Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I think that you, like most people, have not spent time in western South Dakota. In some areas, what you say is surely true, but in many rural areas, everyone knows all too well that if the military leaves, they're fucked, because there's nothing to take it's place.
We all may benefit from the spending, but South Dakota (e.g.) benefits in a way other states do not from the decision to spend it in South Dakota -- as opposed to spending it elsewhere, not as opposed to not spending it at all -- which is what the $1.10 figure is trying to capture.
|
I'm not denying that a place might be fucked if you take out a military base, but if people choose to get fucked by it, they bear at least some of the blame. First off, they can move to where there is a job. Second, closing bases doesn't always eliminate jobs. Many of the closings simply shuffle personnel around. Sure, there are relocation costs, but long run those are relatively small. I truly believe that the large part of the "subsidy" is simply going to whoever happens to get the employment, not a particular location. (and that's a small part of the overall benefit)
On the second point, I agree, the question is as opposed to not spending. And that's why the $1.10 figure doesn't capture much at all. The question is what we're spending versus spending it elsewhere. You're looking at it from the locals' perspective, which is "I get it all or I get nothing, because it's going to another state." I'm looking at it from the national perspective, which is we need to spend a dollar on the military, where do we spend it. It might waste a few pennies to spend it in S.D. instead of Cal., but otherwise we're getting the benefit of that dollar spent (or most of it). The only "waste" is the subsidy for doing it in S.D. To me, it's pretty unobjectionable (not entirely so) that we might waste a couple of pennies putting a base in S.D. (and it's probably in some ways cheaper than putting it elsewhere). Put differently, you could buy a book at Amazon or City Lights. It will surely cost you more at the latter. The subsidy (if you want to call it that) is not the price you pay for buying it at City Lights. It's the difference in the prices.
