RIOOOOOOO.. :applause:

Congratulations to Rio! Yes, I wanted to see chicago get it. But my hat is off to Rio which is a beatutiful city. I only have two problems which I am sure will be handled.

!.) You guys need to start building more Hotels ASAP for the games because there are simply not enough rooms to handle it. Which I am sure i is already in the works. Could threre a boom in hotel skyscrapers in Rios future over the next 6 years? What do you think guys?

2.) Please don't take this the wrong way. I mean this with all due respect. The booing of non Brazilian athletes has to stop! You can not have a repeat of the Pan Am Games! Brazilians have a lot of class so lets show some when your team is competing against other countries.

Again Congratulations and good luck to Rio!

1- Well, that's probably going to happen, Rio is a touristic city, and after the World Cup and Olympics the intention is to strenghten tourism, so well, if everything goes right there will be public enough for new hotels. And the area of Barra da Tijuca (which will host great part of the games) is an area with great potential for new hotels

2- I agree it's a big problem, I'm very ashamed to see people booing athletes. I hope our goverment will make campaigns on how to behaviour well, just like China did.

OLD
FIFA WC 1994 = USA!! 2years ago Olympic 1996 = Atlanta!!
So relax!! :okay:

NEW
FIFA WC 2014 = BRAZIL next 2years Olympic 2016 = RIO!!
So Congtralations!! :banana::applause::nocrook:


I'm very happy...!! :banana:

Future
FIFA WC 2026 = CHINA next 2years Olympic 2028= Shanghai or Tianjin or Chongqing or Guangzhou, "maybe" by my dream!!
Cheers...!! :cheers1: ....... :dunno:

2.) Please don't take this the wrong way. I mean this with all due respect. The booing of non Brazilian athletes has to stop! You can not have a repeat of the Pan Am Games! Brazilians have a lot of class so lets show some when your team is competing against other countries.


I agree, Brazilian spectators may have to learn to channel their exuberance so that hissing and booing will not lead to an ugly black mark on them. Perhaps some public ad campaigns on proper behavior from fans could be required. International competition is not your domestic football league where hissing and booing the opponents is proper form.

Congratulation RIO........Wonderful city

but they are dominated by their more powerful latin neighbors...

French Guiana?? I don't think so !! Take a look at the immigration rates coming from its "so powerfull latin neighbors" ! :lol:

Anyway a part of France can't be in Latin America !
The French Guiana (part of European Union :D) is in South America, which is a sub-divison of the continent !



BTW according your map (which has nothing to do with political divisions or uses), Europe and Asia are the same continent :ohno: !

New people can stop voting for Rio in the poll. There is nothing cool about voting for who you know already won. :lol:

http://www.clicrbs.com.br/rbs/image/7045875.jpg

http://www.rio2016.org.br/files/galeria/Lumo%20Rio2016_Venue_21_1.jpg

MARACANÃ STADIUM - CAPACITY: 90 thousand PEOPLE

RIO 2006: Opening Ceremony and closing of the Games.
FOOTBALL

COPA 2014: CLOSING CEREMONY


The BRAZIL WILL HAVE 12 MORE SEATS, WITH RIO DE JANEIRO

MARACANÃ STADIUM - CAPACITY: 90 MILLION PEOPLE

Wow! That's one big stadium! :lol:

http://www.rio2016.org.br/files/galeria/Lumo%20Rio2016_Venue_05_1.jpg

http://www.rio2016.org.br/files/galeria/Lumo%20Rio2016_Venue_04_1.jpg

João Havelange Olympic Stadium

Current Capacity: 45 thousand people


RIO 2006: Extended to 60 thousand people (already provided in your original project)
Athletics


COPA 2014: Place of preparation of Selections / Rio Group

simple, go get an atlas, look for the map that shows the continents of the world in different colours and then come back and say that there is one continent called america, if you find that impossible i shall take a photo of the laminated map i am using at the moment with 11year olds and settle this argument once and for all.

