Prompt: organising the olympics Holding Olympic Games is an exciting event. Some people think it has positive effects while others argue that it is a waste of money. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

That whether a country should host the Olympic Games has aroused a considerable controversy. While some people deem that it could bring enormous advantages, others assume that the nation would squander a substantial amount of money on it. In my opinion, I partly agree with the former statement. Ċ On the one hand, there are some justifications why a handful of people contend that being the host nation is a waste of money. This is because the country have to squander a host of money on constructing the state-of-the-art facilities for Olympic Games. If the national government is unable to compensate for its crushing financial loss, the country will be burdened with enormous debts. For example, in 2004, the starry-eyed government of Greek spent huge amount of money investing on up-to-date facility without considering its long-term use, resulting in its debt crisis for over two decades. Ċ On the other hand, it should not be forgotten that organizing Olympic Games could exert profound effects on the host nation's economy. It is because the country cost nothing to be its image to the world during the time the Olympic Games takes place. This led to the rapid development of tourism as well as other pieces of work relating to this special event. For instance, the 1992 Olympic Games in Barcelona produced 88.7 percent of the city's decrease in unemployment. Ċ In conclusion, despite the fact that the country could suffer from financial damages, being the host of the Olympic Games would open up ample opportunities to stimulate its economic growth.