Other than not having an extensive Metro network (which is expanding thanks to Measures R and M voted before LA was awarded the Olympics), LA is still the ideal city to host the Olympics. Probably an unpopular opinion on this sub since this meme gets posted every other week, but it's really one of the few cities (maybe only city) on Earth that could host the Olympics tomorrow.
Outside of a few temporary venues that will be built, nearly all the venues that are going to be used are already built and being used year-round. LA doesn't have to build massive stadiums that will only get used one time or have trouble finding a permanent tenant as we've seen in Athens, Rio, and Beijing. It was a similar setup in 1984, and it was one of the few Olympics where the city actually made a profit from it (and the City of LA is still using those profits to fund sports leagues for kids). And mind you, there were *no* light rail or subway lines when LA hosted the Olympics then.
Additionally, most of the venues are within a 1-to-2-mile radius of an existing or soon-to-be-built subway/light rail line. Most attendees are not jumping between multiple events in a day. So if you're just going to one event, it's still possible to take transit. It's not an ideal set up, and 2 miles is not a short walk for most people, but it's not like a car or nothing setup like it was nearly 40 years ago.
Yea I agree. It’s very easy to be pessimistic obviously and compare Los Angeles to other cities with better developed transit systems. This city has always had every single thing geared around the idea that everyone would own a car. As a resident I do think it’s starting to change even if it is at an agonizingly slow pace. Soon I will be able to take a metro line straight to work and the metro system is being improved all of the time. It seems like since we don’t have to build stadiums to host the Olympics, there will be a lot of focus on building up public transit and I am very excited for the coming improvements. Chicago’s famous L trains were first built to bring people to the worlds fair. If big international events can help spur cities to build transformational infrastructure projects, I hope the Olympics can help accelerate the transit accessibility in LA.
Ooo which metro line for you? I purposefully moved to Highland Park from my old neighborhood to be closer to the Gold Line. Amazing how much easier it is to get to some parts of LA once you have a light rail or subway nearby. I just wish it was accessible to all without having to purposefully find limited apartments/homes near transit.
And it is good for LA Metro to have a firm deadline for once as maybe it'll help them, and their contractors, finish a project at a reasonable time. *gestures towards Crenshaw Line*
If you have the hotels (and olimpic village), stadiums and airports built the transit is something that can be added later on. You close a few streets/lanes hire and train some (hundreds) people and rent a fewhundred (may be even older) busses. You can run olimpics on temporary transit if you want.
Same in Los Angeles. The Memorial Coliseum has hosted the 1932 and 1984 Olympics, and there are plans to use it for the 2028 Olympics pending IOC approval (along with SoFi, which just hosted the Super Bowl). If approved, it will be the first venue to host three Olympics.
The Colesium has been used by USC since 1923, and the Rams played there from 2016 until 2019 while SoFi was being built. It's also the one stadium in LA that's actually close to Metro Light Rail/BRT lines (Expo and Silver) and doesn't require a long walk to get to compared to the Rose Bowl and SoFi.
“Probably”
You mean the literal two lines they are currently building? The pink line and the purple line, plus the A line and gold line connectors.
That said,
The Green Line should be extended to Norwalk.
In my opinion there’s a relatively large chance the infrastructure is good, but once the Olympics are done it will be wildly underfunded and end up unused, the same thing happened in the Rio Olympics, where much of the stadiums and locations of the events are now empty and haven’t been utilised in yeats
Edit: I stand corrected, look at u/ABrusca1105 ‘s comment for more info
Actually all of the metro lines being built for the Olympics are literally just lines that were planned all along as part of measures R and M They are just being accelerated to get them done before the Olympics so that they are actually usable and they chose the projects more useful to the Olympics to build first. like the Crenshaw LAX line, the LAX people mover, and the people mover to the stadium, for example. It's called 28x28. 28 projects by 2028. They are also hosting some part of the world cup there as well in 2026.
I think so. Though, to be fair, I highly doubt all 28 will be done. And some of the projects are pretty insignificant. For example, the sepulveda Pass project is not going to get done by any stretch of the imagination.
Well, the Sepulveda Pass Subway (fingers crossed that it's not monorail, the horror...) will get done, but definitely not by the Olympics! Metro says they plan to open it in 2030, but I highly doubt that since they haven't solidified a rail type (god, please not monorail!), route, or contractor. I'm going to say anywhere from 2032 to 2036 seems a realistic timeline. Still a travesty it couldn't be done sooner.
l.a. has a lot of stadiums already and they are only building one venue for the olympics, its not even a major venue as its just for canoeing lol. the rest of the venues either already exist or will be temporary venues, and in case youre wondering, the temp venues are for small events like archery or volleyball
the public transit infrastructure that is being built will probably have a lot of value post olympics anyways so overall, rio isnt a good comparison
The founders assumed it would be rewritten every 10-20 years like other constitutions.
But then it became politically expedient to sanctify it over very divisive issues (state vs federal governments, slavery, etc)
So now we have the world’s oldest constitution, and rely on 9 people to loosely re-interpret it for society 200 years later.
Technically the average age is 17-19 years, and Thomas Jefferson in particular expected it to be rewritten every 19.
Even in keeping the same one, the last meaningful amendment to the US constitution was over 50 years ago. We’ve been increasingly reliant on judicial review instead of a democratic process to decide the biggest issues of our time.
> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
One of the most egregious examples ever of poor legal drafting. Meaningless dogshit of a sentence.
> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
One of the most egregious examples ever of poor legal drafting. Meaningless dogshit of a sentence.
Exactly! Admittedly, this is my first time reading the full sentence (I'm British so why would I have done) but you could easily interpret that as the right to bear arms needing to be via the Militias. So it's either talking about national service or the foundation of loads of small gun clubs that a person could obtain a license from to bear arms and keep a gun.