(although i applaud people trying to talk sense into those who believe n and s america are infact one continent you cannot use the current formation of tectonic plates, continents refer to land masses above sea level, tectonic plates refer to sections of the earths crust hence the backlash using the eurasian plate containing both the continent of europe and asia and the indo australian plate containing india.)

continents are human constructs that are known worldwide and are universally accepted

what i dont understand is why would a country so wonderful as brazil want to be lumped to together with north america ... not that N am is not also wonderful but be proud of you south american wonderfulness.

i cant be arsed with this anymore i have way too much work to do. end of x

Olympic Aquatics Stadium

http://www.rio2016.org/files/galeria/BCMF%20Rio2016_Venue_01_1.jpg

Park Maria Lenk

http://www.rio2016.org/files/galeria/20_Donald-Miralle.jpg

National Olympic Training Center

http://www.rio2016.org/files/galeria/Rio2016_Venue_33_1.jpg

http://www.rio2016.org/files/galeria/Rio2016_Venue_34_1.jpg

http://www.rio2016.org/files/galeria/Rio2016_Venue_57_1.jpg

JR, I've already posted all the venues on the last page, please don't spam the thread :okay:

Was this really needed?

Soup or man, that was only my opinion. In these 2-3 years of the candidacy process a great part of the people in this forum that are from the US were laughing against the brazilian bid. I believe some laughing against you now are valid.

JR, I've already posted all the venues on the last page, please don't spam the thread :okay:

Ok .. people who have not seen it yet .... I am posting to these people .... theme is ..... Stadiums and I am posting on the RIO 2016....

And what you posted this as many pages back .... and have lots of new people here


Congratulations for your posts...

Wow! That's one big stadium! :lol:

:lol:

India? it takes decades to build one subway...

anyway chicago should have had the olympics

But it didn't

MADRID WAS BETTER THAN CHICAGO (70% OF THE VENUES BUILT), FOR ALL THE PEOPLE FROM THE USA (300,000,000) "CHICAGO SHOULD" BUT FOR THE REST OF THE WORLD CHICAGO SHOULDN'T. I THINK THAT POEOPLE FROM MADRID, OR TOKYO KNOWS BETTER HOW TO LOOSE WITH DIGNITY!

Spaniards knew it was gona be hard after london 2012. Even harder if we had to face Rio in the finals, first south american olympics argument was hard to beat.

Some european members have their own interest they trying to host the olympics on 2020 themshelves. So they decided not voting Madrid, not because they hate Spain or dident think their venues or presentation were strong enougth. Just because of their own interest in presenting their cities in 2020. Why vote on another city that migth make ur chances of winning that much lower next time around.

If Madrid would have won, it would have been a waste of time presenting a european city in 2020. So now that the olympics of 2016 went to the americas, Spain is gona move on, take the experience and come back stronger on 2020. 3rd time is the charm, no time for crying and bitching thats not part of the olympic spirit.

Congrats Rio!!!!!!!! All i can say is don't fuck it up lol if not south america wont see the games ever again, damn that a lot of pressure. But we believe by 2016 u guys will be ready ur country has done very good in this hard times.

I believe Chicago was voted out because if the olympics were going to the americas it was gona be Rio not Chicago. And Tokyo dident have a strong popular support, plus the city already hosted the event once.

Spaniards knew it was gona be hard after london 2012. Even harder if we had to face Rio in the finals, first south american olympics argument was hard to beat.

Some european members have their own interest they trying to host the olympics on 2020 themshelves. So they decided not voting Madrid, not because they hate Spain or dident think their venues or presentation were strong enougth. Just because of their own interest in presenting their cities in 2020. Why vote on another city that migth make ur chances of winning that much lower next time around.
.

I've heard reports that the vast majority of Spains votes came almost exclusively from Europe so I fail to see your logic.

I've heard reports that the vast majority of Spains votes came almost exclusively from Europe so I fail to see your logic.

Votes are secret so i dont know how you came to that conclusion.

OLD
FIFA WC 1994 = USA!! 2years ago Olympic 1996 = Atlanta!!
So relax!! :okay:

NEW
:cheers1: ....... :dunno:
Can u stop violence against the Tibet Nation and the aspiring Uyighirstan
BFOR TRYING ANYTHING
V ALL CAN REJOICE
:cheers1::cheers1:
:lol::lol::lol:

But it didn't

good job captain obvious, goes to show how smart u are

MADRID WAS BETTER THAN CHICAGO (70% OF THE VENUES BUILT), FOR ALL THE PEOPLE FROM THE USA (300,000,000) "CHICAGO SHOULD" BUT FOR THE REST OF THE WORLD CHICAGO SHOULDN'T. I THINK THAT POEOPLE FROM MADRID, OR TOKYO KNOWS BETTER HOW TO LOOSE WITH DIGNITY!

