On the one hand, it is understandable why opponents believe that spending money on other things is better than on sporting events. They often emphasize the huge amount of money, which is invested into infrastructure for athletes and visitors such as transportation networks, accommodation, and stadiums. These need to be improved to meet the criteria of an international event, which is very inevitable. As a result, this can put a train on government coffers. Therefore, critics argue that this investment should be allocated for other purposes, which appear more important. For example, they suppose that the education sector should be invested, instead of sporting events. This is because spending money on education can generate an educated workforce and reduce crime rate that creates a healthier community.
On the other hand, I am convinced that staging large sporting events brings benefits for countries. The main reason is economic value. This is because the traditions and culture can be promoted to international visitors through these events, which finally result in boosting tourism. For instance, the Sea Game hosted in Vietnam promoted their economy much. Moreover, these events can generate an income resource for locals, because the investment-infrastructure can make more employment opportunities for residents. In some countries, there are many people who are into sporting games. Therefore, these events foster a sense of sportsmanship among residents, ultimately leading stronger bond relationships between people in communities.
In conclusion, despite the disadvantages of the large sporting events, I still advocate that we should host these events to boost the national economy and strengthen bon society.