Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Do We Really Need Two Separate 'heroes' Victory Celebrations?
113 Answers
http://
Hasn't enough money been thrown at this two week event already?
£347m of lottery money has been spent on the event and they say that each medal that has been won cost £5.5m of public spending.
Most of these minority interest events create attention for only 2 weeks every 4 years how many of us rush out every week to watch little pole vaulting for example?
Hasn't enough money been thrown at this two week event already?
£347m of lottery money has been spent on the event and they say that each medal that has been won cost £5.5m of public spending.
Most of these minority interest events create attention for only 2 weeks every 4 years how many of us rush out every week to watch little pole vaulting for example?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Gromit
/// AOG,
Debate.org is an American site. The votes cast are from anybody in the world, not British voters. ///
How do you know that British voters have not contributed to the poll?
Beside with the USA coming tops, and this poll being conducted on an American site, don't you think that the outcome would have been more focused the other way round?
/// AOG,
Debate.org is an American site. The votes cast are from anybody in the world, not British voters. ///
How do you know that British voters have not contributed to the poll?
Beside with the USA coming tops, and this poll being conducted on an American site, don't you think that the outcome would have been more focused the other way round?
Gromit, I wouldn't call it a vanity project - if it is, it seems to appeal to the vanity of many happy Brits - but you're right, East End regeneraton was a big driver of the project (and had been by pursued by Heseltine under the Tories). Generally, it seems to be working; I was walking round Stratford High St and the games site this week, and it all seems to be booming. Whether the infrastructure is enough to cope with the swelling population, I don't know.
Gromit
/// but incorrect is saying lottery money should be used to mask the damage of the cuts. ///
Why not if the country is short of money why not use monies gained from a National Lottery to fund these shortfalls?
Perhaps you would be more in agreement to it being taken from the millions we spend on overseas aid?
Come to think of it, I know that I would.
/// but incorrect is saying lottery money should be used to mask the damage of the cuts. ///
Why not if the country is short of money why not use monies gained from a National Lottery to fund these shortfalls?
Perhaps you would be more in agreement to it being taken from the millions we spend on overseas aid?
Come to think of it, I know that I would.
“It is a good thing to fund, for the nations health and well being.”
What, like getting people to slob out on the sofa watching underwater mixed doubles showjumping for 18 hours a day, you mean? A similar “legacy” from the London Games (which did indeed cost the taxpayer – particularly the London variety – dearly) was forecast. Recent reports suggest it hasn’t happened.
I’m surprised Mrs May was able to reach such an important decision without a public enquiry, a Royal commission, a select committee report followed by a judicial review. After all she has not been able to conclude far less important matters, such as Hinckley Point power station, the third London runway and the date of Brexit thusfar.
There’s nothing wrong with using lottery money to fund local council projects. Anything important should be left to national government (and Parliament should insist on decisions being made, not shelved) and local government should stick to what it does best – arranging for the dustbins to be emptied (which in many areas it seems somewhat incapable of doing without a fuss). Anything in between which is unnecessary but nice to have can be funded by voluntary contributions – such as the Lottery – rather than cash being appropriated compulsorily.
Personally I don't care how many "victory parades" they have for our so-called "heroes" so long as none of them are near me or anywhere I might want to go.
What, like getting people to slob out on the sofa watching underwater mixed doubles showjumping for 18 hours a day, you mean? A similar “legacy” from the London Games (which did indeed cost the taxpayer – particularly the London variety – dearly) was forecast. Recent reports suggest it hasn’t happened.
I’m surprised Mrs May was able to reach such an important decision without a public enquiry, a Royal commission, a select committee report followed by a judicial review. After all she has not been able to conclude far less important matters, such as Hinckley Point power station, the third London runway and the date of Brexit thusfar.
There’s nothing wrong with using lottery money to fund local council projects. Anything important should be left to national government (and Parliament should insist on decisions being made, not shelved) and local government should stick to what it does best – arranging for the dustbins to be emptied (which in many areas it seems somewhat incapable of doing without a fuss). Anything in between which is unnecessary but nice to have can be funded by voluntary contributions – such as the Lottery – rather than cash being appropriated compulsorily.
Personally I don't care how many "victory parades" they have for our so-called "heroes" so long as none of them are near me or anywhere I might want to go.