They know how to loose with dignity because for 4 years they have known they were gonna lose, this whole time people worldwide were saying it was a race between Chicago and Rio, honestly i wouldnt have minded if Chicago got 2nd to Rio, but 4th place with such a good plan? no that doesnt fly by me too well, considering europeans made up 40 percent of voters, it goes to show how close minded europeans really are

They know how to loose with dignity because for 4 years they have known they were gonna lose, this whole time people worldwide were saying it was a race between Chicago and Rio, honestly i wouldnt have minded if Chicago got 2nd to Rio, but 4th place with such a good plan? no that doesnt fly by me too well, considering europeans made up 40 percent of voters, it goes to show how close minded europeans really are
It was all between Rio and Tokyo. Chicago had no chances. That was clear to everyone.

^^ Rio and Tokyo? You mean Rio and Madrid. Tokyo came second last remember? Chicago did have a chance, but I suppose dwindling public support, protests against the games and a pointless Obama coming to Copenhagen to needlessly lobby for it was what failed for Chicago.

One should also note that Rio won the games not only because a Madrid games would come after a London one, but also because during the selection of candidate cities, the IOC let Rio through instead of Doha, Qatar in spite of the fact that Doha scored higher in their assessment. This would have been a major factor, not only due to the fact that a South American city had never hosted or that Madrid comes after London.

Votes are secret so i dont know how you came to that conclusion.

Well I suppose it comes from Olympic observers with contacts who did some exit polling.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4yd4zMSpBo

They know how to loose with dignity because for 4 years they have known they were gonna lose, this whole time people worldwide were saying it was a race between Chicago and Rio, honestly i wouldnt have minded if Chicago got 2nd to Rio, but 4th place with such a good plan? no that doesnt fly by me too well, considering europeans made up 40 percent of voters, it goes to show how close minded europeans really are

Xenophobic much? :ohno: And by the way, admitting publically, as you did earlier, that you've already had three accounts banned on this site doesn't do much to dispel the myth that Americans are dumb. See, I can induldge in stupid stereotypes as well, but it doesn't get us anywhere really does it?

Blaming the Europeans rather than USOC, Chicago 2016 etc. etc. shows how little you understand what happened. The world's media got it wrong, not for the first time either as far as Olympic bid races go. You should feel let down by the media for leading you to believe it was set in stone, and USOC for buggering up Chicago's chances by straining relationships with the IOC membership.

EDIT: I see you've been banned. That, people, is how you go about shooting yourself in the foot. Who gets banned from a site three times then sets up a new account and posts this fact?! DUH!

What really sucks about Chicago losing is how this will affect the US politically. Obama probably won't be able to get health care reformed now, as a result, which I desperately need because Insurance companies refuse to insure me because of all the cancer in my family. So it's kinda weird to think that while this decision is great for Rio, and will bring much joy to that city, it will likely end up resulting in a lot of unnecessarily dead Americans (like me if I got cancer suddenly and couldn't afford to get it treated).


Oh, and to the person who was incredulous about Europe and Asia being the same continent, they are. Dividing them is a purely cultural construct that is meaningless to the scientific community who just consider the whole thing to be Eurasia.




Now, when considering possible US bids for 2020 (maybe there should be a dedicated thread to this topic?) one should consider which cities have the following:


A large GDP
Cultural cachet
A need for a new football/athletic stadium


San Francisco meets all the criteria but the citizens of the city are very anti-sports and will never approve of the construction of a new stadium no matter how badly it's needed.

Washington DC meets all the criteria but would run into huge issues regarding oversight (federal vs city) and funding (federal vs anything else).

Los Angeles meets all three criteria but it has the issue of having already hosted two Olympics and it's main airport is already overcapacity.

Miami also meets all the criteria but its hard to imagine the city of Miami putting aside the cocaine and condoms to actually do something constructive.:D

New Orleans meets the last two criteria but already has issues with rebuilding from Katrina let alone preparing for the Olympics.

San Diego meets the last two but may not have the money (remember Chicago had $450 billion and it still wasn't enough to sway the IOC) and there is an issue with the lack of capacity at its airport.

Boston meets the first two criteria but with no need for a new stadium, and no place for a temporary one, geography might conspire against them.

