Final Forum™ Thesis - Tate Compton

Summary

Highlights

• Tate Compton suggests a 'No Build Olympics' approach, limiting hosts to cities with existing infrastructures. 🛠️
• Olympic-related constructions have displaced over 2 million people in 50 years. 🚧
• Many past Olympic facilities are now disused and abandoned, wasting resources. 🏟️
• LA plans to use only existing venues for its 2028 Olympics, setting an example for sustainable hosting. 🌿
• The 2004 Athens Olympics nearly bankrupted Greece, demonstrating financial risks. 💸

Key Takeaways

• Olympic hosting has led to significant community displacement and financial strain on host cities. 🏚️
• A "No Build Olympics" model, limiting hosting to cities with existing facilities, could mitigate these issues. 🏟️
• Current IOC selection criteria might not adequately prevent human rights and financial issues tied to hosting. 🏛️
• The historical narrative shows how economic expectations around the Olympics have exploded, often leaving cities in debt. 📈
• Temporary facilities, like those used by Paris, present a viable alternative to expensive permanent venues. 🏗️

Overview

Chapters

• 00:17 - 00:20: Introduction and Welcome The chapter titled 'Introduction and Welcome' seems to have started with some background music as indicated by the transcript. Unfortunately, the content of the spoken or written parts following this music are not provided in this transcript. As a result, a detailed summary of the chapter's content cannot be generated based on the given information. If there is more text or dialogue following the music, including that would allow for a more comprehensive summary.
• 00:20 - 00:21: Opening Prayer The chapter begins with the sound of music, setting a tone of reflection and reverence. The atmosphere is likely calm and serene, inviting readers into a space of contemplation or spiritual readiness. The music acts as an opening to the prayer session, possibly signaling the transition from the secular to the sacred. The lack of spoken words suggests a focus on inner thoughts or the ambiance rather than verbal communication. This chapter sets the stage for what is to come, preparing participants or readers for a prayer experience.
• 00:21 - 00:42: First Presentation: Tate James Compton The chapter titled 'First Presentation: Tate James Compton' opens with a musical introduction, setting the tone for the content that will follow.
• 00:42 - 01:05: Q&A Session The chapter begins with background music indicating the start of the Q&A session.

Final Forum™ Thesis - Tate Compton Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 [Music] [Music]
• 00:30 - 01:00 [Music] [Music]
• 01:00 - 01:30 [Music]
• 01:30 - 02:00 [Music]
• 02:00 - 02:30 [Music]
• 02:30 - 03:00 [Music]
• 03:00 - 03:30 [Music]
• 03:30 - 04:00 [Music]
• 04:00 - 04:30 [Music]
• 04:30 - 05:00 [Music]
• 05:00 - 05:30 [Applause] [Music]
• 05:30 - 06:00 [Applause] [Music]
• 06:00 - 06:30 [Music]
• 06:30 - 07:00 [Music]
• 07:00 - 07:30 [Music] [Music] [Music]
• 07:30 - 08:00 [Music] [Music]
• 08:00 - 08:30 [Music] [Music]
• 08:30 - 09:00 [Music] [Music]
• 09:00 - 09:30 [Music]
• 09:30 - 10:00 [Music]
• 10:00 - 10:30 [Music]
• 10:30 - 11:00 [Music]
• 11:00 - 11:30 [Music] [Music]
• 11:30 - 12:00 [Music]
• 12:00 - 12:30 [Music]
• 12:30 - 13:00 [Music]
• 13:00 - 13:30 [Music] [Music]
• 13:30 - 14:00 [Music]
• 14:00 - 14:30 [Music]
• 14:30 - 15:00 [Music] [Music]
• 15:00 - 15:30 Hey everybody, this is your two-minute warning. We will start in about 2 minutes. [Music] [Music]
• 15:30 - 16:00 [Music]
• 16:00 - 16:30 [Music] [Music]
• 16:30 - 17:00 [Music] [Music] [Music]
• 17:00 - 17:30 [Music] [Music] All [Music]
• 17:30 - 18:00 right, if everyone could enter their seats, we'll get started. All right. Hi everybody and welcome to the final forum thesis presentations for Veraritoss Academy for the year of 2025. My name is AJ Hannenburg. I'm the department head of ours thesis program here at Veraritoss.
