152

'All cost, no benefit': Victoria cancels 2026 Commonwealth Games (www.forbes.com.au)

submitted 1 year ago by TheTango@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 15 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] min0nim@aussie.zone 30 points 1 year ago

It’s an extraordinary move, but I think they’re spot on. It’s a huge amount of money to spend on a sporting even for a few weeks when Victoria is in a real cost-of-living crisis. There are much more pressing priorities for regional Victoria than a legacy of some upgraded sports venues.

[-] TinaGurner@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 year ago

Agreed. All these big sporting events should just focus on locations with existing sufficient infrastructure. All those underpaid workers who died for the World Cup in Qatar to happen…. For what?

[-] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

To be immediately forgotten by the climax.

Qatar could not possibly have gotten a greater blessing than that match completely obliterating any discussion or protest around the Cup that year. They got away with some truly unbelievable shit.

[-] TotallyNotADolphin@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

I think the idea of using these big sporting events to upgrade or build new facilities is a good one, however the current practice where the host nation/city sits on most/all the expenses and the organizer/owner of the event reeps the profit is completely turned on it's head.

There is enough money involved in these events amd organizations that they should foot more of (maybe most of) the bill to build the facilities and infrastructure, and the host covers some aspects as well as providing the permits and location itself.

Furthermore, some events such the Olympics have such ridiculous demands that cities/nations should start telling them to fuck off imo. One of the more obvious ones being the demand that IOC leaders require a direct private road accessible by limo between their hotel and the venues

[-] BNE 21 points 1 year ago

Here's hoping Queensland has the spine to say the same thing about the Olympics.

They want to bulldoze a 100 year old primary school so they can knock down a stadium we already have - to build a new one worth 2.7 billion in exactly the same place. Meanwhile, our rents are going crazy as locals get forced out of their support networks, there's rough sleepers being displaced and at times outright attacked by the states support workers, our education system is now decades underfunded and the health system isn't far behind.

We didn't ask for the Olympics. The campaign was a businessmans vanity project. It's insane to shoulder the burden of that frivolity right now.

[-] AnonymousLlama@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago

Good. Now's not the time to sink 3-7 billion dollars on a 12 day vanity project for the regions. The fact that every other states is also throwing their hands up and saying "not me" is probably a good indicator that it's the right move

[-] devious@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Offering an alternative and mostly unpopular view, there are lot of things that society should spend that may not always have a great financial return on investment but will contribute to the culture of society (sports, art, entertainment, history, etc).

That said I do think the Commonwealth Games is a massive cost sink during poor financial conditions and sports already gets a disproportionate amount of funding compared to the others so I don't think this is necessarily a bad move!

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Even if you deliberately target "blowing millions of dollars with no expectation of a return", there are still better things to spend the money on.

[-] chemicalprophet@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Sports!

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

You'll be good at them!

[-] bossito@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Big sports events are a mad circus, all cost, no benefit is the rule. It's extremely rare that a country/city benefits from a sports events, if ever. Sometimes people point out renovations done to cities that were useful, but those renovations could have been done without the excuse of the games. Building sports infrastructure with a single event in mind is prone to disaster, and don't mention all the corruption behind. It should be FIFA or the Olympics making the bids, not the cities/countries..

Big sports events are a huge pain for residents and taxpayers. And actually it didn't have to be that way, with sensible demands many cities in the world could easily host them without extra works and expenses.. they're a finantial disaster by design.

Hope others will learn from Victoria and take their bids back. I'm looking at you, Portugal (WC 2030).

[-] golamas1999@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I will be back up higher than before within the near future.

[-] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Nobody likes Dan, but he's spot on the money here.

[-] spez_@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Nobody likes him, but he recently got re-elected with an even larger swing towards him?

Something doesn't add up. Surely you mean the biased media doesn't like Dan?

load more comments

this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023

152 points (100.0% liked)

World News

39110 readers

2100 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.