FIFA not concerned, yet

[kingmonty]

My comment was just one suggestion of a possible scenario that might become a reality IF one of the FIFA requirements is for all host cities to have power during matches in any other city. So e.g. to ease the load, many smaller towns/ non-host cities might have black outs if Eskom can meet FIFA guarantees any other way.

Please explain this to me because clearly I lack the intellectual power of an average pro FIFA fanboi. How is that good for the country? Is this event so important to South Africa and it's economy that shutting down power to potentially farms and mines is warranted? No, it's not. Being a little FIFA whore is only going to enrich a few puddles at the top of the urinal. South Africa should just tell FIFA, "hey, we are in **** here, let's look at an alternative plan for now."

 

[Ricard]

My comment was just one suggestion of a possible scenario that might become a reality IF one of the FIFA requirements is for all host cities to have power during matches in any other city. So e.g. to ease the load, many smaller towns/ non-host cities might have black outs if Eskom can meet FIFA guarantees any other way.

So I did interpret your comment correctly... you dont care if its not WC2010 related.

 

[capetownguy]

You just don't get it... if the rest of the country falls apart (i.e. lands up in an economic crisis), who the **** will care about the world cup? If people are told the stadiums have power while they do not, how happy you think they're gonna be? This event is a giant ****ing waste of money. The money they're spending on this event could easily have solved our power problems. But hey, blinkered views are cool too.

I don't think its a waste of money. We don't have power not because of a lack of money but because of a complacent(understatement) government who failed to respond to warning signs they received back in 1997, which If I'm correct said ...in 2007 there will be a power crisis! The blinkered view is believing that money spent on this event which was only awarded in 2004, long after the 1997 warning signs from governtment reports about the future power crisis, somehow affected Eskom's/governents capital/funds to the extent that it cause the power crisis we experience today.

The same argument applies to housing. Its the "common view" that money on stadia should be spent on houses. Money spent on the event doesn't mean that fewer houses for the poor gets built. Not enough houses are being built due to inability to deliver homes and the consistent underspending budgets by variou spheres of goverment, not because of a lack of money. Throwing billions of rands at housing won't result in more houses.

Perhaps 2010, is providing the urgency to face the huge gvt and Eskom f@#$ up sooner rather than later. Read my signature...its easy to blame 2010 for everything.

 

[capetownguy]

So I did interpret your comment correctly... you dont care if its not WC2010 related.

My suggestion is NOT good for the country at all. In fact it should never ever happen. The WC 2010 is not the be all and end all for south africa and screw the rest. BUT if the LOC can't meet FIFA guarantees who knows to what ends they will go to satisfy FIFA. My suggestion is not a solution to catering for the electricity needs for 2010, and neither am I pro FIFA.

FIFA get what they want regardless of the impact on the host country, and I'm certainly not for that. Definitely not going to support to collapse of the rest of the country while FIFA's host cities enjoy power on match days.

 

[kingmonty]

I don't think its a waste of money. We don't have power not because of a lack of money but because of a complacent(understatement) government who failed to respond to warning signs they received back in 1997, which If I'm correct said ...in 2007 there will be a power crisis! The blinkered view is believing that money spent on this event which was only awarded in 2004, long after the 1997 warning signs from governtment reports about the future power crisis, somehow affected Eskom's/governents capital/funds to the extent that it cause the power crisis we experience today.

The same argument applies to housing. Its the "common view" that money on stadia should be spent on houses. Money spent on the event doesn't mean that fewer houses for the poor gets built. Not enough houses are being built due to inability to deliver homes and the consistent underspending budgets by variou spheres of goverment, not because of a lack of money. Throwing billions of rands at housing won't result in more houses.

Perhaps 2010, is providing the urgency to face the huge gvt and Eskom f@#$ up sooner rather than later. Read my signature...its easy to blame 2010 for everything.

