Government Priorities

The disparity between 'priorities' is very difficult to understand. But consider the potential for incoming profit as measured against outgoing losses. An example is the current flooding issues. The capital cost of providing planned defenses against future certainties, that will continue for evermore, seems impossible to manage. Arguments concerning the cost outlay of providing and storing equipment for the occasional severe snow conditions do not stand up against a one-off multi £bn event of a known start-date and duration. The cost of a single 16-day event is no problem: the...

Olympic Games

It's quite an obscene cost comparison, yet it is planned. The perceived prestige of hosting is parasitical in that the only motive that drives such a non-affordable debt acquisition is more 'growth'. And ahead by 5 years.

Growth defines future 

Potential fortunes to be made are always considered as the very positive priority, but any outlay that will benefit millions forever, and a major responsibility of government to protect citizens of this country, is a very negative cost burden. And avoidable until too little, too late has to be addressed.

Money is very difficult to 'conjure up', when there is no profit potential.

Taxpayer-funding without asking the taxpayer and lottery fund 'raids' are all possible when the public doesn't benefit. So, how does the public benefit from being the host for the Olympic Games?

Essentially bankrupt a nation for decades. And where does the money go?

£9.3bn