Rio de Janeiro will host the 2016 Olympics, the IOC decided. Chicago, despite a strong pitch by the ever-mellifluous Barack Obama, was eliminated in the first round of voting.

Chicago became a windbag city, wasting an estimated $100 million on its bid, which should piss off anyone, especially during the Great Recession. But at least the city (and Illinois and the federal government) won't be spending billions on the jingoistic boondoggle.

Bread and circuses are great, but this circus costs way too much bread, especially these days.

New York City lucked out when it failed to get the 2012 Olympics. Local Olympic committee head Dan Doctoroff (that was in the '90s; he later became he mayor's top aide and is now president of the mayor's media company) had big plans for the city. Those plans would have torn apart of the fabric of our wonderful town.

Doctoroff and then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani were eager to tell the IOC how they planned to chase all those low-life, messy vendors off the city's streets and spend billions of taxpayer shekels on new stadiums (even more than the subsidies the city gave to the Yankees and Mets). Bloomberg would have enthusiastically backed those plans, too, and the city would have generally made life even more difficult for the vast majority of New Yorkers. The city's big shots would have loved it, of course, because they've never met a skybox they didn't like.

The only troubling thing about today's IOC vote: Some U.S. city is sure to get one of the following Olympics, either 2020 or 2024. But if we have to host the Olympics, I suggest Cleveland, especially because it's broke and could use some attention and, other than LeBron James's Cavaliers, doesn't even have a sports team worth a damn. Our downtown is already full of people; Cleveland's isn't. On the other hand, Cleveland is broke, so we'd all have to pay for it.