The main
sponsors of the London Olympic Games are the big companies of the Processed
Food Industry. This has triggered a big controversy in the UK through the BBC,
because these companies are responsible for the declining health habits of
large parts of the population, mostly children.
The
justification given by the defenders of the scheme is that these sponsors pay
for half the costs of the Games. In other words, without these sponsors, the
games would be unaffordable. Well, that is the point. What about the health
costs? What are the social benefits and the social costs of organizing the
games in this way? If the social costs are higher than the social benefits, the
games should not take place.
No comments:
Post a Comment