$50,000 to $100,000 for a celebration of games happening in Vancouver?

Couldn't that money be spent on say, patching some roads instead? I'd celebrate not needing a wheel alignment every 3 months, wouldn't you?

I know Campbell and his clowns want to create the illusion that all of BC is involved, but watching a torch go through town matters as much toward the games as someone important flying over Prince George. Maybe we should celebrate every time a plane flies overhead. It might be the pope on board.

The games are going to be a huge black eye for BC, and we'll be paying for this black eye on the installment plan for the rest of our lives.

I hope the Polish team all wear "Don't taze me, Bro" shirts when they arrive.

"Best place on earth" my aching ass.

“We will not be responsible for any of those costs” says the Mayor. What about the 50 to 100,000 dollars? Kinsley don't let the door hit your butt on the out.

They never seem to quit wanting to suck PG into the Olympic flame. When will we learn.?

Cheers

Hey its very fitting I just noticed its at half mast

Cheers

See, we did get something out of these games after all!

I guess I'd better hurry and write this before opinion250 moves this story off the main page where it won't get any attention.

Whenever there is a topic of interest with good comments in it, opinion250 always seem to make a duplicate story with a minor variation right above it on the main page. Either that, or they blanket the main page with non stories to march the articles with interesting comments off the front.

Anyway, in the spirit of greed, er free enterprise, why not instead of stealing $50,000 or $100,000 of our money, (maybe more, you know how hard it is for anything involving government money to stay on budget), why not make it a private event and charge tickets to it. Oh wait, there just aren't enough suckers willing to pay and see. A good "free," "private," enterprise knows that the public exists to subsidize losses, while they privatize profits.

What this party they're proposing would amount to, is a bunch of people shivering in the cold with hot chocolate and a slice of sheet cake cheering as the torch goes goes by (from a very safe distance), while our elected "representatives" would get to chow down caviar, drink top shelf booze, and put up a few of their out of town friends in the nicest hotels in town during the wrap-up party.

Best place on earth my aching ass.

I suppose if the Games were held in Prince George all the Lower Mainlanders would show as much negativity as some in the North are showing here with their comments?

What did you do when the Games took place in Montreal or Calgary? That must have been an even bigger bummer!

Let's get real.

I'll tell you what I did for the Calgary and Montreal games, diplomat.

I didn't care, because I couldn't afford to see any of the venues, I wished to god CBC would air something other than the winter games because we didn't have cable.

And this raises a very good point. The games in Vancouver are as far removed from us in Northern BC as they were in Montreal or Calgary, and are even less affordable.

The difference now of course, is everyone in BC has to pay for the games and are expected to take pride in something which will only benefit the lower mainland. How many years do you think it will take to pay this off?

I know China didn't come out ahead from the 2008 Olympics, they lost a lot of money. At least China doesn't have a national debt to worry about like we do, though.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1819373,00.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/industryNews/idUSTRE4997ZJ20081010


The 2010 games are not like Expo 86, where schools were bringing classes of students from rural BC down to see it. Few can afford to go down and see anything. Tickets to watch a single hockey game cost thousands.

I don't know anyone in rural BC making the trip to Vancouver for 2010.

If all of BC were prosperous I could understand spending money on things like this, but the only thing keeping the lower mainland prosperous was the artificial housing bubble. The only part of BC which is honestly prosperous is the northeast, due to oil and gas.

Here are some housing related links to excite you. Don't thank me, just doing my part as a bummer.

http://www.west-kelowna.ca/

http://www.greaterfool.ca/

http://vancouvercondo.info/

I had a wonderful time watching the Montreal and Calgary Games on television! (As a taxpayer I funded part of those with my taxes, like all other Canadian taxpayers). I did the same thing when the other Olympics were on in Berlin, Athens, etc. I never had a chance to attend in person any hockey game of the Canucks or the Montreal Canadiens! Still, I am a Canuck fan thanks to that excellent invention called TV!

Do I feel disadvantaged? No. I am paying with my taxes a small part of the 2010 Games as well! Does it bother me? Not too much. I wasn't in favour of having them here in B.C. so soon after we just emerged from a decade of B.C. sliding into have-not stattus.

The decision was made. Since all the griping in the world won't change that fact I am just going to relax and watch as a long distance spectator.

May it all go well!

