That economic boost from the Olympics

Olympics misery for retailers
The Olympics feelgood factor spelled misery for retailers in August as the public was too glued to television coverage of the event to head down to the high street or even shop online, according to the British Retail Consortium.

Hmm. Retail spending is some one third to one half of the economy isn\’t it? £500 billion ish out of £1.5 trillion? £600 billion?

This slums during the Olymics showing that the Olympics give a decent Keynesian boost to aggregate demand. I think we might see a teensie problem with this idea, no?

12 thoughts on “That economic boost from the Olympics”

  1. I’d be interested to see the figures for Central London. It was obvious the visitors to the Games simply replaced the usual summer tourist influx. Unless someone built a few hundred hotels I haven’t noticed. But the camera toting hordes come for the London Experience. Part of which is shopping. The sort of anoraks sport encourages did their bundle paying for the trip & the tickets. Shopping will have been a couple of t-shirts & a souvenir plastic bag.
    I suppose the Olympics boosters will finagle the money paid to host the Olympic ‘family’ onto the plus side of the accounts to make it right, though.

  2. You’ve largely given up making fun of Preposterous Polly, Tim, so you may have missed her complaint today about people who are “angry” and “blinded by dogma”. It takes one etc etc.

  3. Tim, the Olympics are a party. No more , no less. As Chris says, no serious economist, including, you, thinks they’ll make any contribution to the UK economy.

    They make people here, ie in the UK, rather than tax dodgers and subsidy junkies such as yourself, happy. May or may not be value for money. This is what you lose out on by basing yourself in portugal while pretending to represent the ordinary Briton. You may be right, but you’re missing out on the fun, so can’t comment on the upside ( which may be negligible – but you don’t know).

  4. Luke,

    They make people here, ie in the UK, rather than tax dodgers and subsidy junkies such as yourself, happy. May or may not be value for money. This is what you lose out on by basing yourself in portugal while pretending to represent the ordinary Briton. You may be right, but you’re missing out on the fun, so can’t comment on the upside ( which may be negligible – but you don’t know).

    What “fun”? For 50m+ people in this country, their Olympic experience was no different to that of a scandium oligarch in Portugal, which is to say that they’d have watched it on TV.

    Or to put it another way, other than the content of the opening ceremony and the road races, the rest of it would have looked exactly the same if Paris had coughed up £11bn+.

  5. They make people here, ie in the UK, rather than tax dodgers and subsidy junkies such as yourself, happy.

    Portugese tax rates, if anything, seem somewhat higher than the UK’s. So, unless you are alleging that Tim has a massive unearned income from the UK (which would be taxable in Portugal anyway), how do you get “tax dodger”?

    “Subsidy junkie”? Even if the manufacturers who use Tim’s scandium are subsidised (well, actually it is import duty but roughly comparable), it doesn’t follow that he gets a wedge of it.

    Or, of course, this could just be the random insults of a WGCE fanboi. At least you are more articulate than Arnald.

    Just to note – I watched those bits of the Olympics I wanted to on TV, although a couple of friends were various sorts of volunteer and a couple more were drafted (technically, mobilised but it’s much the same thing). And I did lose, or at very least have significantly postponed, business because of the Games.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *