading I didn't realize how bad the actual situation was. When you hear about how the Olympic committees are given a $400 million face-lift ahead of the 2014 World Cup for a stadium, just for the opening and closing ceremonies (need I remind you, that's only 2 events taking place in the stadium for the Olympics). This is very upsetting to me; someone who cares about the environment because only $800 million has been spent in bay cleanup since 1990, those numbers aren't good compared to each other. I really don't believe the that spending all this money on buildings only used twice is the best way to use the money, seeing how bad the waters look in Rio. That money could have been used to help recreate the bays so they are more efficient, less populated and less smelly. An Associated Press investigation in early August found that Rio’s water is “as filthy as ever, contaminated with raw human sewage teeming with dangerous viruses and bacteria.” The people of Brazil need to stop thinking about who’s going to win the next gold medal and more on the polluted waters because when you turn away from the bay, there are many shanty-towns housing millions of Rio’s poor residents. The impoverished neighborhoods are scattered at the top of the city’s hills and mountains. They lack sanitary services, like plumbing and garbage pickup ( in some areas they are non-existent). Without these essentials, waste flows into water. The people who live near the bodies of water are fighting for survival. It’s a tragedy. One that’s far more serious, and lasting, than anything confronting the sailors, rowers and swimmers during these Olympic Games.


    ReplyDelete
  51. Olympic spending will never be cut; getting all the countries together to decide a limit on spending would be a step above impossible. Although, I would not want Olympic spending to be cut anyway. The Olympics are quite possibly the oldest tradition in the world, and the moral boosts of entire nations and sportsmanship the Olympics celebrate are more than enough reason to keep them. It is important to sustain that tradition to the best of our abilities. However, 400 Million dollars! All that money not spent on rebuilding Rio De Janeiro's poverty or the pollution problem, but on only one of the many Olympic stadiums built for 2016. If the selection process (for an Olympic city) was more than just a bid, and involved other factors such as the economy and stability of the city, perhaps Rio would have been motivated to use that money on the more important issue of poverty. If regular Rio citizens "go to the bathroom and have to use plastic bags to clean up", then Rio needs to identify that issue and solve it as fast as possible. To conclude, the money spent on the Rio games should have been used on helping the poor people of Rio, which would eventually solve the effect of the water pollution. None of the Olympians should have had to settle for the awful water quality in Rio.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I think it's ridiculous how much money they spend on an event rather than the city itself. Rio is clearly polluted and disgusting, yet they continue to put expensive funds into the Olympics. If that money were put to better use, Rio could be cleaned up rather than being in the terrible state it is currently in. I would be ashamed if I were hosting such a huge event in a dirty, unhygienic place. If they were wise, they would put those funds to better use.

    ReplyDelete
  53. After watching this video, it made me feel disgusted. There is so much pollution it is crazy. Even though it is a national event to host the Olympics, I feel that in this case, it was more necessary to use that money to clean up your City, and give a nicer place for people to live and visit. There is so much pollution in the city of Rio, that me personally, I would feel disgusted to live there and would be very uncomfortable. The Olympics costs tons of money, to build the stadium, to purchase equipment, etc. but, with all that money you're could be putting towards something that is more environmental safer to your city. Not only could you be affecting the health of the population, but the health of the wildlife, and other tourists from outside the country. This just seems crazy to me that they couldn't have been more wise with the spending of their money and have made a better choice.

    ReplyDelete
  54. The money it costs to host the Olympics is completely unnecessary. Each year, the new host always tries to outdo the last host, which means spending more money on their venue. It’s sad to see people waste tons of money on buildings that are used for 2 weeks, and then left to sit, empty, for years afterwards. From the pictures, you can obviously see that Rio has more urgent matters to attend to. The water in the canal is a very dark color, and is filled with trash. This can seriously affect anyone that comes in contact with the water, especially since the canal leads right into the Guanabara Bay. Rio needs to use its money for the most important thing, which right now, is fixing their pollution problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I fully agree, the competition to make each Olympics better is out of hand. Especially because it is only 2 weeks. I didn't know that pollution was that bad threes! Rip needs to get their priorities straight.