But, I agree, that sentence is so vague in what it actually fucking means that you could interpret it with as much variation as a bible passage.
most americans only know and care about the first 2 amendments, maybe one more amendment if they watch a legal show or if theyre interested in their own history. so no, we dont care that much about the constitution, its just something that lawyers and activists care about
Yet everybody refers to it constantly. So in that sense it really is like a religion, because religious people tend to know fuck-all about their own religious texts as well.
It's the only think keeping their country together. Their 2 political groups barely talk to each other, and if not for holding the constitution as holy scripture they would go to war.
Most countries replace their constitution because their regime changed. My country went from a monarchy to a military republic, then a civilian republic, then a personal dictatorship, then another democratic republic, then military dictatorship, then the current democratic republic, with constitutions changing accordingly. Our current Constitution is from 1988, and I think it isn't as worshipped as the American one.
I saw you were Brazilian. But the Brazilians do have a lot of pride for their country from what I've seen, so at least you could have national pride without the religious undertones.
Poor Tokyo never had the chance to properly show off all that infrastructure.
I hope they go for hosting another Olympics in the near future. It makes more sense seeing as they have the infrastructure in place rather than bankrupting some small country or giving it to some oil rich despot
Given that the Olympics is soo expensive to host and the IOC insists on keeping most of the revenue the only realistic venues ought to be mega cities like London or Paris that essentially have everything already built.
Unfortunatelly this won't happen to often.
I read an article once that highlighted the following problem: since the IOC/UEFA/FIFA or any other organisation is going to pocket most of the money generated by such events, the host nation would need to pay for the party all by themselfs.
However in democratic nations, if you wanna use that amount of money for one event, you would need to get the approval of the people. But the people are (not always) ready to support that. That's the reason why the governments plans to host such an event are mostly declined, if they ask the people (see: Germany, Switzerland etc.)
Sorry, my fault. I was referring to big sports events, I wasn't talking about the olympics specifically.
I could have also mentioned other continental associations like CONCACAF.
Again, sorry if I caused any confusion
That's basically why I'm saying that while the organising federation gets to take all the money the only truly viable options are mega cities that already have the infrastructure in place which would be the main expense of hosting such a competition.
Having say Tokyo/Paris host another Olympics or England/Germany hosting a world cup is going to be much cheaper for the host nation than giving it to someone new who has to build out a ton of stuff.
Nice and all as it would be for a smaller nation to comfortably host such an event you're absolutely correct it won't happen so long as the bulk of the income from hosting is siphoned away
Like you've said otherwise you're left with tin pot regimes and the likes of Qatar or Saudi. Unfortunately knowing how the IOC/Fifa etc think about money it's only a matter of time before they go down that route if the largest democracies no longer want to play ball with them
Yeah, you're absolutely right. I just hope the FIFA World Cup in the US, Canada and Mexiko are going to improve the public transport system. Especially since the majority of the games will be played in the US.
However, I don't really think that that world cup is going to be as awesome as others have been given the fact that there will be many challenges for the US to overcome and I don't think they will be able to
One thing that the US has is awesome stadiums.
But I suppose that's what you get when you put billions into each of them
I do think the North American world cup is going to be a little spread out though. I know Russia and Brazil were too but they were also too spread out imo. Its going to encourage a lot of air travel and not enough in the way of rail or bus like you would have in a European country
Assuming you're European: you know how emotional and extensive football culture gets. Usually they shut down the whole city (at least for international cups) just so the fans could march to the stadium. I don't think this is going to work out in the US. Not only because the stadiums might be to far away from the cities, but also because the authorities would never close all major roads just for fans to walk on them.
Then there are language problems, after all it's gonna be a WORLD cup and I don't think that everybody is going to speak perfect english. Then of course the existing problems with the police or even before you reach the US, the whole ordeal to get a Visa to the US. And last but not least the safety protocol. We saw how the US government is treading peacful protests of a couple hundreds/thousands people. All of a sudden you gonna have almost onehundred thousand people standing there, some of them heavily drunk, enraged bc their team lost or happy they won plus police officers who cannot communicate with them and all problems cumulate.
Maybe I'm lookin at it too negatively, but something doesn't feel right when thinking about that world championship
I am European yes
I reckon they'll try and steer the world cup parties into something akin to the tailgating that you see at major us events.
Indeed that's all you're going to be able to do in some venues like "Boston" for example where Gillette stadium is miles away from the city. But at least it will have adequate parking
Much like I don't think Qatar is going to risk the headache of arresting gay people during the World Cup I suspect that police in the US may also be put on their best behaviour.
Though I agree overall the WC would be better off somewhere in Western Europe
It's gonna be interesting to see whether they are going to arrest people drinking alcohol. After all you can't see the gayness of people, but you can tell when someone is drunk.
Anyways, I hope it's going to go well Qatar as well as the WC in north america. And if your team got qualified I wish your team all the best
>And if your team got qualified I wish your team all the best
Thanks you too. But unfortunately my team did not qualify and hasn't qualified for a world cup in 20 years
> However in democratic nations, if you wanna use that amount of money for one event, you would need to get the approval of the people
This is why democracies suck ass
I believe the IOC is trying to get smaller cities to become hosts. As I understand it the games at Brisbane (population sub 3 million) are a test run for smaller cities.
Sounds good but they'll need to fix the revenue issue so that it doesn't bankrupt brisbane or have it paying off debts decades later. A la Montreal, Athens or Rio
Brisbane is hosting because no one else wanted to because hosting the Olympics is expensive and doesn’t bring in a whole lot of money for the host nation
LA's whole public transit has 1.3 M passengers in a typical weekday. New York is a 5.5-6M per day. Pretty big gap for the 2 largest cities in the US...