Oh, dont you see? this is not Mayor Kinsleys money. It makes him look good on the way out.
Im talking about the flag donation.Paid for by the people of PG.
Maybe there will be a cost over-run.

I wonder if I walk around town with fire on a stick would I be eligible for $100,000.00? More than likely I would be thrown in the loonie bin, where most of these Olympic supporters should be.

"If all of BC were prosperous I could understand spending money on things like this, but the only thing keeping the lower mainland prosperous was the artificial housing bubble. The only part of BC which is honestly prosperous is the northeast, due to oil and gas."

An interesting take on things, but very dangerous.

Both can be considered as bubbles, in my opinion, and both are based on supply and demand.

The housing demand can be considered to be based on people's demand for larger and newer housing and even a perceived investment. Supplying that demand has meant that those supplying the labour and materials to satisfy it have made money when it was made on the backs of the people creating the bubble. Those who supplied it, have received payment and were able to work and buy their lifestyles. Those who own the houses have seen their investments plummet.

The same with oil and gas. High demand to transport and manufacture the materials and to heat and cool the larger, unecessary, houses. On top of that, none of that money is going to improve access to more sustainable energy - solar, wind, geothermal, hydro, tidal, etc. Again, it is a bubble economy which will burst when oil and gas are depleted, or the speculative prices drop, or the demand begns to drop. Look at what is happening to the currently highly questionable process of extracting oil from tar sands now that the price of oil has dropped. The notion of prospering "honestly" is only a matter of time in both cases.

Once we all have a much better understanding of what constitutes "prosperity" and what "bubbles" are, we will be far better off.

People here are so parochial or insular. The torch is going right accross Canada, folks. It will cost $30 million for that. $20 million of that is paid through fed taxes.

Why celebrate anything? An absolutely useless endeavour of mankind!

Celebration must be suppressed at all costs!

Spectator sports must be suppressed at all costs!!

Money down the drain for sure!!

-----------------

Then there is Chris O'Connor, the retiring mayor of Lytton, who said Friday he was "aggrieved" to hear the torch would not pass through his town, nor would it be travelling down the historic Fraser Canyon section of Highway 1.

It's not insular or parochial to say something which benefits the very few at the expense of the many is not equitable.

When the "many" speak out against something, the "few" should listen, but then there aren't any real avenues of discourse outside of the internet for the 2010 games.

I love a good celebration, and I like watching a good sports game. The difference is I don't expect everyone to pay for for it whether they go or not.

I especially don't expect everyone to be forced into paying private enterprise for something recreational which they will not attend.

Remember what I said earlier about socializing losses and privatizing profits? This is EXACTLY what the 2010 games embody. The BC government is going into debt for the 2010 games. If BC or Canada did not have debt, had no provincial sales tax and the lowest income tax in Canada, I'd be more inclined to support it. However, BC has a national reputation as standing for, "Bring Cash."

Borrowing money for games and celebration is myopic, reckless and crooked. It's not their money though, so what do they care.

As for comparing oil and gas to the housing bubble, you are somewhat correct in that there has been an oil and gas bubble. The northeast was prosperous before this bubble began, and are not getting oil from tar sands. Also consider, the housing boom didn't make BC mills flourish like you would expect, they barely kept afloat.

BC, "Best place on earth" my aching ass.

Something which benefits the very few at the expense of the very many?

You mean something like access for the handicapped? 10% additional width roads for 0.1% of the population that rides bicycles? Tennis Courts for 0.05% of the population?

Our societal system is largely based on giving bnefits for the few by the many paying for it. There are few of us who do not have some sort of minority interests which we would not be able to accomplish if we had to pay for them ourselves.

The entire insurance system is based on that very principle. I have paid into a variety of insurances for decades without collecting.

The collective in society takes care of the individual components of society. It is the very essence of a social system. You are questioning the very essence of that system.

"I love a good celebration, and I like watching a good sports game. The difference is I don't expect everyone to pay for for it whether they go or not."

So, you watch it on TV? Who pays for it on TV? Unless you pay for access on a commercial free sports channel, the game is paid for by commercials. Whoever buys those products pays for the marketing dollars, even though they might not watch sports on TV.

You watch the games by buying a ticket to the local hockey club playing in an arena paid for by taxpayers and thus partially subsidized by them? Double and triple the cost of the tickets and you are actually paying the true cost of that game taking place for the few watching.