      Delete
  55. Well, money was spent. Just how well? Not well at all. Rio poured billions into the construction of venues and infrastructure as it prepared to host the 2016 Summer Games. Its organizing committee said its focus was on efficiency, legacy and entertainment, rather than scale, grandeur and cost. $12 billion SCREAMS scale, grandeur and cost. Who were they trying to fool? Promises to clean up 80% of Rio's Guanabara Bayt were as stench-filled as the bacteria and virus-laden water itself. Rio chose to focus on the 'wow' factor of spectacular stadiums, souped-up subways, and globally glamorous venues. The same 'wow' that historically and literally crumbles given time. Forget the promises made. Temporary Eco-barriers were placed in the Bay to hold back the polluted waters and provide a 'clean' environment. It's been reported that the bacteria levels were 1.7 million times the acceptable levels found in the USA and Europe. And while the IOC insisted athletes entering the waters would be safe, it refused to conduct its own testing to prove it. Only until the IOC sets in place formal, mandated criteria for the environmental, social and financial effects of hosting the Games AND actually holds host cities accountable, scale and grandeur will continue to be the winner of the Games.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I'm a huge sports fan so for almost an entire year leading up to these Rio Olympics I was following all the coverage on the news and sports channels. When I would hear that there was a possibility that they would cancel the Olympics I was pretty upset. Then I started seeing photos and videos of what Rio looked like. It made me think that this really is a legitimate health risk. Watching this video up hear makes me think less and less highly about this years games. I tend to agree now that looking back on it, we should've either postponed the games or hosted them somewhere so that Rio could focus there spending on water pollution and curing the Zika Virus. I understand how no one wants to cancel the biggest sporting event an athlete could be in but I think in this case it would've saved money and resources.

    ReplyDelete
  57. With millions of dollars going to waste with every four years by companies and nations for the Olympics, I personally believe that it’s all pointless. I believe this because it’s a waste of money that could be put to the better use of repairing nations and helping millions, instead of building fancy one-use stadiums. These large, expensive stadiums typically are just abandoned after the games. Yes, the Olympics do make many people smile but is it really that big of a deal if there’s better things to be done? Rio, for example, already has problems of crime and poverty but instead of Rio taking care of that, they blew $12 million dollars away. Maybe things would’ve been better with millions of dollars going to people’s needs than to people’s cravings for sports...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I 100% agree with you. They could've used that money for better and for helping their country but they decided to waste it all on a dumb tradition that is temporary in their country. We all need to understand that its not worth it.

      Delete
  58. If they have the money to fund the construction of the Olympics, then the money should be put towards bigger problems such as the pollution. The health and welfare of the people is more important than funding the Olympics, the venue could simply be out somewhere else who can afford it and doesn't have major problems that could be fixed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I defiantly agree Rio has much bigger problems and should have not hosted the Olympics. Rio has bigger problems like pollution and the health of the city that they should put there money towards.

      Delete
  59. What I was curious about it why they did give the olympics to Rio and why Rio would apply for it. Rio for one has the zika virus and two doesn't have much money to spend considering all the water pollution. Rio spent 12 billion dollars on the olympics but has only spent 800 million on the water pollution. Entering Rio supposedly you can smell the water stench from the airport which sure says something. Also there is things like Christmas ornaments, milk cartons, cookies packaging, and clothes just sitting in the water. Rio should have never took on the Olympics and should have put that 12 billion towards the water.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I think that the Olympics is still not a bad idea to have them in Rio. The problem with venues after they are used would happen anywhere. However, the pollution is still a problem in Rio. They need to have a balance between the money spent cleaning up and the money spent on the Olympics. After all they should have cleaned up FOR the Olympics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. billy i totally agree that they should make sure that it cleaned up as well as making the village and i think that more people would of went to the games if they had made an effort to clean up a little and it would be not only be good to get more people to come to the games it would be good because rio just need to be cleaned up in general.

