Let the games be played with realistic budgetary limits on the host cities.

THE opening ceremony was spectacular and sentimentalists the world over felt a lump in their throats as the Olympic torch was lit in Athens.

Yet, the games are turning into a financial disaster. Greece has raised its estimate of government spending on the event three times, and it now stands at as much as $8.6 billion. That's 52 percent more than the initial cost estimates. And for what? A few weeks of ceremony that will be swiftly forgotten? A raised profile for one of the most famous cities in the world? A boost for an already growing economy?

Those are meager returns for such huge expenditure. In reality, the Olympic Games have become a bloated economic monster.

The games reached their financial nadir with the Montreal Olympics in 1976. That event left a $1.2 billion deficit, which is still being paid off with the help of a supplementary tobacco tax, according to a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.

Things improved in 1984 when the games in Los Angeles turned a profit of $355 million. Seoul bad an operating profit in 1988, but the next three Olympic cities--Barcelona, Atlanta and Sydney--only just managed to break even, according to the report. Indeed, economic nonsense comes in portions as large as a shot-putter's breakfast when it comes to the Olympics.

The cost of the games will increase Greece's budget deficit to more than 4 percent of gross domestic product this year. What's the justification?

It will stimulate the economy, the games' supporters argue. Indeed, the Greek economy grew 4.3 percent last year--one of the fastest rates in Europe. Against that, the higher taxes needed to pay back all that debt are going to depress the economy. And couldn't the money be better spent on something other than some glittering stadiums?

Then there are those who say the games will raise the city's profile. Is there anyone out there who hasn't heard of Athens?

A simpler, more economic games is needed. One solution would be a permanent site (to which no city would have a better claim than Athens). Alternatively, the International Olympic Committee could impose strict limits on spending, telling cities that they must use existing stadiums, and capping expenditure at, say, $1 billion.

Beijing is already stuck with the 2008 games, and it's hardly encouraging that work has stopped on the $423 million main stadium amid safety and cost concerns.

The 2012 games are still up for grabs. London, Paris, New York, Madrid and Moscow should each run such inept campaigns that the prize is certain to go to another city.

Matthew Lynn is a columnist with Bloomberg News.