Once one starts thinking through objectively who pays for what, it becomes overwhelming to keep an accurate account.

You're comparing insurance, being handicapped and riding a bike with a sporting event? Are you on crack?

The games don't do anything for the public good, they're purely recreational.

If you could only get insurance in the lower mainland, could only park in a handicapped spot in the lower mainland, or ride a bike in a lower mainland, or play Tennis in the lower mainland, then your comparison would make sense and be accurate, this is not the case.

When you're forced to pay into something without any possible return on that investment, that's taxation without representation. Americans didn't like paying money for the shared "good" of being part of the British empire.

Maybe you think paying increased taxes for the rest of your life is justified in return for a couple weeks of enjoyable TV, I do not. If the games were held somewhere else you would still get to watch it on TV.

As for who pays for it on TV, it's a shared cost. I pay for my TV, my subscription, the electricity to operate it, the home in which it resides, etc...

It's also not coming out of my tax dollars, with the exception of the CBC, who I would be paying taxes toward with or without the games, and I am not seeing my tax burden increase drastically because of the games. I also do not have to be in the lower mainland to watch the CBC.

I can't believe I need to explain this.

"Duh. Olympic games that only benefit the lower mainland are the same as every other public service which you can access anywhere in BC. I can watch it on TV, that makes it okay. Me Gus, me smart."

Nejab ... we have hit a stalemate .....

Best option is to agree to disagree ... I am also different than you in that I do feel that I can believe that I do have to explain it to you. It is not surprising.

In addition, you resort to ad hominem responses instead of arguing the point. You may not realize it but writing: “You're comparing insurance, being handicapped and riding a bike with a sporting event? Are you on crack?” is an ad hominem response.

---------------

You suggest recreation is not for the public good ..... that is an opinion and many others do not share.

-------------

You suggest that this is a regional issue between the lower mainland and the rest of the province ...... that is an opinion I do not share.

------------------

You suggest that if one pays into something without any return on investment, it is taxation without representiation ..... that is an opinion I do not share.

-------------------

Those are all reasonable opinions which I would happily discuss with you one at a time. As for the rest, they are too absurd to even give them any time.

Nejeb ma =slovak for "don't f*ck with me", eh???

Very interesting handle!!

http://www.toy17s.com/insults.php?Insults=Slovak%20Insults

Gus,

I was not using ad hominem as an answer, I used it as a form of incredulity, to accent my response, much as they do in parliament. Perhaps you feel you are too good to engage in such banter, so be it.

When you say something incredible and illogical, you should not be surprised when you get called on it. I could write many paragraphs detailing your flawed reasoning, or I can just ask if you're on crack, which is a nice summary.

Your answers are mere opinions without substance, as you back away from your losing point of view and call a stalemate.

It's not a stalemate, because I am right, and you are wrong.

The fact of the 2010 games is nobody outside the lower mainland were asked if we want it. Nobody outside the lower mainland is reaping any benefit from tourism dollars, and aside from people dressing up as ill conceived game mascots touring BC and watching a torch go through town, BC has no involvement outside of the lower mainland, yet we are all paying for huge infrastructure upgrades, security, parties, etc... out of our tax dollars.

The only ones who should pay for the 2010 games ought to be people in the lower mainland.

I don't see Vancouver paying for Billy Barker Days, the WL Stampede, Riverboat Days, Fall Fairs, etc...

By the way, when you consider the $50,000 to $100,000 budget for a one day party in Prince George.... the ENTIRE Billy Barker Days budget for 2008 was just over $158,000.

http://billybarkerdays.netbistro.com/sponsors.htm

The official description of the 2010 Olympic Winter Games goes like this:

"The 2010 Winter Olympics will be the third Olympics hosted by Canada, and the first by the province of British Columbia. Previously, Canada was home to the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal and the 1988 Winter Olympics in Calgary."

Please take notice of the fact that CANADA is the official HOST!

The games take place in B.C. and VANOC does all the organizing etc.

Still, the host country is CANADA!

The Federal Government shares the funding with Canadian taxpayers' money from Coast to Coast to Coast!

May the Games be a success to make Canada proud!

Over and out.

You chose a handle which sums up the kind of individual you appear to be Nm.

You might realize that many things can be said in Parliament which cannot be said outside the House, so that is not a good guideline to use outside of parliament.