      Delete
  61. Rio is facing a big problem with their environment, that they pushed aside to host the Summer Olympics this year. Guanabara Bay and the area surrounding it is extremely polluted. When choosing to host the Olympics, and spend the money necessary to ¨ready¨ their stadiums, and other competing fields, they did not think about all of the other important uses the money would serve. It is estimated that Rio spent about $12 billion on the Olympics. This money instead, could have been used to clean up Guanabara Bay, and help those living near the Guanabara Bay Area be able to afford the proper quality. For countries that face problems similar to Rio, and Rio, it is not worth it to spend the resources it would take to host the Olympics. If the water is truly that polluted in Rio, it would not be the proper place to host the Olympics. Instead of having new countries host the Olympics each time, countries that have the proper resources and abilities to host should. In the video it shows that most of the structures built for hosting the Olympics, are scarcely used again. Hosting the Olympics can truly be detrimental to the surrounding environments.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I don't really understand why Rio would choose the olympics over taking care of the pollution that they have. They should use the money that they have to clean up the water at least. Since there are many diseases in the water and lots of trash, wouldn't this take top priority instead of helping some athletes perform? I am a little angered about what they choose to do and i'm sure many other people are outraged too. I feel as if countries shouldn't pay for the olympics if they really can't do so. I know they technically did have the money to spend but they should have used that money on the thing they should have, which is the pollution. Time Magazine said that they spent 800 million on cleaning the water but they should have spent some of the 12 billion they spent on the olympics on cleaning the water completely.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I don't think that Rio was fit to host the Olympic games. They have so many issues that they really just can't afford to spend billions on hosting the games. First off, the Zeeka virus is a major epidemic at the moment. With so many athletes and spectators coming from all over the world, the risk of making Zeeka a global issue is very high. Second, the pollution of their environment is unsuitable for the athletes to compete in, specifically the swimmers. The rivers are full of human waste and dangerous chemicals. According to research, if just three teaspoons of the water were consumed by the swimmers, their health could be at high risk. Lastly the economy is a huge issue. When Rio built the stadiums for the Olympics, they covered up all the poor areas of the city by building w

    ReplyDelete
  64. The Olympic Games is one of the most universal ways to get the whole population of Earth together to watch the best athletes compete. For two weeks, everyone around the world watches these nice, clean venues that athletes compete on in awe. The aftermath, however, no one really looks at. The amount of money spent on something that, after 14 days, means nothing, is crazy. If I were a country, I would avoid at all costs to get the Olympics held. Even before Rio this year, the waters weren’t in tip top shape, and there were many complaints about it. “For the past 30 years, we’ve invested very, very little money in it,” said Paulo Rosman, a professor of coastal engineering at the local university. People don’t realize how much get’s invested into it, because the countries get nothing in return. Sure, they get their two weeks of fame, but that’s about it for that country. No one talks about London anymore, do they? Our world needs to come with a better way to conserve money, so we can support the poor residential people and avoid them contaminating the water. There has to be a better solution.

    ReplyDelete
  65. After reading this article my outlook on the Olympics has changed. As a society we tend not to think about what happens after the dust settings when following a major event such as this one. It is widely know that Rio has high crime and poverty rates, and you would think that they would spend some of their money trying to fix those problems before diving into such a big event like the 2016 Olympics. And on top of that many times the venues used and created for the games are turned into giant places for trash to collect, graffiti and can even just be abandoned and forgotten about, which seems like a huge waste of money to me when you live in a country with problems like Brazil. But with that being said, there is no REAL solution to cutting costs when it comes to the Olympics. There is almost no way to be frugal when trying to Feed,house and creating a venue for all the athletes and spectators from different parts of the world to all fit into at one time.Not to mention that equipment and medical care for the participants is 100% necessary and is an expensive attribute that just couldn't be cut from the budget. Instead of Rio wasting their money on things they don't need, like hosting the Olympics, they should try to focus on the real issues that they have ahead, such as the Guanabara Bay Area, instead of wondering what scandal Ryan Lochte will start next and which male gymnast won the gold medal.

    ReplyDelete
  66. I think that the money spent on the Rio stadium was not put to good use because of how poor the majority of the population is. The 400 million dollars spent on constructing a new stadium could have helped out lots of those impoverished people. The reason the bay is so polluted is because of the problem on land, which is the people who have to dump their waste somewhere so they put it in the river. If Rio had garbage trucks going to those sectors of the city then they would eliminate the source of the waste then cleaning up becomes an easier and less costly job. Also I think that instead of taking down stadiums after the games the country that owns them should keep them for other games hosted in that country. That would save money and time spent building such massive things.

    ReplyDelete
  67. I think that the money spent on the Rio olympic village was not well spent i think that the should of been able to clean up the water a little more and the pure pollution of rio. And it's not just reo that has spent their money poorly. Most of the olypic villiges hae eaither been abaned or negledted in a secne of them just thoughuing money down the drain.like they make this huge place and then after a mouth its abaned and i mean i know that they make so much money from the games that they could do that and still be in the black but in terms of the envierment or the cominty it not good.and in that video it showes what the villiges turn into after a couple of year and it kind of sad.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I don't think the Olympics should've been in Rio. The empty venues would happen everywhere, but the pollution is horrible. The pollution was so bad that multiple athletes didn't even compete! They should've put more effort toward cleaning the bay where the water events were held. Instead of putting lots of money towards the Olympic games they should've invested more in to the cleaning process to make the environment better for their citizens.

    ReplyDelete