• 18:00 - 18:30 Quintilian defined an ortor as a good man speaking well. Tonight's presentations in their ideal are that good students speaking well. Though speaking well isn't quite the right translation. It would be more like speaking good as in speaking good into the world. And that's what we hope our students do through their speaking bring good into the world. It's what I hope. It's why I'm still a teacher. Uh, each presentation will be about 20 minutes long, memorized, followed by a 20-minute question and answer portion. If they hit the 20-minute mark during the presentation, they'll hear this sound,
• 18:30 - 19:00 after which they have about a minute to wrap things up. They are competing for the honors of top speaker, which brings both a $2,000 scholarship, a whole barrel of house points, and bragging rights. They're evaluated on uh not by the panel that asked them questions here, but by the thesis team, which includes myself, Graham Donaldson, Zeke Pickering, Ashlin Thompson, and Katherine Ball. We evaluate them on seven criteria. So, first is the five cannons of rhetoric. The first of which is invention, which is the crafting of the argument. How well did they use the
• 19:00 - 19:30 means available to them to craft something that is logical and compelling? Arrangement, which is the ordering of the speech. Is everything placed for maximum impact? Do you as an audience ever get lost as they say what they're going to say? Also, the style, which is the quality of the pros. Is it succinct, clear, and memorable? Uh memory, how well they carry what they wrote to the stage. Delivery, which is the quality of the per performance. If they look comfortable and professional, then they're doing it right. Then we have the Q&A portion, how thoroughly and
• 19:30 - 20:00 pointedly they answer the questions. We also have the Os which go through the entire performance both delivery and Q&A and those are Aristotle's uh Aristotle's three corners of rhetoric which is ethos did the speaker establish themselves as trustworthy then argue from that solid ground pathos did they tug on your heartstrings and logos did they speak with solid logic free of fallacy during the presentations please keep your phones dark silent and in your pocket once begun the doors will lock and you
• 20:00 - 20:30 won't be readmitted if you have to leave for some The winner will be announced at graduation. And no, if you ask us, we will not tell you. They'll get at graduation. If they win, they'll get a special pin, a big silly novelty check, and a special wreath made from honest to goodness foliage personally by myself and Mr. Donaldson. On a final note, it is hot in here. It's probably going to stay hot in here because our AC is broken. If you need to use your program as a little fan, that's probably okay. I will probably lose my jacket at some point and so may our presenters
• 20:30 - 21:00 especially between their delivery and the Q&A. Not promising it's going to happen. They are just allowed to do it because it's so hot in here. So with that said, I'm going to ask Miss Thompson to pray for us. Okay, let's pray. Lord Jesus, we do just thank you for the opportunity to come together um and just see um our our students be able to do their capstone project. And um Lord, we pray that you will be with each of them with Tate and Austin and Finley and
• 21:00 - 21:30 Jack. That you will give them grace under pressure and um help them to um come away from this evening feeling um confident and um pleased and proud of all that they've accomplished. Um Lord, I pray for um those in the audience that just want them to do their very best, that you will give them peace, that you will help all of us that just really enjoys this, the joy, this opportunity um to see our students um be that good man speaking well. We love you, Lord,
• 21:30 - 22:00 and we give you this evening in your precious night. Amen. Thank you, Miss Thompson. Okay, let's welcome our first presenter of the evening, Mr. Tate James Compton with his thesis, Torching the System: Hosting No Build Olympics. Let's give him a hand. [Applause]
• 22:00 - 22:30 Via Alto Dromo housed more than 700 families in a peaceful haven untouched by the chaotic sprawl of Rio de Janeiro's urban landscape. It was one of Rio's many favllas, lowincome communities of small homes. These families loved their neighborhood, invested in it by paving the streets themselves and building a bus stop. and in 1992 secured 99-year leases for their homes from the Brazilian government. Via Automa was thriving and peaceful.
• 22:30 - 23:00 Despite these long-term leases and tight-knit community bonds, it became a target of the Rio government in its preparation for the Olympic Games. In the years leading up to Brazil's 2016 Summer Olympics, Via Altomo stood in the construction path for Rio's Bar Olympic Park project. At first, the government guaranteed VA residents that their favlla would be spared. But in 2010, it required them to leave as construction began, moving them to cramped housing in distant suburbs.
• 23:00 - 23:30 They refused. Officials began turning off water, cutting power lines, and even demolishing homes. Each day, more and more members of the Vio community began piling into the church, praying for their community's survival. Denise Costa Santos, a 66-year-old resident at the time, said, "I'm not leaving." Even though there's no water most of the time, "The pipes have burst. They've cut down the trees and my house
• 23:30 - 24:00 shakes because of construction work." Yet later, she recalled the powerlessness she felt walking home from the store only to see a huge bulldozer crush her home of 26 years. In the end, most of Via Alto was destroyed. Only 20 families remain in the area out of the original 700 living in a few untouched houses while the rest of the 3,000 people are scattered in inner city apartments. For VIA residents, the glory
• 24:00 - 24:30 of the Olympic Games meant only destruction and grief. A community lost to make way for parking lots and access roads. The International Olympic Committee or the IOC utilizes a straightforward selection process for determining host cities. 10 to 14 years before the games occur, cities submit budget proposals or bids to the IOC that include costs and planned infrastructure. The IOC evaluates these bids based on a set of guidelines that state host cities must demonstrate a sustainable legacy plan
