have to pay more council tax for the Olympics? Surely the Games are supposed to be of benefit to the whole country?
I am seething that the cost has gone up already, and Teresa Jowell is casually saying that we shall have to pay for it with yet another raise in our council tax. We have 6 more years before the Olympics start - am I going to have to sell my house to pay my council tax, whilst the government reaps the benefits from the related tourism? And how on earth are the Olympics going to benefit me, personally? Why should I be paying for them?:
2006-11-21 10:23:19 · 23 answers · asked by Sarah A 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Mr Sceptic is actually making my point too. I thought the Olympics were supposed to be representative of the United Kingdom as a whole. So why do only Londoners have to pay for it?
2006-11-21 10:49:43 · update #1
Right! Just how did we get here? I didn't ask for it and I didn't vote for it. Hell, I didn't even know that it was coming until a bunch of arrogant, self-engrandising pricks like Lord Coe & Co stiffed me with a higher tax bill for the next thirty years.
I'm really looking forward to my "sporting legacy" though I didn't know that fishing, darts and snooker were Olympic events!
2006-11-21 12:37:57 · answer #1 · answered by Jellicoe 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
To start with it is very disappointing to here such a negative reaction to a once in a lifetime opportunity, but not unexpected. It probably explains why Britain no longer is a leader in technology, business etc.
I agree, Londoner's on their own should not have to shoulder the burden of the cost of the Olympics. I would suggest the Government borrows the money, then after the Olympics, the tax revenue generate can be used to pay off the loan. Any differential can be collected as a ring fenced tax, spread across the whole of the country. I would like to see included in the Olympic programme development centers across the countries( Eng, Scot, Wales, NI) that can be used to train athletes in all sports for Britain to be able compete in the 2012 and future games. So this can be used as a catalyst for further sporting success.
As for how you as a person will benefit. I would suggest that with improved, sports facilities at your disposal, better transport links and much needed housing you probably have more to gain then most in Walsall or Penrith.
But more then anything else, it would be nice to see our politicians being able to do something basic like manage a public project without it becoming a fiasco.
2006-11-21 22:48:59 · answer #2 · answered by dwayne dibbley´s cat 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Equally why should I pay for them if I live in Scotland and don't give a hoot whether the Olympics come to Britain or not.
If they use lottery money then I will stop doing the lottery.
You do have a valid point though, if this government want the bloody Olympics then they should pay for them it shouldn't be down to individuals who live in the local area,to be so over budget at this stage is ridiculous.Ithink the whoever won the contract knew they could quote a price and then hike it up to whatever they wanted after it was secured.It happened with the Scottish Parliament building as well
2006-11-21 18:33:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You miserable shower of bastards! This country is privileged to be able to hold the world's most prestigious sports event and all you can do is whine about how much it will cost and how you live a long way away and how you don't like it and don't see why your tax should support it.
This is a chance to revitalise a run-down area of our capital and a chance to show the world that the UK can stage a major world event proudly and be up there with the best. Ask the inhabitants of Barcelona, Sydney and Athens if it was worth it.
Or just sit there grumbling about the cost and wondering why people don't think we are a great nation any more. Perhaps it's because when anything exciting happens the joy is drowned out by the moaning noises.
2006-11-21 18:43:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Isn't it a fact that the national lottery is paying for the Olympics, which in some ways a tax on those who play the game.. In the end London, will benefit from the serious amount of cash being spent to host the games.. Other places round the country won't benefit one bit.
2006-11-22 03:14:25 · answer #5 · answered by robert x 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
It is a cheek you have to pay more council tax, they do have funds coming from else where such as the lottery are giving the money made from the dream number tickets, why don't they get the money from else where like the businesses that are going to make a fortune out of it.
2006-11-21 18:37:10 · answer #6 · answered by elhodgie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Olympics are awarded to a city, not a country. The city authority has to actually bid so you can blame the local authorities in London for this mess/wonderful-opportunity-to-update-athletic-facilities.
Having said all that, I feel for you. There has to be a better way of paying for it.
2006-11-21 18:42:19 · answer #7 · answered by skip 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well the Olympics are going to attract a lot of sponsers, I can't personally see why they'd even apply if there wasn't a profit of some kind. It's not gonna be some stupid fuckin tourist attraction like the dome, this is something that gets big sponsers involved.. so politicians can line their pockets
2006-11-21 18:37:43 · answer #8 · answered by I Feel Like Lickin Your Chicken 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All those who are sneering at the Londoners who have to pay for the Olympics - maybe we should only have Londoners representing the UK at the Games, if you're gonna be so rude!!!
2006-11-21 18:41:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
People coming from abroad will use London shops and services therefore contributing to the local London economy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that the "village" will be available for housing, ect after the games...?
2006-11-21 18:34:14 · answer #10 · answered by life_aint_a_game_10 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