Yeah, it should only be held in countries that have the required infrastructure in place, but the whole IOC is corrupt from top to bottom.

Just hold it in Greece every time. Those poor fuckers could use some foreign money coming in every few years, they might not have to work 6 days a week then.

Imo, we should have one, or at most, two Olympic states. They'd be small countries that are more-or-less politically neutral, and instead of sending teams, their purpose would be to host the Summer and/or Winter Olympics. Construction, maintenance and upgrades of the facilities would be paid for by participating countries, as a percentage of their GDP. That way, the hosting country(ies) wouldn't have to spend billions building the facilities, they get guaranteed tourism every 2~4 years, the facilities get reused, non-hosting countries have a place to measure their penis size, don't have to spend outrageous sums to build their own facilities (they're all paying together, after all), don't have to bulldoze houses or forests, be concerned with water quality, and probably many other bonuses I'm not thinking of.

Bonus points if the facilities are open year-round for Olympians to train at, so that the athletes are more used to the climate, equipment, tracks, trails, etc.

The biggest downside is that hosting the Olympics is prestigious itself and generates a lot of tourism revenue (which in this case, would only be going to the "static" host(s)). It's a chance for the host country to show off their economic strength, culture (like during the opening ceremonies), and more. You'd have to convince countries that they're better off without the tourism and chance to flaunt their wealth.

I have a wild idea. What if humans prioritise making money now over their children being able to exist tomorrow?

There was just an article posted around here about future games in Los Angeles …. Where one of the venues is in Oklahoma, unless I got seriously trolled, for exactly this: trying not to build as much new stuff.

Here in Boston when they were talking about putting in a bid, all the discussion was about upgrading athletic facilities for all the regional colleges, and getting more hotels built to handle more tourism

First of all, who keeps their houses up to 79°F at night?

I do. When I am in Florida, I set my AC to 78 at night but room temperature can go to 80 before the AC kicks in. The key is having a nice ceiling fan. Normally the discomfort comes from hot and humid air hovering around your body (you do make heat). Having a constant breeze on your skin keeps you comfortable.

That said, I am not an athlete trying to achieve my personal best while the entire world is watching. I think it is reprehensible to not provide athletes with a climate controlled environment in which to rest.

In the summer, what temp do Europeans keep their homes? When I've been in Europe (northern US too) it's always so hot indoors, summer and winter. I thought it was a low energy use thing until i encountered the crazy indoor heat in the winter.

Big cities already periodically provide "Cooling Centers" to support the large population of working poor who can't afford the sky high energy bills. I have no idea what rural communities do during a heat-wave induced brown out. Everyone gets in the lake that's full of industrial agricultural run off? They retreat into the mines, like a bunch of Morlocks? Y'all just fucking die?

But this is entirely unsustainable long term. Either we find a way to keep our large populations cool during the killer hot months or we stop having large populations all together.

Humans ceasing to emit carbon dioxide is inevitable. I reckon this will happen some time before the average global temperature reaches 100 degrees C.

The athletes who get aircon will also be determined by who comes from a wealthy country. Makes a mockery of the games imo, should disqualify them all for having an unfair advantage.

Ok, maybe I'm just spoiled somehow, but that's REALLY high for sleeping. If it's over about 72 I just straight-up cannot sleep. I can flex that a little with good airflow and low humidity (windows open).

I can't possible imagine having to sleep in that temp after a full day of strenuous physical activity. I guess if you were somehow used to it but that seems crazy.

Furthermore, does this cooling strategy (minus the AC units shipped in) even come close to offsetting the burned fossil fuels to actually move all these athletes to another country and set up the games? Asking cause that seems kinda relevant....

Because the bidding/bribing process is where a lot of grifters get rich. The construction contracts are where the others get rich. With your simpler less wasteful system all those worthless people might have to work for a living.

Yes, that has been the norm in Europe. Most people here do not have AC.

If they were especially designed without an AC, there might be no need for it.

Plenty houses in Central Europe don’t have AC and they’re fine.