Red-Light Cameras Not So Special?
Cubs Combat Casino
How To: Simple Salad Dressing
Mr. Burris Goes To Baghdad
Properly Sauced: Auditorium Cocktail
We got a copy of an email appeal to support Chicago's 2016 Olympic bid off the Chicagoist Tipline yesterday (thanks, Michael!), and the sender makes a really good point.
I don't know who wrote the actual email, but it was forwarded via a list by Billy Dec.After numerous positive points about the Olympics, the one thing that troubles me is this section: The question on deck, and correctly so is, ”What is the risk to the city?”
There is some degree of risk in every single endeavor worth pursuing. As a committee member with full access to the plan, I can tell you with great confidence that the risk is very controlled, extremely limited and very well placed. The city is well insulated from the risk of any financial shortfall.
I'm with many of the people who feel that eventually, taxpayers are going to be affected tremendously by this. For a city that currently can't work its way out of a deficit, is as corrupt as it gets, and has the highest tax in the country, I think this email really glosses over plenty of risks. The city is well insulated from the risk of any financial shortfall? Where's the proof of that?
In the same email it appears to state that some taxes will go up: ยท An additional $1 billion from a variety of sources, including sales and amusement taxes, that will help support education, law enforcement and other city services.
How exactly is that a benefit?
That's a good question, but you seemed to have answered it in how you described where the email came from. We don't know who wrote it. The author of the message claims that he or she is "a committee member with full access to the plan." That's great news, mystery writer! Why don't you share with the rest of us who exactly you are, and what exactly is in place to ensure that "the city is well insulated from the risk of any financial shortfall"?
One of the big problems with how the movers and shakers in Chicago have gone about promoting our city as a venue for an exclusive international sports party is the complete lack of transparency in the process. Olympic boosters claim that the bid will be financed by private money. Unfortunately for us, though, the event itself demands a massive injection of funds, often coming from local, state and the federal government. In fact, the big buzz in IOC circles right now is speculation over whether President Barack Obama will show up in Copenhagen, not just to shake hands, but to make federal assurances that the Games will go off without a hitch. Mayor Daley and his privately appointed civic boosters have hidden from the public eye in this matter. If they had laid out their plans to hold the 2016 Summer Games without spending taxpayer monies from the get go, maybe this story would have a happier ending. Of course, if they had laid their plans out to public scrutiny from the outset, we're not sure they would have passed muster. Less than a month to go.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
One of the ironclad rules of life in Chicago...ignore everything Billy Dec says. Don't go to the places he says to go, don't eat what he says to eat, don't wear what he wears, don't listen to the music he listens to and most importanly, don't starfuck the celebrities he wants you to starfuck. If Billy Dec were an ice cream flavor he'd be pralines and douche
Who is Billy Dec?
I've wondered that too.
This is Billy Dec.
Coincidentally, matty; back when Anthony filed his review of Sunda I e-mailed him after editing it to thank him for not mentioning Dec in the review (I think Anthony's review is probably the only one that focused more on the food than the owner).
Anthony's reply: "Who is Billy Dec?"
Billy Dec, is, of course, entirely meaningless - but the issues raised here are worth considering.
One issue that came to mind reading this is: Hey! There are situations where the City pays out a bunch of money AND we benefit in the long run. Governments aren't self-contained, for profit businesses - they facilitate all the other stuff going on in society. Sure having a state legislature and state civil courts cost money, but imagine trying to run a business if there weren't business laws or judges to enforce contracts. Why, exactly, should the City NOT spend money to attract and host the Olympics? Why SHOULD it be left to the closed-doors world of private enterprise?
When I read the quote about the extra billion in tax revenue, I didn't take that as "Chicago area residents will pay more in taxes." I think that would refer the additional tax revenue generated by the million(s) of visitors to Chicago who would not otherwise come here if we don't get the Olympics. There's also
I also had no idea who Billy Dec was. Now that I do, I still don't care.
What the email means by "well insulated" is that the bid is taking out insurance to place a buffer between the tax payers and any over budgeted expenses. There is just over $1.4 billion in insurance that would be the first line of defense if there are cost over runs. If, at that point, more money is needed, the games would dip into the guarantee from the City. It would take $250 million from the city. Then, if there are more costs, the games would take the $250 million from the State. If there are further costs, it would take the additional $250 million from the City.
Basically, there is a lot of hot air being blown from every which way. If any of you took the time to go to hearings and get some information, you might tone down the rhetoric.
Oh, and the taxes that they are talking about...that is using the existing taxes to help pay for things. For example, the tickets to the games are subject to the Amusement tax. Those taxes are a portion of the funding. As for the sales tax, any time there are visitors to this city, they pay the sales tax, the hotel tax and the amusement tax (when they are eating in the loop). That is a lot of money for the city. Just think of hotels being filled to capacity in the loop. That would certainly be the case for at least 2 weeks. Those two weeks can bring in a ton of cash. If you are all willing to forgo that money, feel free to say so.
as you can see from his blog, Billy Dec is a huge starfucker. and he always wears a hat. ALWAYS.
He's balding.
The thing is, all those videos are like 2 minutes long. He grabs some celebrity having a meal or on a red carpet or doing a junket and gets them to say "Yay, Olympics, yay" and away they go.
It's got about as much gravitas as Robert Downey Jr. saying "I love comic books!" at Comic-Con.
Dec is just really hate-able.
the most hateable thing is when he calls the celebs his friends and doesn't put quotes around friends. if he's balding, why not just shave it and go for the Mr. Clean look? As much as i hate the guy, I think it's a look he could easily pull off.
He can't pull it off. Mis-shaped head and dumbo ears, he looks really goofy. He truly needs the hat. check his guest spot on Entourage for proof. funny his only true celebrity friend (other than Schwim and Slotnick) is Ryan Cabrera, who was never even realy a celeb...I dont even know what he is famous for. To this day Billy still kisses his ass.