Rather than fighting for health care or working on cap-and trade, Barack Obama has been working on trying to bring the Olympics to Chicago in 2016. Maybe it's better that he is distracted from that nightmare legislation, but I digress.  One vocal opponent of the President has been Glenn beck, who has criticized the potential costs of bringing the Olympics to Chicago.  Well, I guess he struck a nerve, because the White House responded to the criticism on their blog:


RHETORIC: BECK SAID VANCOUVER LOST $1 BILLION WHEN IT "HAD THE OLYMPICS."   Glenn Beck said, "Vancouver lost, how much was it? they lost a billion dollars when they had the Olympics."  [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]

REALITY: VANCOUVER'S OLYMPICS WILL NOT TAKE PLACE UNTIL 2010.   Vancouver will host the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games from February 12 – 28, 2010 and March 12-21, 2010, respectively. [Vancouver2010.com, accessed 9/29/09]

At the end of the post, the White House encourages viewers to visit Politifact.com for "even more Fox lies."


     The details of Glenn Beck's argument were obviously off, but not the point.  A Canadian economic study of the 2010 games in Vancouver predicts a "substantially negative" economic impact from hosting the games.  Interestingly, hosting the Olympics might not be as beneficial as many countries think.  Consider this: Beijing spent more than $20 billion on the 2008 games, it took Montreal 20 years to pay for the 1976 games, and both Japan and Korea noticed a decrease in their GDP's of nearly 2% following their involvement.  This certainly runs counter to what you might expect.  Hosting the Olympics is a great feel-good moment and source of National pride, but economically it's questionable.