Minneapolis meets the last criteria (and actually has expressed an interest in running) but has little recognition internationally and may not have the deep pockets.

Honolulu meets the second criteria but would run into issues of access as well as issues of stadium location, cost and need.

One city that meets none of the criteria, but would be interesting, is Pittsburgh. Sure it's relatively poor, no one knows it internationally and it doesn't need a stadium, but it's topography would make for one beautiful Olympic Games.



Make of my deconstruction what you will.

Well I suppose it comes from Olympic observers with contacts who did some exit polling.

I hope they are not the same observers with contacts that predicted for chicago to be in the finals and told the american media.

What really sucks about Chicago losing is how this will affect the US politically. Obama probably won't be able to get health care reformed now, as a result, which I desperately need because Insurance companies refuse to insure me because of all the cancer in my family. So it's kinda weird to think that while this decision is great for Rio, and will bring much joy to that city, it will likely end up resulting in a lot of unnecessarily dead Americans (like me if I got cancer suddenly and couldn't afford to get it treated).

Oh, and to the person who was incredulous about Europe and Asia being the same continent, they are. Dividing them is a purely cultural construct that is meaningless to the scientific community who just consider the whole thing to be Eurasia.

Now, when considering possible US bids for 2020 (maybe there should be a dedicated thread to this topic?) one should consider which cities have the following:


A large GDP
Cultural cachet
A need for a new football/athletic stadium


San Francisco meets all the criteria but the citizens of the city are very anti-sports and will never approve of the construction of a new stadium no matter how badly it's needed.

Washington DC meets all the criteria but would run into huge issues regarding oversight (federal vs city) and funding (federal vs anything else).

Los Angeles meets all three criteria but it has the issue of having already hosted two Olympics and it's main airport is already overcapacity.

Miami also meets all the criteria but its hard to imagine the city of Miami putting aside the cocaine and condoms to actually do something constructive.:D

New Orleans meets the last two criteria but already has issues with rebuilding from Katrina let alone preparing for the Olympics.

San Diego meets the last two but may not have the money (remember Chicago had $450 billion and it still wasn't enough to sway the IOC) and there is an issue with the lack of capacity at its airport.

Boston meets the first two criteria but with no need for a new stadium, and no place for a temporary one, geography might conspire against them.

Minneapolis meets the last criteria (and actually has expressed an interest in running) but has little recognition internationally and may not have the deep pockets.

Honolulu meets the second criteria but would run into issues of access as well as issues of stadium location, cost and need.

One city that meets none of the criteria, but would be interesting, is Pittsburgh. Sure it's relatively poor, no one knows it internationally and it doesn't need a stadium, but it's topography would make for one beautiful Olympic Games.

Make of my deconstruction what you will.

Another issue with a U.S. games is that the risk and guarantees largely filter down to the municipal level. That was a BIG (and controversial) responsibility to take on for Chicago. Many of those other cities you listed are under a million people. Those are cities that have less then 1/3 the people of Chicago or 1/8 the size of NYC. Even for cities like NYC or Chicago the idea of billion dollar cost over runs or boondoggles cause a sweat. For cities with much less margin for error the prospect I think can be horrifying if cost containment were to break down.

If a city can get the rest of the metro region or state to partake in a porotion of the risk and cost, as Chicago to some degree was able to do, then the finances can look a lot less intimidating for a city but the trick is convincing a metro or state to feel and take a large stake in a city centered Olympics. The contradiction is that the best bids are likely to be the most centralized as well so that is why I think early reports of Boston making it a kind of pan-New England games will fall flat fast.

Another differant but imporant aspect is that any city that will build a new stadium and entertains ANY thoughts of bidding for a future games I would also recommend that they build it so that has the potential to be converted to a track stadium so that they can minimize redundant cost. This is something that Chicago very well could have done in 2000 before rebuilding Soldier Field and completely dropped the ball on even though they put forward a bid less then ten years later.

Soup or man, that was only my opinion. In these 2-3 years of the candidacy process a great part of the people in this forum that are from the US were laughing against the brazilian bid. I believe some laughing against you now are valid.

Who?

Now, when considering possible US bids for 2020 (maybe there should be a dedicated thread to this topic?) one should consider which cities have the following:


A large GDP
Cultural cachet
A need for a new football/athletic stadium




GDP is not important for Olympic Games, pure finances are. But USA has big financial problems nowadays. It's not as rich as China, Japan, Russia, Brazil and some other countries. USA is more like bankrupt. Everyone has cultural cachet and demand for new stadiums.