• 24:30 - 25:00 that aligns with long-term developmental goals of the region, including economic, social, and environmental aspects. Then the IOC votes to determine the host city. The IOC's guidelines would work if global expectations surrounding the games, their energy, extravagance, and amazing facilities had not increased exponentially. Rather than just share a bunch of numbers with you, I'm going to tell you a story. Once upon a time, Olympic budgets were fairly tame. The
• 25:00 - 25:30 1984 Sarva Winter Olympics, $320 million. The 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics, 570 million. Even the 19 Even the 1984 Los Angeles games, 2.2 billion. Even Moscow's 1980 Summer Olympics with all its Cold War grandeur came in at only 3.5 billion. Now, fast forward to 2008, where Beijing took that old budget playbook, shredded it, and set a new record, a jaw-dropping $40 billion, 11
• 25:30 - 26:00 times the price of Moscow's games. The opening ceremony alone cost 461 million, 15 times what Calgary spent in 1988. These numbers and all the rest are accounting for inflation. These cost explosions are driven by the everinccreasing size and scope of the games. The 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics hosted 1,000 athletes for 12 days and 39 gold medal events. By 2002, Salt Lake City hosted 2400 athletes for 17 days and 80 gold medal
• 26:00 - 26:30 events. Beijing's 2022 Winter Olympics hosted 2,871 athletes across 109 events. This number is 12 times the first Olympics, Athens 1896, which had only 241 athletes. Not only have the number of athletes and events increased, but the amount of land required to host has also increased dramatically. For the 1896 first modern Olympics in Athens, only seven minis were needed. But today, the
• 26:30 - 27:00 games require an average of just over 30 facilities. For the 2000 Sydney Summer Olympics, 29 vineies were built. London built 31 in 2012. In a densely populated urban metropolis, there is no room for this footprint. As every aspect of the Olympics has bloated, the number of cities applying to host has declined. In 2016, when Rio won the bid, five cities applied to host. For the 2024 games, only two cities
• 27:00 - 27:30 applied. Paris, which hosted, and LA, which will host in 2028. Cities are beginning to understand the colossal price tag of hosting and the long-term detriment to their citizens. And some are losing interest. For the rest, I propose the IOC should limit Olympic hosting to cities with pre-existing Olympic standard facilities. The IOC should create this limit because some host cities are financially unprepared for the extravagant overheads required to host.
• 27:30 - 28:00 Second, the IOC should also limit Olympic hosting to those existing facilities because those facilities often go unused and fall into disrepair once the games are over. Finally, the IOC should protect host city residents who are often displaced due to construction. First, as Olympic budgets increase, fewer cities are prepared for the financial outlay of hosting. These costs include infrastructure, larger roads, more airport gates, and expanded public transportation, security,
• 28:00 - 28:30 construction of highly specialized facilities for each sport, plus massive venues with enough space for both ceremonies, athlete housing, and marketing and broadcasting. The Olympics financial demands have always burdened host cities. According to an Oxford study, each Olympic since 2000 has cost an average of $22.2 billion. For perspective, the most expensive non-Olympic sporting venue ever built is the Sofi Stadium in Englewood, California, totaling $5.5 billion. With the money spent on Sochi's
• 28:30 - 29:00 2014 Winter Olympics, 67 billion, you could build 12 SoFi stadiums. Cities fund their Olympic budgets by combining local and federal tax revenues, private investments, ticket sales, and loans. Yet since 2000, cities have faced an average budget overrun of around 300%. This trend began long before that. The 1976 Montreal Summer Olympics surely stands as the first major Olympic
• 29:00 - 29:30 failure. Montreal budgeted $ 1.5 billion for the games. But because of wild ambitions, poor communication, construction delays, and egregious underbudgeting, costs surpassed $7 billion. A shocking 500% budget overrun. For perspective, this is equivalent to the total global box office gross of all eight Harry Potter films combined. This massive price tag hurt Montreal's economy, requiring 30 years to pay off the debt. So's 2014 Winter Olympics also
• 29:30 - 30:00 faltered financially, skating past its $10 billion budget to spend upwards of 66 billion. The only Olympics to make a profit since 1932 were LA in 1984 and last year's Paris Olympics, which I will speak to later. But the biggest loser by far has been Athens in 2004. The 2004 Athens Olympics stand as a stark warning of how hosting the games can spiral into economic catastrophe. Athens applied to host the
• 30:00 - 30:30 Olympics in 1997, excited to bring the event back to its roots after a hundred years. They budgeted $1.6 6 billion for the games, but spent 15 billion due to expanded construction and security. With Greece's national debt already at 150% of the country's GDP, it was in no position to host. The Olympic debt pushed Greece past the breaking point of its debt, requiring an $116 billion European Union bailout to prevent complete financial
• 30:30 - 31:00 collapse. Athletes compete and tourists cheer for two weeks. Then city taxpayers will have to pay off huge debts for years and decades. Cities that have previously hosted are better able to predict and manage Olympic overhead. Were the IOC to choose a city with existing facilities and infrastructure, the cost of hosting the Olympics would drop and the economic pressure on host cities would decrease. Relying on existing facilities brings me to my second point. Host cities must present a variety of of
• 31:00 - 31:30 Olympic facilities for the games, including track and field stadiums, swimming complexes, and the Olympic Village. Facilities built specifically for the games often go unused and fall into disrepair once the games are over. They become expensive single-use stadiums that are left to decay. In fact, the IOC's own report in 2022 admits that more than 15% of of Olympic venues are no longer in use today. Let that sink in. Over 120 abandoned facilities worldwide, ghost stadiums, empty pools,