I'm afraid your very wrong in your various assumptions. The fact is that surplus funding was allocated to the world cup and the various structures surrounding the world cup. In fact, policing is to be increased for the event only at a cost of mere billions. The housing budget pales into comparison of the budget allocated to the world cup stadiums and the sub projects around the world cup. The World Cup and the Gautrain jointly enjoy the biggest budget cut in the country - for 2 years running now.

You cannot with a straight face claim that this event is honestly worth the money being spent on it when the country has a quarter of its employable work force unemployed. The fact is infrastructure collapse is imminent not only due to money shortfalls in budgets, but also due to factors such as shortages of cement (because all the cement in the country is prioritised for stadiums and gautrain).

We are in the midst of an economic crisis but strangely the only thing on anyone's mind is how to keep FIFA happy. **** FIFA. The world cup makes them billions - that's the only damn reason they do it. Every single thing they do is aimed at making them money, so as far as I'm concerned, the guarantees anyone offers should be to the South African citizen first, and to FIFA a distant second.

 

[kingmonty]

Perhaps 2010, is providing the urgency to face the huge gvt and Eskom f@#$ up sooner rather than later. Read my signature...its easy to blame 2010 for everything.

You still don't get it. The government is not being kickstarted into urgency. Besides, the government is not even directly doing anything for the world cup except splashing out all the money they can lay their hands on for it.

 

[capetownguy]

I'm afraid your very wrong in your various assumptions. The fact is that surplus funding was allocated to the world cup and the various structures surrounding the world cup. In fact, policing is to be increased for the event only at a cost of mere billions. The housing budget pales into comparison of the budget allocated to the world cup stadiums and the sub projects around the world cup. The World Cup and the Gautrain jointly enjoy the biggest budget cut in the country - for 2 years running now.

You cannot with a straight face claim that this event is honestly worth the money being spent on it when the country has a quarter of its employable work force unemployed. The fact is infrastructure collapse is imminent not only due to money shortfalls in budgets, but also due to factors such as shortages of cement (because all the cement in the country is prioritised for stadiums and gautrain).

We are in the midst of an economic crisis but strangely the only thing on anyone's mind is how to keep FIFA happy. **** FIFA. The world cup makes them billions - that's the only damn reason they do it. Every single thing they do is aimed at making them money, so as far as I'm concerned, the guarantees anyone offers should be to the South African citizen first, and to FIFA a distant second.

I do believe that event is worth the money being spent not only on stadia but on all the infrastructure that has become a priority due to 2010, which simply put would not have happened in the next 5 or even 10 years without 2010.

Again an example in Cape Town. Transport projects in the pipeline for 10-20 years are now, under the urgency of 2010 becoming a reality over the next few years. I believe the changes and improvements to all host cities exceed the negatives, with spending on stadia just a fraction on all goverment spending pre 2010.

I agree with your comment relating to FIFA, but we've always known that.

 

[kingmonty]

Once again Cape Town is a minority in the bigger scheme of things. In Joburg the only new development is Gautrain, which is not going to be ready for the World cup anyway.

Transport infrastructure in Joburg is already in big trouble, and the future plans to be brought in will likely cause major economical problems in itself.

The facts are these:
1. Stadiums will not uplift people.
2. The infrastructure development taking place is very world cup centric - the new buses and so forth in the Cape Town city will likely not contribute much to the future of the Western Cape's transport system
3. Housing now stands still thanks to a shortage of cement and electricity. New housing developments may very well have been in the pipeline were it not for the world cup, as it is a majorly sensitive area with the ruling party's voters.
4. A 30 day long sports event will probably not even recover the losses the economy experienced over the last three days thanks to the power shortages.
5. No new hospitals are being built right now, as all major construction is centered on getting the country ready for 2010. There was even a planned hospital who lost it's funding to the world cup.
6. We won't recoup the expenses we're forking out for this event.
7. The minority of this country is paying for this event - the people who pay tax. We won't see any return on our investment.

What a giant waste of money. Shameful.