In any way. USA is not popular today. That unpopularity has hurt the bid very well. And 4 games in past 30 years is quite enough. Better not to waste the money USA don't have for bids in next 40-50 years.


^^ Rio and Tokyo? You mean Rio and Madrid. Tokyo came second last remember? Chicago did have a chance, but I suppose dwindling public support, protests against the games and a pointless Obama coming to Copenhagen to needlessly lobby for it was what failed for Chicago.

One should also note that Rio won the games not only because a Madrid games would come after a London one, but also because during the selection of candidate cities, the IOC let Rio through instead of Doha, Qatar in spite of the fact that Doha scored higher in their assessment. This would have been a major factor, not only due to the fact that a South American city had never hosted or that Madrid comes after London.

Indeed it is, Madrid had no chances mainly politically. Athens 2004 and London 2012 enough for western Europe and EU. But as well as Chicago, Madrid has clearly lack of very huge available finances. Look, stakes are a lot higher today than before. Russia just buried its winter bid in $9bln budget, which is eventually was increased in more than 3 times to over $30bln. Chicago promised just $5bln for summer games. That's why it was between Rio and Tokyo, where Rio has won politically. Both Brazil and Japan have a lot of free money that they unable to reinvest into economy. Same goes to China, Russia, India and some other countries.

Obama was not pointless. He just tried to repeat Putin's success last year. But it was worth of it. There is no harm in trying.

It was all between Rio and Tokyo. Chicago had no chances. That was clear to everyone.

Everybody knows it was all between Rio and no other city, since IOC Commission release cities' marks...

GDP is not important for Olympic Games, pure finances are. But USA has big financial problems nowadays. It's not as rich as China, Japan, Russia, Brazil and some other countries. USA is more like bankrupt. Everyone has cultural cachet and demand for new stadiums.

In any way. USA is not popular today. That unpopularity has hurt the bid very well. And 4 games in past 30 years is quite enough. Better not to waste the money USA don't have for bids in next 40-50 years.
.

Coth, I know your anti-Americanism is rabid but don't embarrass yourself please.

In any way. USA is not popular today

A city from the unpopular USA still outshined your nations bid city in 2012 though.

GDP is not important for Olympic Games, pure finances are. But USA has big financial problems nowadays. It's not as rich as China, Japan, Russia, Brazil and some other countries. USA is more like bankrupt. Everyone has cultural cachet and demand for new stadiums.


The US is no where near bankrupt, and is more powerful than all those countries, and will still be 100 years from now. So I think you should shut your mouth. A lack of Finances had nothing to do with why the Chicago went out in the first round.

A city from the unpopular USA still outshined your nations bid city in 2012 though.
As I said, last few years was a turning point in world policy. BRIC has officially formed now and it's more powerful and more popular than USA or EU. All of BRIC counties are in top 10 of reserves. Russia alone has as much as entire EU. With China and Japan topping the list on 1 and 2 places. While USA has nothing, but trillions of credit debt, that making nearly 100% of US economy, comparing to 5% of China, 15% of Russia or 12% in Brazil.
Sochi bid has won thank to worldwide popularity of Russian federal government and thank to large amount of money.
As of Moscow - it's politically independent within Russia. It wasn't supported by federal government, nor politically, nor financially.
And you see, looking between $6bln bid and $60bln bid IOC will rather prefer second one.
So possibilities of Harbin 2018 and Saint Petersburg 2020 as federal bid are very very high.

As I said, last few years was a turning point in world policy. BRIC has officially formed now and it's more powerful and more popular than USA or EU. All of BRIC counties are in top 10 of reserves. Russia alone has as much as entire EU. With China and Japan topping the list on 1 and 2 places. While USA has nothing, but trillions of credit debt, that making nearly 100% of US economy, comparing to 5% of China, 15% of Russia or 12% in Brazil.

Actually we have the largest GDP in the world, debt's not everything. Debt probably will not affect the US as much as you think. And China has more like 25% government debt. It's certainly more than 5%, and could be even larger than reported. It's not like Chinese debt is going to be going down in the future.

Second, the US is still a rapidly growing county, if you didn’t notice. It’s the fastest growing developed country in the world (of which two of the “BRIC” members are not, and will struggle even more as time goes on).