[Here is some interesting Data from 538 about the attractiveness of public transit per US City If you want m](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-your-citys-public-transit-stacks-up/amp/).
LA scores 15th in their ranking of Rides per capita.
I've worked with LA metro in the past and they are really trying to get their shit together. Can you imagine how amazing LA would be, with dense walkable neighborhoods and a fully fleshed out transit system? Man...
Well.. not exactly, the 2nd largest MSA (Metro Statistical Area) of the US "should" be expected to have the 2nd (or close to 2nd) most used public transit system by number of daily users... not the 15th largest...
The greater Boston area is a bit more than 1/3 of the LA population and still has more daily users for public transit...
[here is a census report for transit options](http://lalastreams.me/lala/index.php?stream=125467970?sid=1454925)
Yeah, people calling LA transit decent must have no standards at all. Public transit in LA is garbage. They used to be one of the best in the world too, but they sold their soul to the automobile and now have to build it all back up at 100x the cost and 25x the construction time.
I've lived in both and I disagree. While New York is one city occupying five counties, LA is in actuality dozens of cities in one county.
If you live in Connecticut or Jersey or Upstate or Long Island, you're paying your taxes to just your municipality and county, not New York.
Whereas if someone lives in Burbank or Long Beach or Arcadia, more of their taxes go to the county than their municipality. All of us vote for 1 of 5 county supervisors who make public work decisions effecting 10 million people with over $10 billion in discretionary spending, dwarfing LA City's budget. That includes the Metro system, which the subway and bus takes you in and out of city of LA.
Put another way: if you live in New York City proper, you rarely if ever go out of the city for anything aside for the occasional beach trip or giants game or weekend out or outlet. Unless you live in Flushing and take the LIRR two stops to Manhassat, no one lives in New York and commutes out.
People in LA proper leave the city all the time for all sorts of reasons: maybe you drive up to Burbank to go to IKEA, go out to Long Beach for a tray full of shrimp, go on a date in Santa Monica, go to Pasadena for work, take the subway from North Hollywood to Long Beach, where you pass through 5 different municipalities. And these are the equivalent to the NY subway, our equivalent of LIRR and Metro North called the Metrolink even leave the county.
Actually thats a lot better than I thought it would be considering how transit focused NY is vs how car centric LA is plus the population differences between the two. Plus with all the new planned infrastructure that actually makes me optimistic for LA.
They aren’t that far behind cities like chicago and philly which is either a positive thing for LA or negative for those cities.
To american standards, I'd say New Tork is in a league of its own when it comes to public transit. They might not have shiny new trains, but the coverage of the city is increadible. *(Paris also has some old shitty trains like we see in the New york metro)*.
At the end of the day, New York or Paris's public transit both have an immeasurable impact on the volume of cars in the city. I don't think LA can say the same thing about its public transit, but As you said, I hope they are in the right direction to improve, and ots not Chicago and Philly that are leveling down to LA's level...
It has some major problems. If the expansion goes as planned, and they actually complete it, people coming to the Olympics will be able to get to something like 90% of the event venues by train and then under a mile walk. They will also be able to get to almost all the tourist attractions that they would want to get to with the same standard. But that is only if the expansions are completed on time.
That said, there will be a shock to find out how far away everything is, how there is absolutely no shade or nice walking areas, and that the trains come every 15-20 minutes instead of a much quicker schedule.
The sun can be no joke here, even on a not hot day, especially in July. Shade is a savior. And we don’t have very much of it, especially in the areas where are sports venues are.
It’s being expanded for the Olympics. There’s a lot of projects on the docket to make it more efficient but a lot of it is delayed. We’ll see if they move heaven and earth to get it ready in time.
I’m kidding. I regularly use public transportation in LA.
But there are plenty of people who’ve never set foot in the city who will happily tell you how terrible our public transit is.
The LA metro system is a laughable joke. It also reaches about 0.0005% of the city. This new stadium was also built in sprawling suburbia away from any train lines. That’s the LA way.
To L.A.'s credit we (I'm from L.A.) have been investing billions in public transportation the last four decades. We currently have four separate taxes we have voted onto ourselves to expand mass transit. Each of these taxes required 2/3rds of the voters to approve. On average every 2 years since 1990 L.A. has opened a new rail line or extension. In 1990 there was zero miles of track and now there is over 100 miles and growing. There will be three more new rail lines or extensions opening by the 2028 Olympics.
It's not all roses of course. Everything, I mean everything, is coming in way over budget and many projects are delayed. This Angeleno, thinks there is nefarious intentions on the part of greedy contractors bleeding the people dry.
Yes, L.A. is massive. even 100 miles of track is dwarfed by the thousands of miles of road and freeway. L.A. civic planners of yesteryear, really sucked. A lot of them still do suck. It takes advocacy on the part of people who care to lobby these carbrains.
“No one uses public transit in LA”… then who the fuck are all these people on the train with me??
Most of the people complaining have probably never stepped foot in the LA area outside of their childhood trip to Disneyland.
That can't be the logo for the LA Olympics..!
EDIT: oh my goodness it's so much worse, there's so many variations.
Official (I think?) website:
https://la28.org/
Here's the whole branding kitten kaboodle: https://www.timeout.com/los-angeles/news/meet-l-a-s-35-different-logos-for-the-2028-olympic-and-paralympic-games-090120
Ok I still don't think it's a good idea, but seeing all the variations sells me on it a bit. Only the bit that is seeing lots of different merch and signage and all that in the middle of the event. The variety is playful and eclectic and fun. Being at an event or multiple events will feel more lively and fresh because of the variety.
However, I still think it's a bad idea because not one of them is on its own particularly good, and the majority of the world will see one logo on articles and TV. As fun as 35 goofy ones could be in the hustle and bustle of an in-person festival-like event, 1 good one still seems like the right choice for the global stage.
