Is Hosting the FIFA 2014 World Cup Really Worth it Financially?

Demonstrators held a protest against the World Cup FIFA soccer on Thursday, May 15, 2014 in Sao Paulo, Brazil. (GETTY)

PHOENIX — With the FIFA 2014 World Cup in full swing, have you ever wondered if it’s really worth it to host an event of this magnitude financially for a city?

According to Fox News Latino, this World Cup is the most expensive one yet, over $14 billion dollars spent. This includes more than $3.6 billion spent on 12 new and renovated stadiums.

That’s three times the estimated price for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, which cost a total of $3.9 billion with $1.3 billion in stadium construction work.

Brazilians are up in heels by the escalating costs. There is rumored corruption among their government and how these immense spending contrasts to their country’s level of poverty.

As with any major sporting event, economists disagree on the long-term economic benefits of hosting the World Cup. Projected gains to the Brazilian economy vary from as much as $13.6 billion to yes, $0.

Another interesting point is that at least one of the stadiums will remain empty after the world’s largest sporting event ends. The new stadium in the remote Amazonian city of Manaus is reported to have cost $270 million to build.

It will be used for four games during the tournament, and after that, well, got any suggestions? There isn’t a local team that can use it after the Cup is done.

Those projections see an estimated 3.7 million domestic and international tourists spending approximately $11.1 billion.

Of Brazil’s population of almost 200 million, about 32 million are living in poverty. Over the course of the World Cup, these 32 million people will combine to spend less than $1.3 billion.

In other words, a group about one-ninth the size, staying in hotels and buying souvenirs, will spend about nine times more than the other—who are just trying to survive.

No wonder the Cup has sparked riots and protests across the country.