Third, the US still has by far the most powerful military in the world, and nothing is likely to change that for a number of reasons.

As I said, last few years was a turning point in world policy. BRIC has officially formed now and it's more powerful and more popular than USA or EU. All of BRIC counties are in top 10 of reserves. Russia alone has as much as entire EU. With China and Japan topping the list on 1 and 2 places. While USA has nothing, but trillions of credit debt, that making nearly 100% of US economy, comparing to 5% of China, 15% of Russia or 12% in Brazil.
Sochi bid has won thank to worldwide popularity of Russian federal government and thank to large amount of money.
As of Moscow - it's politically independent within Russia. It wasn't supported by federal government, nor politically, nor financially.
And you see, looking between $6bln bid and $60bln bid IOC will rather prefer second one.
So possibilities of Harbin 2018 and Saint Petersburg 2020 as federal bid are very very high.

Your whole rationale for the loss of the Chicago bid is kind of questionable. You claim that the U.S. is unpopular, but Russia (Sochi) and China are not? You also grossly overstate the popularity of the Russian government worldwide.

I don't think the current recession and the debt had anything to do with the Chicago bid. They knew that it would have been very successful and profitable anywhere in a large U.S. city with a huge corporate presence.

Coth, you make it seem that my country is doomed...is that what you wish on others? Thanks mate! I wish the worst to Russia.

Your whole rationale for the loss of the Chicago bid is kind of questionable. You claim that the U.S. is unpopular, but Russia (Sochi) and China are not? You also grossly overstate the popularity of the Russian government worldwide.

I don't think the current recession and the debt had anything to do with the Chicago bid. They knew that it would have been very successful and profitable anywhere in a large U.S. city with a huge corporate presence.
I wasn't mentioning current current crisis at all. I was talking about situation in overall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_current_account_balance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt


As i noted Chicago was able to spend as much as just $4,8bln, Rio olympic budget is $15bln. Tokyo - $4,5bln, Mardid $5,5bln.

Rio budget was as larger as other three bids in sum.

And yes, according to experts, not only gigantic olympic budget, but also Putin, who attended at Guatemala himself leaded Sochi to victory.

As I said, last few years was a turning point in world policy. BRIC has officially formed now and it's more powerful and more popular than USA or EU. All of BRIC counties are in top 10 of reserves. Russia alone has as much as entire EU. With China and Japan topping the list on 1 and 2 places. While USA has nothing, but trillions of credit debt, that making nearly 100% of US economy, comparing to 5% of China, 15% of Russia or 12% in Brazil.
Sochi bid has won thank to worldwide popularity of Russian federal government and thank to large amount of money.
As of Moscow - it's politically independent within Russia. It wasn't supported by federal government, nor politically, nor financially.
And you see, looking between $6bln bid and $60bln bid IOC will rather prefer second one.
So possibilities of Harbin 2018 and Saint Petersburg 2020 as federal bid are very very high.

It is amazing someone can be so smug who came from a nation who took it up the rear almost or as well as any other in the last two years. :lol: Claiming that somehow Brazil and Russia has any reason to be lumped together the same as fellow EU or U.S. states do I have no idea. The trade between China and the US alone absolutely drwarfs any Bric trade combined. So you can talk about all the grand proclamations and supposed solidarity but the meat is in the numbers such as China/US trade and investments which dwarf any practical interdependency the BRIC nations have with one another. Trying to make out like Bric is some grand and discernable economic block is a farce.

The EU and US are many times larger then the Bric nations combined and even though you desperately want to buy that the last two years radically and rapidly changed the whole geopolitical and economic order so that Russia can again regain relevance in order to appease to your shallow nationalistm but you are but living in a "new world" in your own mind much more then reality.

Public debt of GDP is 48.6% in the US (not at deseriable levels but not likely catosrophic) while those of India are 59% and Brazil is 40.2%, your fellow "BRIC" brothers. France and Germany rate out at around 75% of GDP.
http://buttonwood.economist.com/content/gdc?source=hptextfeature

As far as worldwide popular of Russian government. :lol: Yea, everybody loves how Russia levels Caucasus cities and assassinates domestic journalist it doesn't approve of. In many nations the approval ratings of the U.S. have gone up over 50% in less then a year in many cases so the turn around has been quick. The U.S. is relatively important it is quickly scorned and quickly embraced. In contrast to Russia which shows its importance and muscle largely by freezing peoples homes during the winter to its west.