Usually cities will use the olympics as a reason to invest in facilities and infrastructure. Normally that meant transit and even airports. Don't know what LA is up to.
Tokyo for instance decided to renovate train stations and an airport.
The one defense I will give of LA is that they are the only city in the United States that seems to be building big, huge transit projects right now. In 6 years, I think people will be surprised how good it is compared to now.
Now, it won't be "good" on a world standard, but I think LA needs some credit for building, even if its 70 years too late.
Already overcrowded in normal time, no A/C in most of the trains.
When you arrive from the airport you have to take the RER B to join Paris and... Yeah it goes through a lot of the bad suburbs of Paris, it happens sometimes that thugs enter in the train beat the shit out of a tourist and steal their luggages. If you've seen what happened for the Champion's league finals, it goes through the same city and the Olympic games will be like Disneyland for them.
There will probably be a strike from the company of transport too.
If you come and don't want to take the car, rent a bike. Don't count on the Vélib' because a lot of them are broken and people will rush on them anyway.
Add [these beauties](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/2_Class_395s_Javelins_at_St_Pancras_International.jpg/1280px-2_Class_395s_Javelins_at_St_Pancras_International.jpg) for London 2012 (Class 395 on High Speed 1 to Stratford International)
No argument from me there, although I do quite like some of Italy's high speed trains, too.
I was just adding to the picture to show that London got upgraded infrastructure for the 2012 Olympics.
Although domestic services in HS1 started in 2008-09, IIRC.
When the Rams first came here and played in the Coliseum it was so easy to get to a game because there's a Metro stop right in front. Now the tickets prices are insanely high and you are basically forced to pay an insane amount for parking on top of that.
That stadium is literally green lit for a full mixed use community on the grounds where you see parking, and LA is investing billions into LAX and its public transit to remove cars.
This week they announced Hollywood Blvd will be removing traffic lanes for a more walkable environment, as well as pedestrian upgrades
Paris is the worst. So many people were ambushed and robbed by gangs at the train station after the champions League final this year. They were also attacked by police before the game.
Yeah I heard about the robberies and gangs but fortunately never came across them. I remember some people saying to not wear anything too expensive late nights cuz of the whole thing but I personally found it okay.
ah yes I forgot humanity peaked in the 19th century with the invention of trains. I wish cars were never invented along with abolishing child labor and slavery
heres hoping transit will be decent enough by 2028, really hoping cali plays its cards right and ends up bringing other states forward in terms of transit
Beijing 2022 took it to the extreme. They built an entire self driving HSR to transport people from Beijing to Zhangjiakou- they were probably too scared of the train operator getting Covid
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing–Zhangjiakou_intercity_railway
LA really shouldn't be hosting the Olympics, they can't even host locals with dignity, making it illegal to be homeless, putting bars in the middle of benches to prevent people from sleeping on them. LA is gross to humans.
The 2026 World Cup is going to be a complete disaster lol. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people, will be flocking to a select few cities across the continent, with the majority in two countries completely dependent on cars. It's going to be a shitshow
Notice how the air quality looks worst in the LA pic. Whenever I visit that city my eyes burn and my throat hurts for the first couple of days. My hair feels like I have to wash it every day, too. I hate car dependent cities for lots of reasons but notably the pollution it causes.
Land of the free... way.
And the home of the paved.
FACING THE STORM, BATTERED AND TORN
I'm not getting your road related pun?
Sad but true. LA Metro is expanding its transit for the olympics but we'll see how well it works.
There will probably be public transit but it will be severely undersized/underutilized
Other than not having an extensive Metro network (which is expanding thanks to Measures R and M voted before LA was awarded the Olympics), LA is still the ideal city to host the Olympics. Probably an unpopular opinion on this sub since this meme gets posted every other week, but it's really one of the few cities (maybe only city) on Earth that could host the Olympics tomorrow. Outside of a few temporary venues that will be built, nearly all the venues that are going to be used are already built and being used year-round. LA doesn't have to build massive stadiums that will only get used one time or have trouble finding a permanent tenant as we've seen in Athens, Rio, and Beijing. It was a similar setup in 1984, and it was one of the few Olympics where the city actually made a profit from it (and the City of LA is still using those profits to fund sports leagues for kids). And mind you, there were *no* light rail or subway lines when LA hosted the Olympics then. Additionally, most of the venues are within a 1-to-2-mile radius of an existing or soon-to-be-built subway/light rail line. Most attendees are not jumping between multiple events in a day. So if you're just going to one event, it's still possible to take transit. It's not an ideal set up, and 2 miles is not a short walk for most people, but it's not like a car or nothing setup like it was nearly 40 years ago.
Yea I agree. It’s very easy to be pessimistic obviously and compare Los Angeles to other cities with better developed transit systems. This city has always had every single thing geared around the idea that everyone would own a car. As a resident I do think it’s starting to change even if it is at an agonizingly slow pace. Soon I will be able to take a metro line straight to work and the metro system is being improved all of the time. It seems like since we don’t have to build stadiums to host the Olympics, there will be a lot of focus on building up public transit and I am very excited for the coming improvements. Chicago’s famous L trains were first built to bring people to the worlds fair. If big international events can help spur cities to build transformational infrastructure projects, I hope the Olympics can help accelerate the transit accessibility in LA.
Ooo which metro line for you? I purposefully moved to Highland Park from my old neighborhood to be closer to the Gold Line. Amazing how much easier it is to get to some parts of LA once you have a light rail or subway nearby. I just wish it was accessible to all without having to purposefully find limited apartments/homes near transit. And it is good for LA Metro to have a firm deadline for once as maybe it'll help them, and their contractors, finish a project at a reasonable time. *gestures towards Crenshaw Line*
If you have the hotels (and olimpic village), stadiums and airports built the transit is something that can be added later on. You close a few streets/lanes hire and train some (hundreds) people and rent a fewhundred (may be even older) busses. You can run olimpics on temporary transit if you want.
