You can gloss over the facts all you like but London since the games has become the number one most visited city... on earth. They didn't just wave a wand, say 'voila' and it happened magically. London has achieved this by investing in itself consistently over the years, and the olympics is just one instance of this.
?!?!?! London has been the most visited city on Earth for years, if not decades, prior to 2012. I'm surprised you haven't started claiming the Olympics transformed London into the UK's capital.
Why not just go full hog?
Since the Olympics, London has become the UK's biggest city! Take that, Olympic nay-sayers!
Since 2008, Beijing has become the capital of the largest country in the world!
Since 1984, Los Angeles has become the 2nd largest city in the USA!
Since 1988, Seoul has become one of the largest cities in Asia!
It's fun to attribute causality with phenomena that occur decades before their putative causes!
... and you'd be surprised why people are visiting London these days. It's not for mushy peas and a visit to the Tower or Big Ben anymore. It's because London has been forging through an international modern identity for itself, one as a world capital of music, fashion and culture. The olympics were a powerful way to message this to the world, a tool for branding. If you think it was just a big expensive party for the heck of it you're naive.
People visit London because it's a big city with lots of attractions in lots of fields. Coincidentally, London's status also helped it land the Olympics. Nobody is travelling to London because it's got some "Olympic legacy." ("Skyler! Look at this here velodrome! Glad we didn't go to some stupid White Cube Gallery!")
It is a big expensive party for the heck of it, which is why nobody finds actual tourism benefits. Ever. I'm still waiting for you to actually provide a study suggesting Barcelona had a measurable tourism boom
from the Olympic Games.
Nonsense. This area was a massive derelict tract of land in central London, not just anywhere. The billions required for revitalization (basic infrastructure alone) are what was preventing development here. The games were leveraged for the financial justification and the political impetus. This area will now become London's third major business node, and it is shifting central London eastward.
Have you ever been to Stratford or London?? Nobody would describe it as
central London (sic). It's literally about the distance of the Beaches from downtown Toronto.
Literally everywhere in London, including areas that are heavily derelict and lacking in basic amenities, are seeing untold billions in investment. London didn't need the Olympics to have people invest in London property. There's so much demand to do that there are consistent demands to stop the flow of investment into the city.
The stadium will have a life beyond the games, it is not the white elephant that the anti-progress Olympic nimbys insist it would be. The specifics of the deal are irrelevant to the opportunity the games provided.
They're not irrelevant at all. If a bunch of rich dudes wanted a new stadium, they should have paid for it themselves. Public spending shouldn't be used to funnel money to the wealthiest and most politically connected amongst us.
But you probably think Skydome was a great public investment because it was so visionary.
Riiiiight, so we do nothing then. That's truly brilliant. I'd rather have a tri-level government organization overseeing this and working with Waterfront Toronto to effect change and progress than sit back on our hands in gridlock just because you have trust issues. Oversight by upper levels of government will make sure we don't end up with a subway to some Toronto politician's backyard.
Umm, we're NOT doing nothing. We're literally spending 10s of billions of dollars a decade and have more transit investment than any city in North America save NYC.
Moreover, oversight by upper levels of government is often WHY we have subways running to backyards (e.g. Sorbara subway, Ontario Liberals and the Scarborough Subway ect...)
You keep making up flimsy justifications for why putting a notoriously corrupt organization in charge and diverting billions to hideous stadiums and security will somehow lead to better spending choices.