That figure of £5.5million per medal is wrong.
We have won 60 medals, but the funding is actually £274million, not the £347million that is quoted in the article.
The figure of £347million includes the Paralympics, which have not taken place yet. So each medal 'costs' around £4.6million.
But that's moot, because the Olympics doesn't exist in a bubble. We need to take into account all the jobs and services which revolve around the games.
Then there's the unquantifiable value of national pride when our team does well.
We have won 60 medals, but the funding is actually £274million, not the £347million that is quoted in the article.
The figure of £347million includes the Paralympics, which have not taken place yet. So each medal 'costs' around £4.6million.
But that's moot, because the Olympics doesn't exist in a bubble. We need to take into account all the jobs and services which revolve around the games.
Then there's the unquantifiable value of national pride when our team does well.
Prudie
/// The rowers are toffs argument falls apart because, as in USA, good rowers can get into Oxbridge because they are good rowers, whatever their background. ///
Really? It seems that no matter how old a person is, one can learn something each day.
But I wonder how many of these not so academically clever, but excellent rowers come from the Bronx?
/// The rowers are toffs argument falls apart because, as in USA, good rowers can get into Oxbridge because they are good rowers, whatever their background. ///
Really? It seems that no matter how old a person is, one can learn something each day.
But I wonder how many of these not so academically clever, but excellent rowers come from the Bronx?
I would wish to take issue with the vastly overused, and increasingly redundant term 'hero' in this context.
These are athletes, professional now, or probably soon to be so who are going to see their acknowledged hard work and skill parlayed into eight-figure sponsorship deals.
They are not, by any standard understanding of the term - 'heroes'.
These are athletes, professional now, or probably soon to be so who are going to see their acknowledged hard work and skill parlayed into eight-figure sponsorship deals.
They are not, by any standard understanding of the term - 'heroes'.
No problem with as many parades as is required for people to show their appreciation of the effort these athletes have put in to produce the results we have achieved. Good to see the age old twaddle that sport is for the privileged is alive and well. Come to East London, see the canoeing, kayaking, athletic facilities, (all in place before 2012) being used to the full. Plus the post 2012 facilities still in full use. As for another chestnut that the Olympics are a waste of money - look at the regeneration of London's Olympic site, fantastic area for everyone to enjoy.
This is exactly what lottery funding is for, sport, culture and the arts. Love to know what AOG's 'million other uses' for lottery funds are.
Stop the moaning and appreciate the (mostly) youth of today proving there's more to life than consoles, smart phones and junk food. Most of all appreciate the effort and sacrifices these athletes make in pursuing their chosen field of endeavour and setting an excellent example for others to follow.
This is exactly what lottery funding is for, sport, culture and the arts. Love to know what AOG's 'million other uses' for lottery funds are.
Stop the moaning and appreciate the (mostly) youth of today proving there's more to life than consoles, smart phones and junk food. Most of all appreciate the effort and sacrifices these athletes make in pursuing their chosen field of endeavour and setting an excellent example for others to follow.
Sorry, I’ve just spotted the “rowing for toffs” theme.
I always jump to the defence of rowing because it was a sport I (very much not a toff) participated in at school. There’s a lot more to rowing than the Varsity Boat Race. Youngsters can join a rowing club and will have to spend probably less than they spend on mobile phone bills and MacDonald’s hamburgers. You obviously have to be within striking distance of a river but other than that there are no restrictions. You don’t have to attend a top university or even any university at all
My school had a boathouse on the Thames. My father was a painter and decorator and my mother a wages clerk. There were no toffs in my family. Mind you, I did attend a direct grant grammar school which was unencumbered by local authority interference. But that, as they say, is another argument.
I always jump to the defence of rowing because it was a sport I (very much not a toff) participated in at school. There’s a lot more to rowing than the Varsity Boat Race. Youngsters can join a rowing club and will have to spend probably less than they spend on mobile phone bills and MacDonald’s hamburgers. You obviously have to be within striking distance of a river but other than that there are no restrictions. You don’t have to attend a top university or even any university at all
My school had a boathouse on the Thames. My father was a painter and decorator and my mother a wages clerk. There were no toffs in my family. Mind you, I did attend a direct grant grammar school which was unencumbered by local authority interference. But that, as they say, is another argument.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.