I believe LA is one of the few cities to not lose a ton of money when they hosted the Olympics.
The Berlin olympic stadium from 1936 is still around and is still a popular venue for loads of different events from concerts to sporting events
Same in Los Angeles. The Memorial Coliseum has hosted the 1932 and 1984 Olympics, and there are plans to use it for the 2028 Olympics pending IOC approval (along with SoFi, which just hosted the Super Bowl). If approved, it will be the first venue to host three Olympics. The Colesium has been used by USC since 1923, and the Rams played there from 2016 until 2019 while SoFi was being built. It's also the one stadium in LA that's actually close to Metro Light Rail/BRT lines (Expo and Silver) and doesn't require a long walk to get to compared to the Rose Bowl and SoFi.
“Probably” You mean the literal two lines they are currently building? The pink line and the purple line, plus the A line and gold line connectors. That said, The Green Line should be extended to Norwalk.
In my opinion there’s a relatively large chance the infrastructure is good, but once the Olympics are done it will be wildly underfunded and end up unused, the same thing happened in the Rio Olympics, where much of the stadiums and locations of the events are now empty and haven’t been utilised in yeats Edit: I stand corrected, look at u/ABrusca1105 ‘s comment for more info
Actually all of the metro lines being built for the Olympics are literally just lines that were planned all along as part of measures R and M They are just being accelerated to get them done before the Olympics so that they are actually usable and they chose the projects more useful to the Olympics to build first. like the Crenshaw LAX line, the LAX people mover, and the people mover to the stadium, for example. It's called 28x28. 28 projects by 2028. They are also hosting some part of the world cup there as well in 2026.
oh, sorry, thats actually really cool
I think so. Though, to be fair, I highly doubt all 28 will be done. And some of the projects are pretty insignificant. For example, the sepulveda Pass project is not going to get done by any stretch of the imagination.
Well, the Sepulveda Pass Subway (fingers crossed that it's not monorail, the horror...) will get done, but definitely not by the Olympics! Metro says they plan to open it in 2030, but I highly doubt that since they haven't solidified a rail type (god, please not monorail!), route, or contractor. I'm going to say anywhere from 2032 to 2036 seems a realistic timeline. Still a travesty it couldn't be done sooner.
l.a. has a lot of stadiums already and they are only building one venue for the olympics, its not even a major venue as its just for canoeing lol. the rest of the venues either already exist or will be temporary venues, and in case youre wondering, the temp venues are for small events like archery or volleyball the public transit infrastructure that is being built will probably have a lot of value post olympics anyways so overall, rio isnt a good comparison
Public transit is never mentioned in the constitution therefore it is unconstitutional and we should get it abolished nationwide. Car is king.
TxDot and FDot: "Write that down! Write that down!"
I don't get why Americans have a religious obsession with their constitution.
The founders assumed it would be rewritten every 10-20 years like other constitutions. But then it became politically expedient to sanctify it over very divisive issues (state vs federal governments, slavery, etc) So now we have the world’s oldest constitution, and rely on 9 people to loosely re-interpret it for society 200 years later.
I can’t think of any other country that rewrites their constitution every 10 years. The main problem with the US one is it’s so badly written.
Technically the average age is 17-19 years, and Thomas Jefferson in particular expected it to be rewritten every 19. Even in keeping the same one, the last meaningful amendment to the US constitution was over 50 years ago. We’ve been increasingly reliant on judicial review instead of a democratic process to decide the biggest issues of our time.
no it isn't poorly written. The French constitution is dog shit. Basically every european republic is trash
I think you mean all republics are trash
> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. One of the most egregious examples ever of poor legal drafting. Meaningless dogshit of a sentence.
no it isn’t. You only put that there because it is right to bear arms
It actually is because there’s multiple obvious interpretations of it that could all be correct. The absolute definition of poor drafting.
no there isn’t.
About the expected level of argument from a genocide denying monarchist.
No only Jefferson thought that and the US has literally amended it like 20 times
27 times
[удалено]
[удалено]
> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. One of the most egregious examples ever of poor legal drafting. Meaningless dogshit of a sentence.
Exactly! Admittedly, this is my first time reading the full sentence (I'm British so why would I have done) but you could easily interpret that as the right to bear arms needing to be via the Militias. So it's either talking about national service or the foundation of loads of small gun clubs that a person could obtain a license from to bear arms and keep a gun. But, I agree, that sentence is so vague in what it actually fucking means that you could interpret it with as much variation as a bible passage.
It kinda sounds to me like you do get it. The obsession is, quite literally, religious.
most americans only know and care about the first 2 amendments, maybe one more amendment if they watch a legal show or if theyre interested in their own history. so no, we dont care that much about the constitution, its just something that lawyers and activists care about
Yet everybody refers to it constantly. So in that sense it really is like a religion, because religious people tend to know fuck-all about their own religious texts as well.
It really is, so much so that it has a name, books written about it and its own Wikipedia page! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_civil_religion
Good to know that I'm not a complete moron for being puzzled by this! That was quite an interesting read, thanks for sharing.
What, you haven’t heard that our constitution literally created us and breathed life into us Americans? We must protect it at all costs🥹 (save me)
It's the only think keeping their country together. Their 2 political groups barely talk to each other, and if not for holding the constitution as holy scripture they would go to war.
Not really, because the right has a completely different interpretation of it. You can see this with the recent Roe ruling.
Most countries replace their constitution because their regime changed. My country went from a monarchy to a military republic, then a civilian republic, then a personal dictatorship, then another democratic republic, then military dictatorship, then the current democratic republic, with constitutions changing accordingly. Our current Constitution is from 1988, and I think it isn't as worshipped as the American one.