As far as the lame claim about Moscow not being a Russian bid. Please, Moscow was every bit as much as Russia's bid as NYC was the U.S. and was looked at as such :|

If Russia spends 60 billion on at St .Petersburg bid that either speaks to Russian corruption, stupidly, or how utterly deficient St .Petersburg is now. Either way it nothing to be proud of.

Coth, you make it seem that my country is doomed...is that what you wish on others? Thanks mate! I wish the worst to Russia.

Don't let him rattle you, nothing these people say has much truth to it. People just like to get on the US sinking bandwagon, because they think their country is the next big thing (when Russia is anything but, and China and India have each other to deal with).

And the US is also two times larger than Russia, and by 2050 will be two times larger than Brazil. :tongue3:

I wasn't mentioning current current crisis at all. I was talking about situation in overall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_current_account_balance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt


As i noted Chicago was able to spend as much as just $4,8bln, Rio olympic budget is $15bln. Tokyo - $4,5bln, Mardid $5,5bln.

Rio budget was as larger as other three bids in sum.

And yes, according to experts, not only gigantic olympic budget, but also Putin, who attended at Guatemala himself leaded Sochi to victory.

Brazil has included transit and other non-Olympic infrastructure projects in that. That would be like me including the 15 billion O'Hare modernization taking place as part of the bid package or the proposed three billion dollar downtown transit station. :)

I think Brazil will do a good job largely carrying through its vision but it didn't come through on many of its infrastructure promises for the Pan Am games so its best to tally up completed projects and cost AFTER they are done and not what the big plans and promises are before hand.

I wasn't mentioning current current crisis at all. I was talking about situation in overall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_current_account_balance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt


As i noted Chicago was able to spend as much as just $4,8bln, Rio olympic budget is $15bln. Tokyo - $4,5bln, Mardid $5,5bln.

Rio budget was as larger as other three bids in sum.

And yes, according to experts, not only gigantic olympic budget, but also Putin, who attended at Guatemala himself leaded Sochi to victory.


yeah, but what does that have to do with the Olympic bid? Your comments seemed like nothing more than to take a pot shot at the U.S. and spew your Russian pride.

As for the budgets, it would have gone higher than 4.8 billion, no doubt. It has for every other Olympic event, including Beijing-which overran 38-40 billion dollars. Forgive me if I am a bit skeptical of Rio's proclaimations of its guaranteed gigantic budget and being able to handle everything that goes along with the Olympics (security, infastructure, transport, etc). I guess that will be the most interesting part of these games---seeing how the Olympics affects Rio and how it changes it.

Public debt of GDP is 48.6% in the US (not at deseriable levels but not likely catosrophic)
Economist isn't really a trusted source. It's a yellow press very similar to Wall Street Journal.

In contrast to Russia which shows its importance and muscle largely by freezing peoples homes during the winter to its west.
Now there we come finally to. Isn't many of US people live under brainwashed stereotypes against Brazil, Russia or China. Slumps, freezing people, beggary that's all you can say, when still questioning why Rio has won. So may be because it's very different from what you have seems last time on TV, may be because it's better, may be because it's more popular. It wasn't me who stated US is not popular anymore. It was Onn.

yeah, but what does that have to do with the Olympic bid? Your comments seemed like nothing more than to take a pot shot at the U.S. and spew your Russian pride.
I was saying the same about Madrid. Am I anti Spanish? Wasn't you doing the same over Rio and Brazil few pages ago?

I was saying the same about Madrid. Am I anti Spanish? Wasn't you doing the same over Rio and Brazil few pages ago?

your criticism of Madrid wasn't as harsh.

I was not hating on Rio or Brazil though. I have made it known that Rio was my second choice after Chicago and I was upset with the IOC.

Economist isn't really a trusted source. It's a yellow press very similar to Wall Street Journal.


Please, the Economist is one of the most respected widespread publicans in the English language. :ohno: Fine, you stick to wiki and I will stick with long established journals which depend on their credibility to sell papers.

I think that your "yellow journalism" is a much more fair characterization of say the deplorable RT with their crack pot analyst.