• 31:30 - 32:00 silent arenas, and many more are barely used. As I previously stated, with an increase in the size of the Olympics comes an increase in the amount of facilities necessary, which has risen from around seven to more than 30 in recent years. The games have grown to include more niche sports like skateboarding, break dancing, and rock climbing. Each of these specialized venues means high build costs with the skateboarding facilities for Tokyo 2020 priced at over
• 32:00 - 32:30 $20 million. Unused Olympic venues, white elephant facilities that cost fortunes to build but build but yield little profit are scattered across the globe. More than half Athens 2004 Olympic venues are idle and crumbling as of 2022, including the $300 million aquatic and tennis centers which show the mold and cracks of neglect. Despite Rio's claims, huge venues like the hund00 million Rio Olympic Aquatic Center, where Michael Phelps earned his
• 32:30 - 33:00 final gold medals, sit in complete disrepair. In Sochi, five of the main six venues built in 2014, lie dormant, including the $800 million Fished Olympic Stadium. Beijing's iconic and uber expensive $850 million bird's nest stadium also joined the list of unused facilities. all represent devastating returns on investment. Olympic venues generate revenue, but not nearly enough to offset the cost of building them. As the
• 33:00 - 33:30 expenses of hosting the games have soared, revenues not only cover a small portion of the total overhead required to host. Beijing's 2008 Olympics brought in $3.6 billion, while costs exceeded $40 billion. Similarly, Tokyo's postponed summer games generated 5.8 8 billion in revenue, but incurred 13 in expenses. With millions spent to build just one of these facilities and millions spent to maintain them each
• 33:30 - 34:00 year, permanent Olympic venues are no small endeavor for host cities. LA is taking steps to solve this issue, promising to be the first city to rely only on existing facilities. LA is implementing strategies such as using the UCLA campus for the Olympic Village and the Sofi Stadium for both ceremonies to ensure it won't need any new facilities for its Olympics in 1932. LA built only one facility, a swimming center, which it used again in 1984 and will be used in the 2028 Olympics as
• 34:00 - 34:30 well. Paris also used similar strategies in the 2024 games, placing 80 to 95% of events and existing facilities. Along with reusing older venues, Paris also built many temporary ones which were removed after the games. If all Olympics could be like Los Angeles, no build or at least only building temporary facilities, the cost of hosting the Olympics would drop and facilities would not become modern-day Aussie mandas. Look on my worksie
• 34:30 - 35:00 taxpayers and despair. No build Olympics would also decrease pressure on host city residents. This is my final reason why we should limit Olympic hosting to cities with pre-existing facilities. Construction of Olympic facilities has displaced more than 2 million people in the last 50 years as homes were destroyed to pave the way for this huge event. This displacement breaks down community bonds and destroys host city residents lives. and Rio de Janeiro. Preparations
• 35:00 - 35:30 for the 2016 Summer Olympics led to a massive wave of evictions and relocations in FLLAS like Via Automo. Entire communities were uprooted as the government and developers cleared land for the Olympic venues and tourist friendly infrastructure. More than 77,000 of the 12 million people living in Rio in the years before the 2016 games were evicted. That's like evicting the entire student population of Texas A&M. These residents were moved to distant,
• 35:30 - 36:00 poorly connected areas far from their former homes and workplaces. The Olympics leave a trail of displacement. London's 2012 games forced out East Londoners, including 450 Clays Lane residents given only 3 weeks to relocate. Similarly, Soul's 1988 Olympics destroyed 48,000 homes, displacing nearly 720,000 people, equivalent to 10 communities the size of Circle C. Some
• 36:00 - 36:30 given only hours of notice. According to the Center on Housing Rights and Evictions, more than 20% of Limik's displaced people report a decline in living conditions. As one Beijing resident put it, "As soon as you're evicted, you lose a part of your livelihood. Host cities use this mass relocation to create space, usually dismantling or displacing older, poorer communities to raise status. The Olympics bring tourism and investments. So, host cities want to project an image of a modern, thriving
• 36:30 - 37:00 metropolis. That means eliminating any embarrassing, undesirable aspects like lowincome housing projects or vulnerable homeless populations. Ahead of the 1996 Summer Olympics, Atlanta demolished Techwood Homes, a publicly subsidized housing complex of more than 4,000 residents to revitalize the city for the international spotlight. The apartments deemed outdated and unattractive were considered an eyesore. Instead of improving the homes, the government
• 37:00 - 37:30 evicted residents and built a new, more appealing neighborhood for tourists and wealthier residents. New town houses priced at $225,000 were way out of reach for families who had paid as little as 120 a month. As the 1996 Olympics loomed, Atlanta also changed its laws to arrest more than 9,000 unhoused people, giving them one-way bus tickets out of the city and making them sign statements promising that they wouldn't return. This social cleansing mirrored what happened in Seoul in 1988. and
• 37:30 - 38:00 Guangi Dong, 20,000 residents were evicted to make way for a new cultural district, given little compensation and no promise of nearby housing. These residents were left with no choice but to fend for themselves, cut off from critical services and outreach. Residents of Shanty Town Sonia near Seoul also faced eviction because of the location along the Olympic torch route. A documentary of their struggle ended with a harrowing promise. Olympic guests will rest assured that they will