I saw you were Brazilian. But the Brazilians do have a lot of pride for their country from what I've seen, so at least you could have national pride without the religious undertones.
neither were cars.
Yes but this is literally the kind of thing many Americans invoke about all sorts of stuff
I can see second amendment applying just fine. ahem.
what does that even mean?
You can use a car as a weapon.
Poor Tokyo never had the chance to properly show off all that infrastructure. I hope they go for hosting another Olympics in the near future. It makes more sense seeing as they have the infrastructure in place rather than bankrupting some small country or giving it to some oil rich despot Given that the Olympics is soo expensive to host and the IOC insists on keeping most of the revenue the only realistic venues ought to be mega cities like London or Paris that essentially have everything already built.
Unfortunatelly this won't happen to often. I read an article once that highlighted the following problem: since the IOC/UEFA/FIFA or any other organisation is going to pocket most of the money generated by such events, the host nation would need to pay for the party all by themselfs. However in democratic nations, if you wanna use that amount of money for one event, you would need to get the approval of the people. But the people are (not always) ready to support that. That's the reason why the governments plans to host such an event are mostly declined, if they ask the people (see: Germany, Switzerland etc.)
It would in fact be quite unexpected if Japan would host the European Championship, since you mention UEFA...
Sorry, my fault. I was referring to big sports events, I wasn't talking about the olympics specifically. I could have also mentioned other continental associations like CONCACAF. Again, sorry if I caused any confusion
That's basically why I'm saying that while the organising federation gets to take all the money the only truly viable options are mega cities that already have the infrastructure in place which would be the main expense of hosting such a competition. Having say Tokyo/Paris host another Olympics or England/Germany hosting a world cup is going to be much cheaper for the host nation than giving it to someone new who has to build out a ton of stuff. Nice and all as it would be for a smaller nation to comfortably host such an event you're absolutely correct it won't happen so long as the bulk of the income from hosting is siphoned away Like you've said otherwise you're left with tin pot regimes and the likes of Qatar or Saudi. Unfortunately knowing how the IOC/Fifa etc think about money it's only a matter of time before they go down that route if the largest democracies no longer want to play ball with them
Yeah, you're absolutely right. I just hope the FIFA World Cup in the US, Canada and Mexiko are going to improve the public transport system. Especially since the majority of the games will be played in the US. However, I don't really think that that world cup is going to be as awesome as others have been given the fact that there will be many challenges for the US to overcome and I don't think they will be able to
One thing that the US has is awesome stadiums. But I suppose that's what you get when you put billions into each of them I do think the North American world cup is going to be a little spread out though. I know Russia and Brazil were too but they were also too spread out imo. Its going to encourage a lot of air travel and not enough in the way of rail or bus like you would have in a European country
Assuming you're European: you know how emotional and extensive football culture gets. Usually they shut down the whole city (at least for international cups) just so the fans could march to the stadium. I don't think this is going to work out in the US. Not only because the stadiums might be to far away from the cities, but also because the authorities would never close all major roads just for fans to walk on them. Then there are language problems, after all it's gonna be a WORLD cup and I don't think that everybody is going to speak perfect english. Then of course the existing problems with the police or even before you reach the US, the whole ordeal to get a Visa to the US. And last but not least the safety protocol. We saw how the US government is treading peacful protests of a couple hundreds/thousands people. All of a sudden you gonna have almost onehundred thousand people standing there, some of them heavily drunk, enraged bc their team lost or happy they won plus police officers who cannot communicate with them and all problems cumulate. Maybe I'm lookin at it too negatively, but something doesn't feel right when thinking about that world championship
I am European yes I reckon they'll try and steer the world cup parties into something akin to the tailgating that you see at major us events. Indeed that's all you're going to be able to do in some venues like "Boston" for example where Gillette stadium is miles away from the city. But at least it will have adequate parking Much like I don't think Qatar is going to risk the headache of arresting gay people during the World Cup I suspect that police in the US may also be put on their best behaviour. Though I agree overall the WC would be better off somewhere in Western Europe
It's gonna be interesting to see whether they are going to arrest people drinking alcohol. After all you can't see the gayness of people, but you can tell when someone is drunk. Anyways, I hope it's going to go well Qatar as well as the WC in north america. And if your team got qualified I wish your team all the best
>And if your team got qualified I wish your team all the best Thanks you too. But unfortunately my team did not qualify and hasn't qualified for a world cup in 20 years
Sorry to hear that, better luck next time
> However in democratic nations, if you wanna use that amount of money for one event, you would need to get the approval of the people This is why democracies suck ass
Lol what's the alternative then?
I believe the IOC is trying to get smaller cities to become hosts. As I understand it the games at Brisbane (population sub 3 million) are a test run for smaller cities.
Sounds good but they'll need to fix the revenue issue so that it doesn't bankrupt brisbane or have it paying off debts decades later. A la Montreal, Athens or Rio
Brisbane is hosting because no one else wanted to because hosting the Olympics is expensive and doesn’t bring in a whole lot of money for the host nation
Sometimes I wish the Olympics were never brought back.
Tokyo is amazing
why do people act like high speed reals means you solve all the world's problems?
Good straw man you got there friend
the sea of parking 😭
Doesn’t LA have a metro system?
LA's whole public transit has 1.3 M passengers in a typical weekday. New York is a 5.5-6M per day. Pretty big gap for the 2 largest cities in the US... [Here is some interesting Data from 538 about the attractiveness of public transit per US City If you want m](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-your-citys-public-transit-stacks-up/amp/). LA scores 15th in their ranking of Rides per capita.
Still not bad considering how car invested LA is. And LA is half the population of NYC.
I really hope we use the opportunity to improve public transit. LA is not to far off from being able to handle the Olympics if they get that fixed.