Now there we come finally to. Isn't many of US people live under brainwashed stereotypes against Brazil, Russia or China. Slumps, freezing people, beggary that's all you can say, when still questioning why Rio has won. So may be because it's very different from what you have seems last time on TV, may be because it's better, may be because it's more popular. It wasn't me who stated US is not popular anymore. It was Onn.

I am not talking about people people inside Russia, I am talking about Russia being so "loved" they resort to using their energy sector as a petty foreign policy tool by withholding supply so that foreign citizens will feel a literal chill of not duly respecting and bending to mother Russia who has an overly inflated nostalgia of her past and pines for the good ole where neighbors use to respect through fear.

Don't make a fool of yourself, when have I stated that Rio doesn't deserve a games because of its poverty or crime? Where have I stated any sort of "sterotype" that any Brazilian would take issue with as wrong? In fact I have praised Rio's virtues many times in these forums about how it is one of my favorite cities and think it is more then deserving. So please, put up or shut up.

Shouldn't this be about Rio de Janeiro? :dunno:

Japan has 170% of public debt??? :uh:

Japan has 170% of public debt??? :uh:

They spent an absolute s--t load in the 90's and early 00's trying to spend themselves out of the post late 80's crash. It could be said they never completely came out of the 90-91 recession and have been doing a series of stimulus plans ever since. That has contradictorily been follow by a very high personal savings rate though.

It is an example of why I am skeptical of all these national stimulus plans in vogue supposadly saving the day of various national economies.

^^ How do you even begin to work that out??? I mean, how are they still living!

It's like every citizen over there not only would have to been taken from all of it's assets, he'd have to do this nearly two times!

^^
they have enough savings for that debt...
debt is never something in absolute, always relative.
the japenese people really know how to save money.

^^
they have enough savings for that debt...
debt is never something in absolute, always relative.
the japenese people really know how to save money.

How can you own savings that are superior to your GDP?? Especially in the case which your debt IS superior to your GDP!

The only explanation would be to own money outside the country, bonds and etcetera, but do they REALLY have nearly their national GDP in oversea assets? :dunno:

I think this thread turned complety useless becoming the old and boring GDP/Best place on erth city x city thread!! Moderation should close it.

How can you own savings that are superior to your GDP?? Especially in the case which your debt IS superior to your GDP!

GDP is a flow... amount of production, wages... in ONE YEAR.
Savings is a stock... Amount on a given moment.

That's the answer... You don't need to keep 100% of your debt value in cash... You MUST have a minimum GPD and savings increase (in time) so you can finance your debt.... Countries don't pay the whole debt every year and then make a new one... They just finance the same debt over time...

I think this thread turned complety useless becoming the old and boring GDP/Best place on erat city x city thread!! Moderation should close it.

I agree.

OIC Congress

Rio vs Chicago

DyTkN73fUQU

Rio vs Tokyo

iIyXtRVPVVo


Rio vs Madrid

v39d_g5ryKY

rio wins!!

QykiPSA_Y9U


:banana::banana::banana::banana:

GDP is a flow... amount of production, wages... in ONE YEAR.
Savings is a stock... Amount on a given moment.

That's the answer... You don't need to keep 100% of your debt value in cash... You MUST have a minimum GPD and savings increase (in time) so you can finance your debt.... Countries don't pay the whole debt every year and then make a new one... They just finance the same debt over time...



Of course. Think of the situation in terms of personal finances and it's easier. You may earn $100,000 a year (equivalent to a nation's GDP) but carry a $200,000 home mortgage (equivalent to a national debt). You pay the debt in installments over a period of time. (Of course, if you're the U.S. government you just pay the interest on the debt.) An individual in such a debt situation is doing OK even if his savings are low, but only so long as he doesn't lose his job!

How can you own savings that are superior to your GDP?? Especially in the case which your debt IS superior to your GDP!

The only explanation would be to own money outside the country, bonds and etcetera, but do they REALLY have nearly their national GDP in oversea assets? :dunno:

you can. overall external debt of japan is about 30% of GDP.

Rio is winner now is time to think in 2020!

:lock::lock::lock::lock::lock::lock:

Not yet, I've heard that do to glitches in the voting machines they are going to have a recount. :colgate:

Yep, 30 of them pressed the wrong button. The electronic voting is like watching your Nan trying to work the TV remote.

:lock::lock::lock::lock::lock::lock:

Well Done Rio & Brasil you will be wonderful hosts and you deserve the games!:cheers: