Argument for and against government financial support for special events

Introduction

Particular events cover well-planned cultural, amusement, athleticss, political and concern events such as Olympic Games, World Cup, the World Expo, Art and Culture Festivals, public presentations, and charity fundraising. Australia has 1000s of festivals every twelvemonth ( Gibson, 2009 ) . Economically talking, these events may make economic value for the local. Of class, the successful retention of these events are besides in demand of fiscal beginnings. Deficit of financess frequently leads to failure of the events. Social capital is frequently limited. From a fiscal point of position, the Government ‘s fiscal support will be an of import aid to raise financess to successfully host these events. Olympics are the event assorted states compete for. The Successful keeping the Olympic Games requires immense fiscal resources. 2008 Beijing Olympics is the most expensive Olympic Games in the history. This paper will foremost discourse the statement for and against authorities ‘s fiscal support for particular events such as 2008 Beijing Olympics. Following that, the paper will do overall rating on authorities ‘s fiscal support for particular events.

Hire a custom writer who has experience.
It's time for you to submit amazing papers!


order now

Arguments

Economically speech production, some events such as Olympic Games, World Cup and World Expo, may make economic benefits which is besides the intents of the events, while some events such as Art and Culture Festivals, public presentations, and charity fundraising may non make economic benefits, but create other benefits such as cultural benefits and environmental benefits. However, the successful retention of these events besides needs fiscal beginnings. Deficit of financess frequently leads to failure of the events. The deficiency of societal capital consequences in turning to the authorities. Of class, Government ‘s fiscal support will be an of import aid. However, there is a argument on the authorities ‘s fiscal support for particular events.

Argument for authorities ‘s fiscal support for particular events

Some people think the authorities should do fiscal support for particular events. They insist that the Government ‘s fiscal support can do the event more successful and pull more viewing audiences, which can hike the regional economic system. Supporters argue that the authorities is besides donees of a successful event. Government can derive public congratulations and accomplishments from the successful retention of the events. Naturally, the authorities should pay a fiscal monetary value for these additions. Furthermore, they believe that particular events should be treated as net incomes tools by the authorities. Therefore, authorities outgo is sensible and necessary ( Allen et al, 2000 ) . Supporters argue that the Beijing authorities should prehend the chance to gain at the Beijing Olympics. Therefore, the Beijing authorities should make their best to set fiscal support to do this event more attractive, therefore hiking a assortment of industries such as existent estate industry and touristry. To some extent, the host metropolis of Beijing Olympic Games besides agreed fiscal support. Otherwise, the Beijing Olympic Games would non be the most expensive event in the history. In 2000, when Beijing submitted the command paperss for the Olympic Games to International Olympic Committee, the substructure undertaking cost was estimated 14.3 billion U.S dollars. After a few old ages, due to surging trade good monetary values, building costs probably exceeded the original projections. Therefore, a entire cost invested by China for the Olympic Games is more than 20 billion U.S. dollars ( Owen, 2008 ) .

Evaluation on the position of protagonists

This position places excessively much accent on economic benefits brought particular events. They even think the authorities should take these particular events as a tool for net income. The advantage of this position is that it gives a sensible economic ground the Government ‘s fiscal support for particular events. However, this position ignores the undermentioned considerations.

First, many particular events are non for net income. A study on the Australian festival shows 74 % of the festival is non for the interest of net income. Merely 3.3 % of the festivals were run seeking net income ( Gibson, 2009 ) . The original purpose of the Olympic Games is non for fiscal addition, but is to a carry frontward the athleticss civilization ( Burton, 2003 ) . In add-on, the charity events are non for economic involvements, and they are unprofitable.

Second, the outlooks may differ materially from consequences and the authorities fiscal support may take immense fiscal load. True, a batch of particular events can convey economic benefits. However, there are exclusions. 1976 Montreal Olympic Games cost 50 billion of which merely 5 % was from corporate and private investing while every bit high as 95 % was from the investing of authorities. The Government did non anticipate the consequence is a loss of 15 billion U.S. dollars ( Burton, 2003 ) . Harmonizing to Gibson ( 2009 ) , if the cost is excessively big, this event would non be a “ good balance ” , because the pecuniary benefit will be non plenty. The cost of inputs for the Olympic Games in Beijing is immense. Despite the drawn-out economic growing, China ‘s per capita income is still at a lower degree, less than 3,000 U.S. dollars. In Beijing ‘s command paperss, the expected substructure cost was near to the outgo of Beijing municipal authorities for the whole twelvemonth of 2006 ( Owen, 2008 ) . As1976 Montreal Olympics and 2004 Athens Olympic Games, the same hazard of big losingss for the Beijing Olympic Games will doubtless increase with the addition of fiscal investing.