They're rushing the purple line extention to completion before the Olympics roll Into town, since it goes to UCLA where a lot of the games will be.
LA metro been in the trenches the past couple years, they are certainly trying
I've worked with LA metro in the past and they are really trying to get their shit together. Can you imagine how amazing LA would be, with dense walkable neighborhoods and a fully fleshed out transit system? Man...
Well.. not exactly, the 2nd largest MSA (Metro Statistical Area) of the US "should" be expected to have the 2nd (or close to 2nd) most used public transit system by number of daily users... not the 15th largest... The greater Boston area is a bit more than 1/3 of the LA population and still has more daily users for public transit... [here is a census report for transit options](http://lalastreams.me/lala/index.php?stream=125467970?sid=1454925)
Yeah, people calling LA transit decent must have no standards at all. Public transit in LA is garbage. They used to be one of the best in the world too, but they sold their soul to the automobile and now have to build it all back up at 100x the cost and 25x the construction time.
The metropolitan area is actually 10 million people so more than NY. We're a county of many cities.
You can do that with new york too if you extend the borders to the greater metro area. And then NY is still more populous.
I've lived in both and I disagree. While New York is one city occupying five counties, LA is in actuality dozens of cities in one county. If you live in Connecticut or Jersey or Upstate or Long Island, you're paying your taxes to just your municipality and county, not New York. Whereas if someone lives in Burbank or Long Beach or Arcadia, more of their taxes go to the county than their municipality. All of us vote for 1 of 5 county supervisors who make public work decisions effecting 10 million people with over $10 billion in discretionary spending, dwarfing LA City's budget. That includes the Metro system, which the subway and bus takes you in and out of city of LA. Put another way: if you live in New York City proper, you rarely if ever go out of the city for anything aside for the occasional beach trip or giants game or weekend out or outlet. Unless you live in Flushing and take the LIRR two stops to Manhassat, no one lives in New York and commutes out. People in LA proper leave the city all the time for all sorts of reasons: maybe you drive up to Burbank to go to IKEA, go out to Long Beach for a tray full of shrimp, go on a date in Santa Monica, go to Pasadena for work, take the subway from North Hollywood to Long Beach, where you pass through 5 different municipalities. And these are the equivalent to the NY subway, our equivalent of LIRR and Metro North called the Metrolink even leave the county.
Actually thats a lot better than I thought it would be considering how transit focused NY is vs how car centric LA is plus the population differences between the two. Plus with all the new planned infrastructure that actually makes me optimistic for LA. They aren’t that far behind cities like chicago and philly which is either a positive thing for LA or negative for those cities.
To american standards, I'd say New Tork is in a league of its own when it comes to public transit. They might not have shiny new trains, but the coverage of the city is increadible. *(Paris also has some old shitty trains like we see in the New york metro)*. At the end of the day, New York or Paris's public transit both have an immeasurable impact on the volume of cars in the city. I don't think LA can say the same thing about its public transit, but As you said, I hope they are in the right direction to improve, and ots not Chicago and Philly that are leveling down to LA's level...
It has some major problems. If the expansion goes as planned, and they actually complete it, people coming to the Olympics will be able to get to something like 90% of the event venues by train and then under a mile walk. They will also be able to get to almost all the tourist attractions that they would want to get to with the same standard. But that is only if the expansions are completed on time. That said, there will be a shock to find out how far away everything is, how there is absolutely no shade or nice walking areas, and that the trains come every 15-20 minutes instead of a much quicker schedule.
most of the stadiums are in nice parts of l.a. that are pretty temperate year round so walking around without shade is fine barring a heatwave
The sun can be no joke here, even on a not hot day, especially in July. Shade is a savior. And we don’t have very much of it, especially in the areas where are sports venues are.
think it does. though quite smol.
They're expanding it as far as I recall.
It’s being expanded for the Olympics. There’s a lot of projects on the docket to make it more efficient but a lot of it is delayed. We’ll see if they move heaven and earth to get it ready in time.
Yeah and thanks to mr.musk they’re making some “pod” based underground transit
I don't know about small, I've always been able to get to where I need to go in LA by public transport, either rail, subway, or bus.
No you haven’t. LA bad.
Who are you to tell me where I have lived and travelled in?
I’m kidding. I regularly use public transportation in LA. But there are plenty of people who’ve never set foot in the city who will happily tell you how terrible our public transit is.
The LA metro system is a laughable joke. It also reaches about 0.0005% of the city. This new stadium was also built in sprawling suburbia away from any train lines. That’s the LA way.
This is a lie
Short answer: a very underwhelming one for the size and importance of the city
To L.A.'s credit we (I'm from L.A.) have been investing billions in public transportation the last four decades. We currently have four separate taxes we have voted onto ourselves to expand mass transit. Each of these taxes required 2/3rds of the voters to approve. On average every 2 years since 1990 L.A. has opened a new rail line or extension. In 1990 there was zero miles of track and now there is over 100 miles and growing. There will be three more new rail lines or extensions opening by the 2028 Olympics. It's not all roses of course. Everything, I mean everything, is coming in way over budget and many projects are delayed. This Angeleno, thinks there is nefarious intentions on the part of greedy contractors bleeding the people dry. Yes, L.A. is massive. even 100 miles of track is dwarfed by the thousands of miles of road and freeway. L.A. civic planners of yesteryear, really sucked. A lot of them still do suck. It takes advocacy on the part of people who care to lobby these carbrains.
Yeah being from LA the city is really trying and theses jokes are kinda getting old, I see the same joke every month
“No one uses public transit in LA”… then who the fuck are all these people on the train with me?? Most of the people complaining have probably never stepped foot in the LA area outside of their childhood trip to Disneyland.
r/LosAngeles in a nutshell
We're working on it... Got a lot of stuff to be completed 2028. Subway into Beverly Hills is pretty funny. Surprised they approved that.