• 38:00 - 38:30 not have to suffer the discomfort of seeing a single poor person in soul. No build Olympics might not eliminate host host city's desire to carry out this social cleansing, but it will take away their excuse to do so. No matter the joy and triumph of the Olympics, host city residents are often displaced and mistreated for the sake of the games. Selecting cities with existing facilities would protect host city residents and cause less turmoil and harm for citizens. Opponents who argue that the
• 38:30 - 39:00 Olympics generate significant economic growth for host cities often fail to acknowledge the stark reality that the costs typically far outweigh the revenue generated. Cities expect the Olympics to stimulate local economy, bring tourism, and improve public amenities. But most end up with large debt, unused facilities, and burdened taxpayers. Beijing's 2008 Olympics expected 3 million international visitors. The actual number fell short at just 1.4 million. So did revenues
• 39:00 - 39:30 with the $3.6 billion in income not nearly covering the $40 billion in total cost. Similarly, London's 2012 games expected 2.5 million international visitors. The reality only 1.2 2 million showed up, less than half the projection. This pattern repeats itself in Sochi, Rio, and Sydney. Big tourism promises and disappointing results. University of South Florida economist Philip Porter says, "The
• 39:30 - 40:00 bottom line is every time we've looked, we find no real change in economic activity." Another argument against my proposition would be that limiting host opportunities to cities with pre-existing facilities would create a monopoly and only a small handful of cities host the games. Yet between cities that have already hosted and cities that have hosted similar mega events like the World Cup, there are about 24 cities that could host the games, including Dubai, Singapore, Cape
• 40:00 - 40:30 Town, Orlando, Paris, London, and Beijing. Each would only have to host once every 50 years. With potential no build cities across the globe and many more reaching that status over time, limiting host opportunities to cities with pre-built facilities would not grant a monopoly to a small group of cities. In conclusion, the IOC should limit Olympic hosting to cities with pre-existing facilities for three reasons. First, unprepared host cities
• 40:30 - 41:00 are easily overtaken by the huge sum of money required to host. Second, facilities built specifically for the games often become single-use stadiums that are left to decay. Finally, too many host city communities are displaced to make way for Olympic venues and infrastructure. For every gold medal won by Usain Bolt, a community is pushed out of their homes. For every Shaun White to double McTist, a $2 billion venue is built. For every world record Katy
• 41:00 - 41:30 Lidducki sets, another city must cough up a $60 billion budget. It's easy to focus on the young hopefuls, bright colors, and flashy opening ceremonies of the games. But these things mask the more sinister effects of hosting. There's something truly magical about the Olympics. But when the fans and athletes leave, the city bears the brunt. The cheers in the stadiums don't outweigh the tears that remain behind. The Olympic rings stand for a
• 41:30 - 42:00 celebration of global unity of the continents and their people and peace. Yet for Via Alumo, the Olympics did not mean celebration. They meant destruction of a community, a way of life, and generations of friendships. We must call upon the IOC to adopt this new model, ensuring that the Olympics are truly a celebration of global unity for both the city and its visitors. Thank [Applause]
• 42:00 - 42:30 you. How's that? A little shorter. Can't see Miss Thompson. No, no, she's she's in a
• 42:30 - 43:00 chair. All right. Joining us for the panel tonight is Mrs. Lesley Quinnel, who was born and raised in smalltown, Texas, and moved to the weird city of Austin in 2002 to attend the University of Texas, where she studied Spanish and business while honoring her teaching or while honing her teaching skills through the UT Teach program. After graduating, she led the educational department and secured funding through grant writing for an Episcopal nonprofit in southeast Austin, all while teaching English as a
• 43:00 - 43:30 second language. Since 2021, Leslie and her husband Eric have been blessed to be part of the Veritoss community, where all three of their children are students. She currently teaches SR speech and coaches the competitive speech and debate team, earning recognition this year as a coach of special distinction from the National Speech and Debate Association. Leslie believes that since teenagers can't help but argue, they might as well earn trophies for doing it. We also have Angie Thompson who received her BA in education at the University of Texas Austin. She's worked at Veraritoss for 18 years and is currently the school of rhetoric head. Welld deserved. She has
• 43:30 - 44:00 been married to her husband Ken for 27 year years and has three grown children that graduated from Veraritoss Academy. She loves to read and be out in nature and she counts it a privilege and blessing to work at Veraritoss with such amazing faculty and talent talented students. We also have John Hallum who received a bachelor's degree in Christian studies from Austin Graduate School of Theology and a mers in educational administration from Concordia University. He's been teaching and coaching in middle and high schools for the past 14 years, nine of those right here at Veritass Academy. He's currently teaching science at Valor
• 44:00 - 44:30 North Austin. We also have Matt Thomas who's a seasoned technology executive who's led companies in the energy, semiconductor, and software markets. He and his wife Andrea have been in classical Christian schooling for 25 years. They have five children ranging from ages 24 to 11, including ver two Veraritoss alumni and two current students. He also gave me a fun fact to read. Which of these is not true about Matt? A. Matt's geeky book club just celebrated their 25th anniversary. B. Despite having zero musical experience, he's somehow an executive music
• 44:30 - 45:00 producer. C. He's currently the CEO of a chain of coffee shops. Or D, his father was a small town rodeo clown who was once gored by an angry goat. You pick. Um, all right guys, you know the deal with the paddles. Whenever you're ready, you may ask.
