In the past few years, global sporting competitions have often been organized in different countries. While some individuals reckon that this tendency can exert detrimental impacts on the home country, I am more convinced that the hosting nation can yield tangible benefits. 

There exist reasonable justifications for public advocacy of not holding international sport events. Firstly, supporters of different games may spend several days visiting the country before watching matches. Some of them who are not eco-conscious may destroy the environment by intentionally littering. Secondly, the host country’s government tends to embark on infrastructure splurge, which takes a toll on national funding, especially in developing countries. The government’s desire to build edifices such as big arenas or racing circuits can incur a huge amount of debts, putting the country in economic difficulties afterwards. Therefore, spending lavishly on a short-lived event can be a dubious strategy. 

However, despite aforementioned drawbacks, I believe that they are overshadowed by the following advantages. First and foremost, the games can boost the nation’s prosperity. An influx of tourists coming to a country means an increasing demand for services, such as accommodations or entertainment. This development can generate more jobs for the locals as well as promote the country’s culture. As the national image is appreciated, monetary rewards can replace national debts, gaining a nation much beyond prestige. In the long run, organizing major sports events can act as economic engines, amplifying the nation’s revival.

In conclusion, although holding global sports competition can be at the expense of several problems, including environmental issues and contemporary national debts, I would argue that the merits are more meaningful to the host country. 

(274 words – )