How's that Olympic Village Doing, Brazil?

[Montegriffo]

Yeah, pretty much what StA said. The money may well be "coming back" to the host country, but it's not going back to the government/taxpayers that actually paid it. Your country's megacorps raking in cash is not the same thing as your country taking in cash.

The majority of the cost of the London games came from sponsorship and the national lottery. The rest was paid for by London's rates payers at a cost of 8p per week. The benefits certainly did go to London's economy in the form of jobs, the construction industry and extra tourism etc.
The presige worldwide which comes from a city hosting a successful games is priceless.
Holding the games in the same place every time would diminish the games and rob nations of the chance to profit from them both financialy and in terms of legacy and international prestige.

What jobs now exist, thanks to hosting the Olympics 5 years ago?

What does that have to do with it? There were tens of thousands of jobs created in the 5 years between being granted the games and holding them. The games came during the height of the credit crunch and kept many construction firms from going bust.
The success of the games has led to an inrease in sports participation and Britain became the first country in history to increase it's medal haul in the games following hosting them.
In a world of increasingly unfit and obese youngsters this can only be a good thing.
The savings to the NHS in future costs is hard to measure.

[SuburbanFarmer]

The majority of the cost of the London games came from sponsorship and the national lottery. The rest was paid for by London's rates payers at a cost of 8p per week. The benefits certainly did go to London's economy in the form of jobs, the construction industry and extra tourism etc.
The presige worldwide which comes from a city hosting a successful games is priceless.
Holding the games in the same place every time would diminish the games and rob nations of the chance to profit from them both financialy and in terms of legacy and international prestige.

What jobs now exist, thanks to hosting the Olympics 5 years ago?

What does that have to do with it? There were tens of thousands of jobs created in the 5 years between being granted the games and holding them. The games came during the height of the credit crunch and kept many construction firms from going bust.
The success of the games has led to an inrease in sports participation and Britain became the first country in history to increase it's medal haul in the games following hosting them.
In a world of increasingly unfit and obese youngsters this can only be a good thing.
The savings to the NHS in future costs is hard to measure.

So, out of 45 (?) modern Olympics, the host country has increased it's medal count once? That's not exactly a strong point in favor.

[Montegriffo]

That is an indication of how influential they have been to Britain although the exclusion of Russia from Rio had a large affect on Britains position in the medals table.
Almost every host nation records a record haul the year they hold the games. Britain is the first to do even better the following games.