• 45:00 - 45:30 Hello. Great job. It was D, by the way. Um, so um really nice job and and well presented arguments. Um I guess kind of at the high level. Um it would seem that one response might be uh these cities that host the games make their own choices to do so. Maybe with the exception of Beijing who's told what to do, but um no one's forcing them to go
• 45:30 - 46:00 spend this money. No one's forcing them to look at their own numbers, do their own analysis. Um they're they're choosing to put in that work. Uh Why would you limit their ability to go put on the best games possible and let them take their own choice uh about what they're going to do to capitalize on that investment after the games are over? Isn't that really up to them? So, cities know that they're gambling when they host the Olympics. I
• 46:00 - 46:30 mean, we've seen this like there are risks of hosting the Olympics obviously as I've mentioned. So, they know they're gambling with their money and their taxpayers money, but the issue really is that they're not only gambling with their money, they're gambling with their citizens money. And the citizens didn't opt into the Olympics. They didn't vote for the Olympics to happen. So, it's kind of like how seat belts work in the United States where people know that the driving is dangerous and they know that wearing not wearing a seat belt is also risky. So, the government mitigates that risk by enforcing seat belt laws. It's a just
• 46:30 - 47:00 because a risk is known doesn't mean that we shouldn't mitigate it. And so it's I hope that answers your question. Great job, Tate. Thank you. Um so the seat belt uh reference the to me the distinguishing part about that is that you're it's the government it's the the citizens directly. the the I think the question some of us may have is why do
• 47:00 - 47:30 you think that the IOC should be the determining body, right? And and then I guess if you if there's something related, if you could follow up on what is the IOC's role as far as pushing or influencing to get those um you know high-end things built like is that are do you are you arguing that the IOC has some accountability beyond simply the choice? Does that make sense? Could you
• 47:30 - 48:00 rephrase the second question? I I'll answer the question. the IOC um they uh um sorry so the IOC has a is choosing right and you're and you're wanting them to choose people or uh countries cities sorry that have um already hosted okay and and some other things right however are they all this expense that is happening these are doing is that because the IOC is not going to choose them unless they spend the hundred
• 48:00 - 48:30 million on the aquatic and so forth. If you could speak to that. Yeah. So, I'll start with your first question. I believe you asked about the seat belt example and like why the IOC has responsibility over that. And what I would really say is in the Olympic charter, one of the main facets is respecting human rights. And when a city like Beijing comes to the Olympics, I believe that Beijing should not have been chosen because of the mass displacement that was caused from the Olympics. And the IOC's main goal, one of the main goals in the charter is to respect human rights. And so it's it's
• 48:30 - 49:00 not as much because it's a government over it. It's just there the IOC is choosing to protect those residents instead of giving the city that choice to kind of show off their facilities. And then your second question was uh why is the IOC does IOC expect these cities to present all these huge venues and stuff? Is that kind of what you were asking? Yeah. So the IOC only expects these cities to have Olympic standard facilities. It doesn't need all the all the huge amounts of cool things like opening ceremonies and stuff. The Olympics at its core and backbone is
• 49:00 - 49:30 really for athletes. The the the original Olympics in Athens was for athletes to compete against each other and show their training that they've built up for years. And so the the Olympics has been more focused on spectacle instead of successful recently and that's a real issue that we have. But with temporary facilities, as I mentioned earlier, you can really lay out some like in Paris, they three of the main uh the break dancing and the rock climbing walls were
• 49:30 - 50:00 all temporary facilities and those were maybe not as nice as what they could have been if they were permanent, but nobody really cared. I mean, the sports still went the same as it as it would have if they weren't there in the first place. Great job, Tate. So, you just brought up kind of about temporary um buildings and that was actually led into my next question for you. When doing your research, did you consider the concept of well what if cities wanted to take you know with building construction we have much more modern approaches now
• 50:00 - 50:30 modular buildings temporary buildings are much more feasible. So if a city wanted to compete on the level to host these games would they not be able to if they were proposing to build it would be new builds but it would be with modular temporary structures. Yes. So included in that city's bid would be the kind of statement that they would be building all those modular structures and that's that was happened in Paris. They were missing I think five facilities and or I think it was actually three but Paris hosted 95% of
• 50:30 - 51:00 events and existing facilities that were permanent and 5% and temporary. So my limit would not be excluding Paris from hosting the Olympics. That still would have happened. It would just be encouraging temporary facilities. But I also think there's a limit on how many of those temporary facilities you can build because if you build more if let's say 50% of the Olympics was temporary it would still rack up costs to be pretty similar to what they would have been without it. So I think there's certainly an extent to which that ends but in the Paris example totally feasible from with my limit in place.
• 51:00 - 51:30 Quick followup to that. Okay. So you mentioned that within this plan there's obviously going to be standards saying the certain number of new builds they can do that would be temporary or modular the existing buildings that are taken into account. How does the IOC actually enforce that the cities are following these measures and not going outside the scope and trying to you know sneak in a new pavilion because it looks amazing and they just want to how do how do you practically enforce all of these things? That's an issue with the IOC
• 51:30 - 52:00 actually is it has trouble enforcing because let's say you're a city and you receive the bid and it's seven years before you host and let's say three years have gone by and you haven't built anything for the Olympics. That rush of them only having four years to build your facilities is going to make costs rack up to more than they what they would have been. And the IOC can't just say you don't get to host the Olympics. Sorry, we're going to pass it to this other city. It's just they're going to have to build those facilities and so that cost is going to rack up. But if a majority of the facilities were already built, and the temporary ones are less of an issue with this, but if a majority
• 52:00 - 52:30 of permanent ones were already built, then it would kind of erase that uncertainty around is this going to cost what they actually say or is it going to cost this huge amount because facilities are 80 or 60 to 90% of the total cost of the Olympics. Great job, Tate. Um so you mentioned earlier that um there were a number of cities that would be um part of this and you said quite a few like how how many did you say would be part of the existing that could already count? 24.
