Job Discussion Forums

small_human · Joined: 07 May 2004 Posts: 24 Location: World

Anthyp, I see your point. I realise that pouring money into 'overseas aid' instead of the Olympics is easier to suggest than to carry out. I understand that there are many pitfalls and complications when large amounts of money get transferred overseas in the name of a charity or cause of some kind...

But at the risk of making another simplistic statement, I still think the money could be better spent on just about ANYTHING other than the Olympics.

It's true that the hosting cities undergo visible changes and improvement under the 'beautifying projects', but do these cities really need it? A city that can afford to host the Olympics is probably doing well enough already.

Sorry to be a spoil sport (ho ho) but I think the amount of hype and funding that go into the Games is out of proportion to the inspirational benefits people may recieve from seeing an athlete run fast or jump high.

But hey, maybe I'm just bitter because I sucked at sport in school

Wink

anthyp · Joined: 16 Apr 2004 Posts: 1320 Location: Chicago, IL USA

Fair enough, small human. But I think the Games can have a huge impact on the host city - and the host country, and everybody who participates in some way ...

I agree that the prospect of athletes running around and jumping can be difficult to get excited over sometimes - but it can't be gloom and doom all the time, can it? Maybe we kind of need this huge, exciting, distraction. Cripes I'm getting sick of Iraq and all these disasters.

In other news, China won the first gold medal of the Games! Chinese shooter Du Li, age 22, took the gold by besting the Russians and Czechs (take that, ex - comrades!).

By the way, here is the real link to tracking your country's medal count:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/olympics/2004/medaltracker/medalTrackerByTotal.html

Sorry about the mess - up before!

The Red Baron · Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Posts: 183

.........and Australians have won the first swimming medals.......
The great thing about the Olympics are the continual surprises....someone, out of nowhere, will beat the best and famous....and that's great!!

senor boogie woogie · Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2004 2:52 pm Post subject:

Hola!

I wanted to watch the Olympics opening ceremony, but it was at 1:45 AM on a Friday nite/Saturday morning and I was drinking Hong Pu Tao Jiu with the Ambassador of Iceland. As the athletes were walking proudly in Athens, we were in a third rate bar drinking to the point of exhustion. I will still be here in China in four years, unless I die or I get kicked out of the country, maybe the same time.

I like the gymnastics. Seeing small muscular people twirl and do things with their bodies, the perverts like it because the girls are about 14 years old. people who shave their body hair off and try ntop swim like a sturgeon going to a whorehouse (swimming), target practice (Chinese will excel, since they shoot people in the head daily), plus other pissant events that will threaten to put to sleep even the most ardent speed freak.

Beijing is going to be a hellhole full of Commies, opportunists, Euro-trash and freaks. That is what the Olympics is, by the way, a political event of the absurd. Communism with Nike shoes on. Since Chinese are money loving freaks, they ought to cash in on this pitiful spectical.

Senor

thelmadatter · Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2004 7:35 pm Post subject: olympics

Personally, I love the Olympics. I think its a great way for people/countries to exercise their competitive tendencies without going to war or economically exploting each other. I also really loved the opening ceremony as well, with the creativity in dress (tho I have mixed feelings about the US choice of attire - it could have been worse). When did this start? I admit I didnt see much of the Sydney games 4 years ago.

It was also a lot of fun to watch Friday's ceremonies at work (started at 11am Mexico time) and cheering for the 11 countries that are represented in my department.

However I have one question. Who decides who competes as a "country"? I was really surprised to see Puerto Rico and Guam competing as separate entities.

moonraven · Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094

"...I think its a great way for people/countries to exercise their competitive tendencies without going to war or economically exploting each other..."

"...I was really surprised to see Puerto Rico and Guam competing as separate entities..."

Anyone else see something wrong with this?

Apparently "The Colonies" gained in war or which are being economically exploted (sic) should not be allowed to express their competitive tendencies....

The Red Baron · Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Posts: 183

Speaking of Puerto Rico................

thelmadatter · Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 2:23 pm Post subject: ah

Ah MR -- I know I can always count on you to try to paint me evil...

What determines a "country" to be represented in the games? and who decides this? Last I checked, people from Guam and Puerto Rico have US citizenship and I bet all those athletes carry US passports. If they can compete as countries - why doesnt Quebec? why not members of the various Native American nations in the US (who supposedly have a certain amount of sovereignty in theory)?

I think these are legitimate questions.

moonraven · Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094

Why ask me? Just because I am from the Iroquois Nation doesn't mean I am going to enter the Archery competition....

thelmadatter · Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:09 pm Post subject: red herring

I that that idiotic response to mean that you have no intelligent answer for me.

moonraven · Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094

Despite your incoherent--that that?--response, apparently I am to assume that my intelligence is too subtle for you. In words of mostly one syllable: I don't think it's up to you, or the US for that matter, to decide who competes in the Olympics.

Puerto Rico has a very active movement to become independent of the US, and I personally applaud their decision to compete as a country, despite US maneuvers to restrict them to the status of a colony. You seem to be identifying yourself with the US' self-promoting role of "world policeman", which is a position offensive to some folks on this forum, including me.

blue jay · Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 10:05 pm Post subject:

thelmadatter · Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 8:20 pm Post subject: independence movement

Thanks Blue Jay for responding to my questions. While you define the status of places like Quebec - my point is that if "country" means a cultually defined group living in a place. Quebec should also participate independently.

Yes Puerto Rico has had an independence movement for some time but that does not make it independent or does that make it a country. In fact, PR voted at least once that I remember whether to go independent become a state or "none of the above" in 1988 http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa031698.htm "None of the above" won with over 50% of the vote. Add in those who voted to become a state and you have quite a majority who prefer to remain a part of the US. Hardly a colony.

The thing is - does anyone have the right to be a citizen only when it suits them? Polls after the 1988 vote indicated that the reason to remain part of the US was economics. So does this mean that Puerto Ricans have the right to be "Americans" when they want something but "Puerto Ricans" otherwise?

Blue Jay - I suspect that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) determines who participates as a country and who doesn't and politics is all in that. My guess is that the US is too scared of looking racist if they insist on territorial integrety.

Personally, if PR wants to be a separate country - great! Give them a party and wish them the best. But either you are part of a country or you arent

blue jay · Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 8:36 pm Post subject:

Lynn · Joined: 28 Jan 2003 Posts: 696 Location: in between