The impact of Olympic Games on the economy of the hosting nation
Hosting Olympic Games is an honor though an expensive one. Statistically, the economic impact of arranging the show is less positive than anticipated. Many cities ended up in debts after hosting the event, which is not worth the fame. The damage is more severe for cities without the necessary infrastructure; after all, they are likely to lose money yet during the submission of the bid to the International Olympic Committee. Even such an advanced city as Tokyo lost $150 million while billing for the 2016 Olympics. But hosting the Olympics is much more expensive. For comparison, London spent $14 billion for hosting the event in 2012.
Winning the bid for hosting the Olympics brings actually little benefit to the cities. They create temporary jobs and build infrastructure that shall be further maintained for the taxpayers’ money. It took 40 years for Montreal to pay off the debt that formed after the 1976 games, and most cities that hosted the Olympics are in a similar position. For many years, a large portion of the taxpayers’ money goes merely to pay off the debt for hosting the event that brings more fame than money.
The profit that can be generated by hosting the Olympic Games is very modest as compared to the overall expenses. For example, London spent $18 billion and earned $5.2 billion for hosting the 2012 Summer Olympics, while Beijing won back only $3.6 billion for $40 billion spent in the 2008 Summer Olympics. As for now, Los Angeles is the only city that got some profit from the games as the infrastructure for the 1984 Summer Olympics already existed there.