2026 Commonwealth games

[beyond our ken]

The Scottish Government seems interested after the aussies pulled out,  it could be a multi-city effort with Glasgow as the hub with the facilities already in place for swimming, indoor velo andplaces like the Emorates and the Hydro.

I don't know about the main stadium though, Hampden might laready be geting a makeover for the world cup joint bid and they have been listed for the Europa League and other finals in 26-27

I feel sorry for Australia. they often compare themselves to the Spice Girls at time like these, everybody tries their best but Victoria always let the rest down

[exiledfan]

I think it would be a great shout. Proven experience of holding big events and give the hospitality trade a boost.

The atmosphere in Birmingham was great and would be even better here I think. 

[beyond our ken]

I don’t think Hampden would be ready in time so a temporary stadium would be needed

many existing stadium would need 2stands taken down to accommodate a track and temporary stands would need to be added

the way they adapted Hampden for the previous games seemed wrong with the temporary raised surface being fabricated in situ

there could be some great legacy facilities for the right setting

[Albanian Buddy]

Seems like the Aussies are not prepared to go into massive debt to host these events. 
Why should Scotland?

There are more important issues that could be addressed with the hundreds of £millions (possibly £billions) required. 
After all we need some new ferries, some government motorhomes and a Glasgow airport rail link. 
A few pot holes filled in will keep us all happy. 

 

[faraway saint]

1 hour ago, Albanian Buddy said:

Seems like the Aussies are not prepared to go into massive debt to host these events. 
Why should Scotland?

There are more important issues that could be addressed with the hundreds of £millions (possibly £billions) required. 
After all we need some new ferries, some government motorhomes and a Glasgow airport rail link. 
A few pot holes filled in will keep us all happy. 

 

While it would be a considerable outlay wouldn't this be recouped? 

[Slarti]

While it would be a considerable outlay wouldn't this be recouped? 

I've never understood this argument. While it may bring in more than it costs, it's mainly taxpayers' money that is going out and mainly private businesses in the localities that are raking it back in. It probably won't benefit the majority of individuals in the country at all. It's the same argument that's used for the royal family which, to me, suffers from the same problem.

I think, historically, the Commonwealth Games tends to be a loss maker, though could be wrong on that.

[faraway saint]

4 minutes ago, Slarti said:

I've never understood this argument. While it may bring in more than it costs, it's mainly taxpayers' money that is going out and mainly private businesses in the localities that are raking it back in. It probably won't benefit the majority of individuals in the country at all. It's the same argument that's used for the royal family which, to me, suffers from the same problem.

I think, historically, the Commonwealth Games tends to be a loss maker, though could be wrong on that.

 

While it is government money that provides the majority of the funding to say it's private businesses that "rake it back in" as if it's a bad thing these private businesses are therefore employing people and also provide new jobs. 

It also leaves facilities that, aye people mainly from that region, will benefit from, no bad thing getting people involved in physical activity. 

Obviously this won't be the majority of people in the country.  

This report shows the bigger picture..................https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/news/article/1263/birmingham_2022_contributes_870million_to_uk_economy#:~:text=Sports Minister Stuart Andrew said,future events in the region.

 

 

[Slarti]

While it is government money that provides the majority of the funding to say it's private businesses that "rake it back in" as if it's a bad thing these private businesses are therefore employing people and also provide new jobs. 
It also leaves facilities that, aye people mainly from that region, will benefit from, no bad thing getting people involved in physical activity. 
Obviously this won't be the majority of people in the country.  
This report shows the bigger picture..................https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/news/article/1263/birmingham_2022_contributes_870million_to_uk_economy#:~:text=Sports Minister Stuart Andrew said,future events in the region.
 
 

I wasn't saying it was a bad thing, just that those providing the funding (the taxpayers) do not get reimbursed, the money coming in, which may or may not be greater than the outlay, goes into the pockets of others. Saying it made a profit because it put more "into the economy" than it cost to host it is a bit disingenuous - IMO obviously.

[faraway saint]

1 minute ago, Slarti said:

13 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

While it is government money that provides the majority of the funding to say it's private businesses that "rake it back in" as if it's a bad thing these private businesses are therefore employing people and also provide new jobs. 
It also leaves facilities that, aye people mainly from that region, will benefit from, no bad thing getting people involved in physical activity. 
Obviously this won't be the majority of people in the country.  
This report shows the bigger picture..................https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/news/article/1263/birmingham_2022_contributes_870million_to_uk_economy#:~:text=Sports Minister Stuart Andrew said,future events in the region.
 