• 52:30 - 53:00 24. Okay. Wow. And that's just that's an estimate. That's a great number and it sounds like that's from all over the world like a lot of variety that sort of thing. Um so thinking about that that many cities. Um and then a little bit later you mentioned that that means that they wouldn't have to host until maybe every 50 years. So thinking about even the example of Beijing and some of the others that you gave in your your second point where you you mentioned many of these venues um are being abandoned and and falling into disrepair even after just a few years. Um, won't those venues
• 53:00 - 53:30 then, if you have 24 different cities and it's kind of cycling through them, won't those venues also fall into disrepair and cause financial kind of upkeep and and stress on the cities trying to keep those up? That's a great question. Um actually if we look into it these facilities that are in those 24 cities that I mentioned host events worldwide and it's that demand for sports and events that really causes those facilities to kind of pay
• 53:30 - 54:00 themselves off. And in Rio there's no demand for tennis. So when Rio builds all its tennis facilities for the Olympics, those aren't going to go into use just purely because there's no demand for tennis in Rio. So, it's it's less of an issue with the these 24 cities that I mentioned are not going to have that problem because I've looked into them and they've all hosted many huge sports events before, but not not only sports events like world expos, world uh world fairs and things that require these huge facilities for them.
• 54:00 - 54:30 So, why not go the other direction and perhaps uh use the free market to solve this problem for you, right? cities are not notoriously great at managing infrastructure projects anyway. Um so are there did you look at other proposals to say select a company to run the buildout of the infrastructure and manage that or maybe put a cap on the
• 54:30 - 55:00 spending and let the city ma the the company manage that. any of those other things that would be um a little bit less extreme than the sort of no build because the no build would in fact as you say eliminate all but 24 cities in the entire world from being able to host. So why would you not give them that opportunity through a different approach? So what I would say to that is G giving a constru I didn't really
• 55:00 - 55:30 consider that is I have three alternative solutions that I considered but that's also a great solution. Uh the the issue with that solution is that even if we put a company construction company to run that the costs of it's just the number of facilities the sheer amount of things that have to be built there's going to be something that goes wrong unless there's like a construction company that is just perfect. I guess there's always going to be these small issues like in Rio this is probably a specific to Rio example but um one of the main stadiums actually collapsed halfway through building so they had to completely re rebuild it and that's
• 55:30 - 56:00 obviously not ideal so putting giving it to a construction company would certainly help in reducing the cost but I believe my limit kind of just like prevents any of that from happening in the first place. Oh, and then you were mentioning also what was the second question? Sorry. You mentioned that you did look at some other alternatives. Could you talk about those a little bit? I'd love to hear more. Sure. So, the three alternatives that were kind of come up in questioning
• 56:00 - 56:30 are better IOC vetting, multiple cities, and scaling down the number of sports. I'll start with scaling down the number of sports option because no city wants to be the Olympics that hosts a scale down Olympics. That's not going to advertise well. That's obviously going to decrease tourism. And as I said earlier, the Olympics are pro- athletes. And so when we start cutting out these sports, then it really starts to kind of ruin the integrity of the games. And the last issue with it is that scaling I believe that the Olympics
• 56:30 - 57:00 have already reached kind of a peak of the number of sports as we've seen. uh baseball, golf, rugby and break dancing or breaking are actually have been kind of coming coming and going from the Olympics. So like it feels like a glass and the sports are dropping in and out of the Olympics. So I believe that they're already at their limit and then multiple city solution. So that's the idea of ho hosting events in little cities around the main city of the Olympics. And there are definitely benefits to that that multiple cities are the ultimate no-build strategy, but they do kind of ruin the integrity as
• 57:00 - 57:30 well because those athletes are now split up by hundreds of miles, tens of miles, and it kind of ruins that kind of athlete culture that we have with the Olympics. So that that's the issue with that one. And then finally, better vetting. It's the question of what if the IOC just bet better. But as I stated earlier, the IOC isn't really concerned about the things you would think like budget overruns. It's more concerned with spreading the Olympics far and wide and giving giving these cities chances to host. And the real issue with the IOC
• 57:30 - 58:00 vetting is that as I mentioned earlier with those time constraints, there's just no way to predict what's actually going to happening what's actually going to happen. So a cost limit wouldn't really do much because the IOC can't just say you're not going to host the Olympics. It's gonna get built anyways and it's gonna cost more. So, answer that. Um, so Tate, um, when in your first in your intro, you mentioned, um, the 3,000
• 58:00 - 58:30 people that were scattered to city apartments because their homes are actually demolished. So um in considering your third point to um protect the communities from displacement, how many cities I mean even just over the last you know hundred years or so how many cities have taken those type of drastic measures? Um because I kind of assume I mean even in Austin they they clean out downtown during different events, right? So that those type of social cleansing meth um methods aren't going to be fixed and you mentioned that but how many cities
