Hosting Olympic Games

Hosting Olympic Games

The Olympics is one of the most important events worldwide. Every two years professional athletes from all over the world face each other in different competitions. It’s a dream to win the games, and sing their national anthem. The Olympics are held in different countries. There are two passages presented, about pros and cons for the economy of hosting the Olympics. One from Igor Kresweski, CEO, The New World Group, want their town to have the opportunity to host the Olympic games. It will be the smartest decision and bring more economic opportunities to city, While Genevieve Dupont, Chief Economist, Bennett and Greene Investments believes that international sporting events of this magnitude might bring more problems than benefits. I think the second viewpoint against hosting Olympic is better supported evidence.

In the first passage, Igor only provides his personal opinion that hosting the Olympic games in his town would be a good idea to benefit the city and the people who live there. While he does a good job at expressing the good outcomes which hosting the Olympics could bring, he does not provide any solid proof that will be exactly what happens. He only uses one direct quotation from a fellow planner which says that previous cities who have hosted the games have "established themselves" by hosting the Olympics. He claims that the tourist dollars which may come in through the games will help benefit the city greatly.

On other hand in the second passage, Genevieve provides her opinion that hosting the Olympics in her town would not be a good idea. She also provides more direct citations and percent data from past cities who held the Olympic games. For example she point about “Bird’s Nest stadium build in Beijing at a cost of $480 million, plus $11 million a year since then to maintain”. She uses past evidence to back up why she believes her town should not host the Olympic games. The first passage only provides personal opinion, but does not consider the cost of actually hosting the Olympics. Genevieve thinks new buildings must be built. Any construction jobs available are only temporary and the benefit is short lived. She also points out that other economists have stated that the cost of hosting the Olympics is usually more than expected.

The first passage mentions that hosting the Olympics will bring more tourism in to the city. After all, the second passage uses data from the Beijing games which shows tourism only increased by two percent after the games were over. The second passage also suggests that extra money will be needed in order to provide security not only for tourists, but also for the athletes. She states that “hosting a large international sporting event is a losing proposition, and our city leaders should nip this idea in the bud”.

Finally after comparing two bodies of evidence I still believe the best supported

...