 

I wasn't saying it was a bad thing, just that those providing the funding (the taxpayers) do not get reimbursed, the money coming in, which may or may not be greater than the outlay, goes into the pockets of others. Saying it made a profit because it put more "into the economy" than it cost to host it is a bit disingenuous - IMO obviously.

SOME of the taxpayers will be "reimbursed". 

There are LOTS of things the government spend your money on that wont directly benefit you.

If that's your main point, you might want to sharpen your pencil and start writing to the government that you're upset. 

[Slarti]

SOME of the taxpayers will be "reimbursed". 
There are LOTS of things the government spend your money on that wont directly benefit you.
If that's your main point, you might want to sharpen your pencil and start writing to the government that you're upset. 

Maybe I'm not explaining this properly. Maybe it would be better doing it with questions?

You said

While it would be a considerable outlay wouldn't this be recouped? 

How is it "recouped" if it is "different people" who pocket the income?

[faraway saint]

1 minute ago, Slarti said:

 

Maybe I'm not explaining this properly. Maybe it would be better doing it with questions?

You said




How is it "recouped" if it is "different people" who pocket the income?

 

The city/area will have considerable financial gains, therefore the money will see its way back into the economy, I don't see why you don't understand this. 

 

 

[Slarti]

The city/area will have considerable financial gains, therefore the money will see its way back into the economy, I don't see why you don't understand this. 
 
 

I do, but that's not recouping the money.

[faraway saint]

1 minute ago, Slarti said:

4 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

The city/area will have considerable financial gains, therefore the money will see its way back into the economy, I don't see why you don't understand this. 
 
 

I do, but that's not recouping the money.

And here we are again.

You, as usual, are fixed on taking things literally, no ability, or willingness, to try to understand what was meant.

Gie an aspirin a said heid you would. 

[Slarti]

And here we are again.
You, as usual, are fixed on taking things literally, no ability, or willingness, to try to understand what was meant.
Gie an aspirin a said heid you would. 

It usually helps if people actually say what they mean.

The fact that a huge investment brings more money into a select area, sometimes to the detriment of other areas, is to me, not a good argument for investing that money - especially on what is essentially a vanity project.

[faraway saint]

1 minute ago, Slarti said:

It usually helps if people actually say what they mean.

The fact that a huge investment brings more money into a select area, sometimes to the detriment of other areas, is to me, not a good argument for investing that money - especially on what is essentially a vanity project.

[Slarti]

[emoji38]

Whatever.

[stlucifer]

4 minutes ago, Slarti said:

7 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Whatever.

Urinating in a tornado mate. He doesn't grasp reality too well.

[faraway saint]

3 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

Urinating in a tornado mate. He doesn't grasp reality too well.

Reality. 

Edited July 19, 2023 by faraway saint

[Slarti]

Urinating in a tornado mate. He doesn't grasp reality too well.

To be fair, like most folk on here, I probably agree with him more often than I disagree.

It's just that when we disagree it's usually because he, again like most folk on here, can't see that I'm right. [emoji16]

[faraway saint]

1 minute ago, Slarti said:

To be fair, like most folk on here, I probably agree with him more often than I disagree.

It's just that when we disagree it's usually because he, again like most folk on here, can't see that I'm right.

Wrong again but, I agree, I am usually right. 

Imagine pissing in a tornado, or would that be ok IF you were inside? 

A bit ambiguous eh? 

[Slarti]

Wrong again but, I agree, I am usually right. 
Imagine pissing in a tornado, or would that be ok IF you were inside? 
A bit ambiguous eh? [emoji38]

I've not got my glasses on, I thought he said tomato. [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

[faraway saint]

Just now, Slarti said:

I've not got my glasses on, I thought he said tomato.

This hurts.....................that's quite funny. 

[ALBIONSAINT]

I suppose you could always research the benefits from the 2014 games? Athletes village is now homes and a few facilities were built. Not sure that the games legacy came to much. 

[antrin]

2 hours ago, Slarti said:

2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

The city/area will have considerable financial gains, therefore the money will see its way back into the economy, I don't see why you don't understand this. 
 
 

I do, but that's not recouping the money.

It's also Beano and Dandy level of economic theory.

 

Why do you bother with him?

Edited July 19, 2023 by antrin

[Slarti]

It's also Beano and Dandy level of economic theory.
 
Why do you bother with him?

To be honest, a steady supply of cow pie is probably a better deal than we get from Westminster.