[speby]

Yep, this is a common case with everyone's favorite repeat offender: Which city gets to host the Olympics?

And that has been shown, time and again, to be a huge money loser and not at all something that invigorates the economy or somehow makes a city "more legit" in the global sphere. It is, at best, symbolic and at worst, charitable [on the part of the host city].

[thrden]

While that's generally been true on a global level, the olympics have generally been profitable endeavors for American host cities. the 1984, '96 and '02 all turned a profit for host cities.[1] Further, if olympic upgrades are done responsibly the games can act as a subsidy for local improvements to mass transit, universities and other civic spaces even if the city doesn't turn a profit.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_the_Olympic_Games

[8note]

Calgary made money on the olympics; our HQ2 bid isn't shortlisted though