Some Bostonians are fighting to keep the 2024 Summer Olympics out of their city due to economic and opportunity costs. Andrew Zimbalist and Christopher Dempsey join Steve Kornacki on MSNBC to discuss. Watch.
Chris Dempsey made this argument:
The polls show that fewer than half people in greater Boston are excited about the games coming to town. People here understand that Massachusetts needs to think big but it also has to think smart, and when you look at the experience of prior host cities, it hasn't left them with good outcomes. People here wants their civic leaders focused on education and healthcare and improving their day-to-day lives in Massachusetts, not on a three week event that's ten years away and really benefits others, not the people who live here.
Andrew Zimbalist, who is an economist, made the following argument:
I think the main benefit of the Olympics is a feel good benefit that lasts for 17 days and maybe trickles on for a couple of weeks after that. The economic benefits have not been forthcoming. There's very little evidence, especially since 1984 in LA and 1992 in Barcelona, very little evidence that you get increases in tourism in the short run or in the long run, or that you get increases trade, or the you get increases in foreign investment. There's a lot of hype about that—the proponents always claim that it's going to happen—but the empirical evidence isn’t there.