Argument against authorities ‘s fiscal support for particular events

Some people do non back up the Government ‘s fiscal support for particular events. They think that means of concern operations should be more widely used to host these particular events including the Olympic Games. Commercial tools can cut down the impact caused by “ siphon consequence ” and the “ valley consequence ” ( King, 2003 ) . In add-on, they argue that the Government ‘s fiscal support for the particular event is bound to increase the fiscal load. A entire cost invested by China for the substructures and athleticss installations of 2008 Olympic Games is more than 14 billion U.S. dollars. Public money was invested in such a big graduated table to athleticss installations, which will non assist to better people ‘s support.

Evaluation on the position of dissenters

This position palaces excessively much accent on the fiscal load of the authorities, while disregarding the possible economic benefits. A successful particular event can convey economic benefits, even if the event is non for net income.

First, the success of the event can convey direct economic benefits. Harmonizing to Gibson ( 2009 ) , it is hard to accurately cipher the economic impact caused by an event. However, in fact, an event will convey economic impact, even if the event is non-profit. The Olympics can advance touristry, building industry, and lead-related industries ( Gibson, 2009 ) . It is an incontestable fact that Olympic Games can advance economic development for the host metropoliss. However, it should be said that the most direct impact is on touristry, building and service industries. Harmonizing to Gibson ( 2009 ) , audience development is worthy of concern. During the Olympics, host metropolis to host jocks, journalists, witnesss and tourers from other states in the universe. This is a enormous demand for the building industry. At the same clip, the Olympic Games will besides convey strong touristry demands, because Sporting events like the Olympics attracts attending of people around the universe. A big figure of witnesss, jocks and staff came here to take part in, watch the Olympic Games and the visit the host metropolis non merely during but besides after the event. Beijing is a historical and cultural metropolis, its intension is sufficient to pull tourers to see. Coupled with its experience of hosting the Olympic Games, it will be more attractive.

Second, the event will convey more occupation chances. Harmonizing to Gibson ( 2009 ) , it is no uncertainty that an event can increase employment chances, including full-time and parttime occupations. 1988 Seoul Olympics provided 16 million occupations for the services sector, 50,000 occupations for fabrication industry, and 90,000 occupations for the building industry ( Burton, 2003 ) . Harmonizing to experts ‘ statistics and calculating base on the investing, Beijing Olympic Games would Generate 745000 occupation chances. This will doubtless assist work out the unemployment job to some extent ( Owen, 2008 ) . For Beijing in which the employment force per unit area was still comparatively big in, this would doubtless assist to relieve some of the employment force per unit area, to increase people ‘s income and to excite economic growing.

If the deficiency of equal support, these events may neglect or can non drive more industries. In other words, merely private capital may non be adequate to do a successful specially a expansive international event like the Olympics, World Expo. Of class, the Government can play its public map to assist work out fiscal jobs instead than holding to put.

Overall Evaluation

Both sides have advantages and disadvantages. They analyzed the jobs and province grounds from two different accents. In fact, the authorities should non set excessively much fiscal support for particular events. However, the Government can non give up support for particular events. First, the Government should pay attending to every particular event. Government should mobilise all participants through its public maps. Government should seek private resources, particularly non-governmental forces and private financess from the design, planning, organisation, operation, to the human, stuff and fiscal resources. Second, Government should beef up the information services and the usage of certain agencies of appropriate macro-policy accommodation. First, the Government should seek to cut down the sightlessness of the organisers, participants and investors. For illustration, the authorities can steer the co-ordinated development of t consumer he from the hot ingestion, guide rational ingestion from herd behaviour ingestion.

In short, the Government should play the public direction maps such as service maps and ordinance maps to service and modulate specific events instead than merely supplying fiscal support.

Decision

Particular events cover well-planned cultural, amusement, athleticss, political and concern events such as Olympic Games, World Cup, the World Expo, Art and Culture Festivals, public presentations, and charity fundraising. Deficit of financess frequently leads to failure of the events. There is a argument on the authorities ‘s fiscal support for particular events. Supporters think that the authorities should do fiscal support for particular events and argue that Government ‘s fiscal support can do the event more successful and pull more viewing audiences, which can hike the regional economic system and that the authorities is besides donees of a successful event. Dissenters think that means of concern operations should be more widely used to host these particular events and argue that the Government ‘s fiscal support for the particular event is bound to increase the fiscal load. Both sides have advantages and disadvantages. They analyzed the jobs and province grounds from two different accents. In fact, the authorities should non set excessively much fiscal support for particular events. However, the Government can non give up support for particular events.

x

Hi!
I'm Heather

Would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out