• 58:30 - 59:00 really take those drastic measures of like we're just tearing down your home. Yeah. So I didn't really look into how many of the cities have done that but on my research I think I mentioned around eight cities that did that. And it's that's always going to be an ongoing issue however small in the Olympics just because there's going to have to be something that's adjusted for the Olympics whether in terms of operations like medical management and security there there's always going to be some people pushed out whether it's just homeless populations moved out of the central area it's going to happen but
• 59:00 - 59:30 the issue with it is the density that it happens in. As I mentioned two million people in the last 50 years were displaced for these events in America. two million people were displaced in I think about 20 25 years to create the entire United States highway system interstate highways and that was in 25 years. So it's it's 1 million people actually sorry 1 million people in 25 years to create the entire United States highway system and that's 2 million in 50 years 1 million in 25 years it's the density of it is too great and with my
• 59:30 - 60:00 limit on on hosting it would be a lot less great for those cities that displacing people. So my question I guess is more cued towards the cities that maybe just fall short just a little bit of the Olympic standards that would be set by the IOC to be able to host um the Olympics. So for these cities that do fall short. So I guess my question better framed is this. How would the IOC um prioritize
• 60:00 - 60:30 the cities in the regards of like say you have a city that has established infrastructure but maybe they are politically unstable. maybe they don't have enough um resources put into like cyber security to make sure things are intact and safe. So would that be prioritized just because it has it does meet the building requirements set by the standards of the the new IOC requirements or would you say yes I'll go ahead and take this other city even though they have to build a little bit more in that regard. I think that would be up to the IOC and the IOC has 110 members
• 60:30 - 61:00 which actually vote to decide on the Olympics and they also have a president that's elected every eight years. It's kind of like a mini government and it's actually it's based in Switzerland. So I I believe that if if a city like that were to come to the Olympics to kind of bid and be able to host the IOC would debate about it and I'm not sure what the outcome would be. But with my limit in place, it would it would it would really make that issue less drastic because that city still isn't going to be able to output as much bad for the
• 61:00 - 61:30 Olympics as any of the other cities that like right now are like cities hosting in 2036, 2034 examples. So you you were talking about the Olympics being about celebration of world unity and uh so I was just I was kind of doing the math thinking about we're talking about about 180 countries represented in the Olympics member countries something like that and we would limit host cities to 24 cities
• 61:30 - 62:00 representing probably less than 24 of those countries. I assume Atlanta and LA, for instance, would both be uh host cities. How do you think how should the IOC um respond to those countries that feel locked out like they're frozen out of it and they're not a part of uh what the Olympics is about? That is a great concern about this. Um, I think you're kind of talking about arriving on the world stage for these countries. And the
• 62:00 - 62:30 main issue with that is that there are plenty of other ways that these cities can kind of grow their world, I guess, popularity through world exposes, which I mentioned earlier, and those also cost way less money to host. Like other games like the Pan-American, Panasian Games, these cost much less money, and they also help them build up their facilities naturally or organically for the Olympics that they could host in the future.
• 62:30 - 63:00 Okay. So, um um I actually have kind of two questions. So, the IOC, you you mentioned they already have guidelines for choosing a city, right? Like sustainability. Can you tell me what those are real quick? So I mentioned only a small portion of the do you want to mention the contract or what I was talking about in the kind of the the contract where where I'm getting I guess in this is you mentioned also um that part of this is the idea of respecting human rights and I guess my my question
• 63:00 - 63:30 is how far then do we allow the IOC to make decisions regarding human rights and whether a country should be allowed to host the Olympics based on their view of human rights or how they treat um treat humans. So I guess I'm wondering if those guidelines are already in the IOC regulations or if this is a step in the direction of letting them making those moral decisions. Yeah. So I'll start with the contract portion of that. I I actually looked at some of the future contracts for the next upcoming
• 63:30 - 64:00 Olympics and what I really found was that there was no mention of these communities displacement, budget overruns or harm or any of the things I really talked about in my paper. And so the the contracts that the IOC and the city sign as of right now are really just an agreement of the broadcasting and legal rights of hosting the games like making your own little logo, all that kind of stuff. None of the really detailed things I talked about in my top in my thesis. Um, and then your second question was kind of leading on that where where do we stop these cities that
• 64:00 - 64:30 are violating human rights? And I think that that brings a difficult question because the IOC certainly has tried to be impartial in the past by letting Moscow host the Olympics, letting Beijing host the Olympics, even though they have some pretty bad practices. And I think that would also be a job that comes down to the 110 members of the IOC to vote on. And I I think that they would do a fairly good job of monitoring that. In the end, there are just going to be some cities that host that have these human rights issues. But eliminating the huge displacement aspect
• 64:30 - 65:00 of it and the huge amount of money that city taxpayers will have to pay back will really kind of like bring down the amount of harm that the city could cause to their citizens through the Olympics only. All right, let's give a hand. [Music] [Applause] [Music] All right, we will be back at 5:30 with our next presenter. I'll see you then.
• 65:00 - 65:30 Q&A better than last time. It was good. Thank you.