Other than that, you are right on the money Nm, as I have now discovered. I will make sure to consult you in the future should I falter and not understand the finer points of an issue.

Dipomat, thank you for setting the context of the Olympics straight. Some people simply do not understand such higher ideals and the responsibilities that go with being a member nation of a world social system which has traditions to uphold.

Some people simply need their bitchin' time. I am glad that the Olympics give them the opportunity to blow off steam relatively harmlessly rather than vandalizing public property.

Gus,

Look up.

Watch for it.

Ooh! Too slow, it zoomed right by. Sorry man, maybe next time...

Diplomat, it's the side projects in infrastucture which are going to bankrupt BC, not just the shared costs between the federal government. We don't even know what the final cost will be to BC taxpayers, we've just turned over a blank cheque to Campbell and his merry band of idiots to issue contracts to whoever they choose under any criteria they choose.

As part of my new job title as Bummer, please direct your attention here:

http://2010watch.com/

How much do you think the gateway project alone is going to cost BC taxpayers?

The international exposure that Canada/B.C./Vancouver/Whistler are going to get out of the hosting of the Winter Olympics will not only happen during the Games but for many years following! People of all walks of life are going to come to, hear about, see on TV and learn about us! It's not only about business but about friendship and culture and often the forging of life long lasting connections.

If there were no benefits and only possible financial downsides, WHY are countries lining up and competing for the privilege of hosting Winter or Summer Games?

Are they all idiotic, as you are perhaps insinuating?

The Games are NOT going to bankrupt B.C., relax! The definition of bankruptcy is that your obligations exceed the value of your assets! What is the value of the province of B.C. calculated in trillions of dollars?

"How much do you think the gateway project alone is going to cost BC taxpayers?"

I presume you are complaining about the seniors housing project on 20th? Or are you thinking about the container port and related infrastructure to the Port of Prince Rupert?

Seniors housing projects are being completed by *Campbell and his merry band of idiots* in many different cities in B.C. in contrast to the non-idiotic band during the nineties! Some are on budget, others under budget, some may come in slightly over budget! Relax, man!

How much will the Canadian participation in the war on Afghanistan have cost by the time everybody faces reality and comes home?

Already the admitted costs are about 18 to 20 thousand millions.

I'd rather see the money used over here, to support seniors housing and yes, even some Games!

Always look at the brighter side of life, Nm!

Have a great week!

Diplomat. Too many gateways. The problem with today's use of catch phrases or words. Gateway is one of them.

The above reference is likely the GVRD Gateway project which will cost several BILLION C$. It is a transportation system improvement project and includes several bridges components which will be tolled since they will be alternate, though shorter and faster routes for getting from A to B.

It is the kind of project which, when first looked at, makes one wonder whether there is some merit to pushing for some decentralization of the population in the province. It is the double edged sword of improving the transportation system which in turn makes it more livable for the residents, thus drawing more residents and causing further need for improving transportation and, more importantly perhaps, losing unquestionably some of the best agricultural land in the province.

The money comes from the feds, the province and the GVRD. It is the kind of money large cities all over the world have been spending on moving people and goods in higher density regions.

I would not worry about it too much from the local taxpayers' point of view. PG has less 2% or so of the population of the province while the GVRD and Fraser valley has more than 50% of the population.

http://www.gatewayprogram.bc.ca

Thanks, Gus, for the info! Last time I drove down to Vancouver I was stuck in a huge traffic jam when leaving across the Port Mann Bridge. Move ten feet, stop. Move another ten feet, stop....etc. For close to an hour.

More jams on several other occasions in the city itself. At least here in PG people are polite enough to let one change lanes when one finds himself (as an out-of-towner) in the wrong lane! I tried everything in Vancouver until my turn signal almost went up in smoke and finally a guy with Washington State license plates allowed me to switch just before I would have been forced to take a wrong exit!

Vancouver drivers are frustrated, angry and uptight - can one blame them?

If they don't build anything it's a problem. Apparently when they do build something it is a problem as well! Since the population and the traffic are growing continuously something must be done about the traffic situation.

When will people give up their private chariots and submit to mass transit? When gas is 3 or 4 bucks a liter, perhaps.

How much additional pollution is caused by traffic jams? Not to mention the lost time that people spend needlessly in their idling vehicles.

Draconian measures are undemocratic, so I guess there really is no other way. It's a bummer.