Oprah-geddon: Winfrey To Quit Show In 2011
Daley Blames - Who Else? - The Media For Oprah-geddon
Chicago Gets Googled
Friday Flashback - Old School Oprah
Today's Transgender Day of Remembrance Honors the Dead
Pat Ryan, head of Chicago's 2016 bid, says he thinks our Olympic-hosting hopes are in fine shape, despite the recent and ongoing violence. "In terms of it resonating with [International Olympic Committee] voters and saying Chicago is an unsafe city, I don't think that would be the case at all," he said. The IOC has already evaluated Chicago's safety and found it acceptable.
Which might be why the city feels so comfortable throwing down $85 million for the 37-acre Michael Reese Hospital land. The city plans to resell the property to developers some time after the IOC hands down a host-city decision for 2016, at which point the area will be converted into either an Olympic Village or just...a regular village. [AP, S-T, S-T]
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
That whole thing makes me very nervous. Back in the 1990's, Detroit evicted and/or tore down an entire prospering riverfront neighborhood on speculation, because they hoped to convince permanent casinos to open there. 10 years later, the casinos never opened. Now 20 years later, they opened, but nowhere near this location. Today, this neighborhood is still a bulldozed, vacant wasteland. And for what?
well michael reese isn't a prospering riverfront neighborhood, it's an extinct hospital, they're not displacing people and it's not like that land isn't valuable even without the olympics.
You know what, Chicago is a relatively safe city. Sure, Tokyo has us beat on crime (who doesn't Tokyo beat on this) and reliability of transportation. But is the IOC really going to award the olympics to an asian city so soon after China? Madrid has great transporttaion from what I've heard, but it has had problems with terrorisim and violence in the recent past as well. Also, having the olympics in madrid four years after london makes little sense.
That leaves either Rio or Chicago as the likely contenders. I think Rio has the edge because the olympics have never been in a south american country. However, how can anyone really argue Rio is safer than Chicago? Moreover, our overall infrastructure, while dilapidated and in need of serious attention, still surpases Rio's.
I understand many chicagoans don't want the olympics for a variety of reasons, but making our city sound like a decrepit demilitiarized zone is simply unfair. If you want to understand what a shitty public transportation system and unsafe streets are like, take a trip to Detroit, Milwaukee, or the majority of other rust belt cities.
schwerve, while that's true, I don't agree with government rounding up land on speculation, especially in a down economy for real estate.
Seems to me a down economy for real estate would be the perfect time for the city to round up land Tower. Sure beats buying land at its peak value.
There are also rumors that the Chinese don't want Tokyo to get the Olympics just 8 years after theirs in Beijing.
Especially if there are problems next month, either political or environmental.
The Chinese definitely don't want to be showed up by the Japanese, they still are incredibly bitter over WWII.
Not only would Madrid follow London by just 4 years, but Barcelona isn't that long ago either.
That leaves Chicago vs. Rio.
Brazil will have the World Cup in 2014 & many think that works against Rio, people think Brazil doesn't have the money for both, although they may become an oil exporter in a few years.
So it comes down to Rio, with its beaches & mountains or Chicago, the city that bribes better than any place on Earth.
Bribes trump beaches any time!
Hey Chicagoist - Chicago is no longer an Applicant City. We are now a Candidate City. The 2016 logo you display is old news, might want to grab the new logo...