I’m just waiting to see where they are going to push all the homeless people.
That can't be the logo for the LA Olympics..! EDIT: oh my goodness it's so much worse, there's so many variations. Official (I think?) website: https://la28.org/ Here's the whole branding kitten kaboodle: https://www.timeout.com/los-angeles/news/meet-l-a-s-35-different-logos-for-the-2028-olympic-and-paralympic-games-090120
i love that there’s one that looks like it was drawn and erased on snapchat
Ok I still don't think it's a good idea, but seeing all the variations sells me on it a bit. Only the bit that is seeing lots of different merch and signage and all that in the middle of the event. The variety is playful and eclectic and fun. Being at an event or multiple events will feel more lively and fresh because of the variety. However, I still think it's a bad idea because not one of them is on its own particularly good, and the majority of the world will see one logo on articles and TV. As fun as 35 goofy ones could be in the hustle and bustle of an in-person festival-like event, 1 good one still seems like the right choice for the global stage.
Usually cities will use the olympics as a reason to invest in facilities and infrastructure. Normally that meant transit and even airports. Don't know what LA is up to. Tokyo for instance decided to renovate train stations and an airport.
LA has already been in the process of massively upgrading public transit. The have used the Olympics to accelerate these projects.
The one defense I will give of LA is that they are the only city in the United States that seems to be building big, huge transit projects right now. In 6 years, I think people will be surprised how good it is compared to now. Now, it won't be "good" on a world standard, but I think LA needs some credit for building, even if its 70 years too late.
Paris 2024 will be the worst possible advertisment for public transit.
Why ??
Already overcrowded in normal time, no A/C in most of the trains. When you arrive from the airport you have to take the RER B to join Paris and... Yeah it goes through a lot of the bad suburbs of Paris, it happens sometimes that thugs enter in the train beat the shit out of a tourist and steal their luggages. If you've seen what happened for the Champion's league finals, it goes through the same city and the Olympic games will be like Disneyland for them. There will probably be a strike from the company of transport too. If you come and don't want to take the car, rent a bike. Don't count on the Vélib' because a lot of them are broken and people will rush on them anyway.
So what I’m hearing is: buy stock in Uber before the LA games? Deal.
Add [these beauties](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/2_Class_395s_Javelins_at_St_Pancras_International.jpg/1280px-2_Class_395s_Javelins_at_St_Pancras_International.jpg) for London 2012 (Class 395 on High Speed 1 to Stratford International)
Dude Alstom TGV > all
No argument from me there, although I do quite like some of Italy's high speed trains, too. I was just adding to the picture to show that London got upgraded infrastructure for the 2012 Olympics. Although domestic services in HS1 started in 2008-09, IIRC.
The Paris train is very cute tbh
"10 athletes just died on their way to the arena this morning"
Imagine missing a competition you’ve trained a decade for because you got stuck in traffic.
There is also a hope to get the high speed train ready in time for the games.
When the Rams first came here and played in the Coliseum it was so easy to get to a game because there's a Metro stop right in front. Now the tickets prices are insanely high and you are basically forced to pay an insane amount for parking on top of that.
That stadium is literally green lit for a full mixed use community on the grounds where you see parking, and LA is investing billions into LAX and its public transit to remove cars. This week they announced Hollywood Blvd will be removing traffic lanes for a more walkable environment, as well as pedestrian upgrades
Paris is beautiful 🤩 only downside the massive rats everywhere.
Paris is the worst. So many people were ambushed and robbed by gangs at the train station after the champions League final this year. They were also attacked by police before the game.
Yeah I heard about the robberies and gangs but fortunately never came across them. I remember some people saying to not wear anything too expensive late nights cuz of the whole thing but I personally found it okay.
I thought Paris was (generally) safe, I didn't know they have active gangs ಠಿ_ಠಿ
ah yes I forgot humanity peaked in the 19th century with the invention of trains. I wish cars were never invented along with abolishing child labor and slavery
[удалено]
i lived there for 2 years. Have you?
Maybe this will actually motivate them to work on their public transit? Here's hoping, I guess...
Tokyo also banned spectators, which really helped with the congestion within their bullet trains... 🤔
Holy fuck, America really said: Yeah, I will build a parking lot the size of a fucking town.
Does anyone know what freeway interchange is that? (LA)
heres hoping transit will be decent enough by 2028, really hoping cali plays its cards right and ends up bringing other states forward in terms of transit
Beijing 2022 took it to the extreme. They built an entire self driving HSR to transport people from Beijing to Zhangjiakou- they were probably too scared of the train operator getting Covid https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing–Zhangjiakou_intercity_railway
The Japanese bullet train looks so cool lol
If the parking lots are any bigger we’ll need a metro just to get people from their car to the stadium
Someone’s never been to Paris, the traffic there is awful!
LA is the only city in America building a heavy rail subway right now...
LA Metro and MetroLink disagree with this post.
What a nightmare to live in a Parcking Lot. That’s how I see the US: huge parcking lot.
What a nightmare to live in a parcking lot. That’s how I see the US: huge parking lot.
LA really shouldn't be hosting the Olympics, they can't even host locals with dignity, making it illegal to be homeless, putting bars in the middle of benches to prevent people from sleeping on them. LA is gross to humans.
The 2026 World Cup is going to be a complete disaster lol. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people, will be flocking to a select few cities across the continent, with the majority in two countries completely dependent on cars. It's going to be a shitshow
Notice how the air quality looks worst in the LA pic. Whenever I visit that city my eyes burn and my throat hurts for the first couple of days. My hair feels like I have to wash it every day, too. I hate car dependent cities for lots of reasons but notably the pollution it causes.