4 ms·

Sure, but the other 50 states are also filled with American citizens who deserve things, many of whom are scrappy and resilient. OTOH, the money being spent is

Sure, but the other 50 states are also filled with American citizens who deserve things, many of whom are scrappy and resilient. OTOH, the money being spent is also ultimately that of the American citizens', so the government should strive to accomplish the most it can for any given mission and budget. In this case, the calculus may simply be that the mission can be more comprehensively and efficiently achieved via investments elsewhere that will similarly benefit Americans near those areas as a reinvestment would have benefitted in Puerto Rico.

authpor 4y ago
shadowgovt 4y ago
The major difference, of course, is that those states have federal representatives with voting power to advocate for their needs and Puerto Rico does not. The story of the death of Arecibo is a stain on the way the United States treats its colonial territories.
- whatshisface 4y ago
  That's a little over the top, if you want there to be a radio observatory in PR it would still be better to build a new one.
  - carbocation 4y ago
    > (Also, the question of whether or not to make PR a state comes up periodically, and PR sides against it.) All 3 referenda in PR since 2010 have favored statehood.
    - whatshisface 4y ago
      Interesting, I guess my information was out of date.
    - colatkinson 4y ago
      Notably many anti-statehood groups boycotted these plebiscites, and analysts noted that the questions were poorly structured. For example, the 2017 referendum had a result of 97% in favor of statehood... because only pro-statehood voters showed up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_movement_in_Puerto_Rico#2012_status_referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_movement_in_Puert...
      - sergiomattei 4y ago
        They were boycotted because they were sham, non-binding referendums. There was never an effort from the mainland to introduce this into Congress seriously. Therefore. Since nobody in Congress or White House lifts a finger, the referendum becomes just another political rally cry for the local pro-statehood party. The United States and their political class have made it exceedingly clear that they favour the status quo -- both economically and politically -- at the expense of the island folk who suffer increasing austerity cuts and a deteriorating standard of living.
        JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > was never an effort from the mainland to introduce this into Congress seriously Statehood and its benefits isn’t something to be unilaterally demanded. Puerto Rico should have the option to declare independence. But it’s far too corrupt for political integration.
        soulofmischief 4y ago
        I find it exceedingly impossible that Puerto Rico is more corrupt than my home state of Louisiana.
        sergiomattei 4y ago
        I wholly understand your point, but there's a huge power imbalance here. We can run all the referendums we want. The US government has the full might of the US military, a reluctant political class and an economic interest in keeping the status quo. There has to be cooperation in both sides for either statehood or independence, if decolonization is to be achieved peacefully. Sadly, there's no will to negotiate from the US gov’t. About corruption, well, it’s true. Our ex-governor was recently indicted. However, I also find corruption allegations a convenient way to perpetuate this image of Puerto Ricans as freeloaders—completely missing how much the mainland benefits from us economically, both as a tax haven and as a source of tax revenue (no IRS federal tax, but Jones Act import restrictions). For more on economic benefits, think about this: a market of 2-3 million people locked in exclusively into US goods and markets due to colonial import restrictions. Taxation without representation.
- cbm-vic-20 4y ago
  The state of the island's electrical infrastructure is a much larger stain than the loss of an aging radiotelescope. Spend the money on that, instead.
  - soulofmischief 4y ago
    This statement is a prime example of a fallacy known as false dichotomy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
    - enjeyw 4y ago
      I’m not convinced it is. The statement translates to: “I think that the benefit for the community that infrastructure investment provides is so much greater than rebuilding the telescope, to the point that if I had absolute control of the limited gov budget I’d allocate all money to infrastructure.” That’s debatable, but it doesn’t seem like a logical fallacy.
      - ComplexSystems 4y ago
        You can build infrastructure and a telescope.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    Is PR’s electrical grid a federal responsibility? I’d assume it was a local/territorial responsibility (now LUMA). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LUMA_Energy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LUMA_Energy

authpor 4y ago

shadowgovt 4y ago

The major difference, of course, is that those states have federal representatives with voting power to advocate for their needs and Puerto Rico does not. The story of the death of Arecibo is a stain on the way the United States treats its colonial territories.

whatshisface 4y ago
That's a little over the top, if you want there to be a radio observatory in PR it would still be better to build a new one.
- carbocation 4y ago
  > (Also, the question of whether or not to make PR a state comes up periodically, and PR sides against it.) All 3 referenda in PR since 2010 have favored statehood.
  - whatshisface 4y ago
    Interesting, I guess my information was out of date.
  - colatkinson 4y ago
    Notably many anti-statehood groups boycotted these plebiscites, and analysts noted that the questions were poorly structured. For example, the 2017 referendum had a result of 97% in favor of statehood... because only pro-statehood voters showed up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_movement_in_Puerto_Rico#2012_status_referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_movement_in_Puert...
    - sergiomattei 4y ago
      They were boycotted because they were sham, non-binding referendums. There was never an effort from the mainland to introduce this into Congress seriously. Therefore. Since nobody in Congress or White House lifts a finger, the referendum becomes just another political rally cry for the local pro-statehood party. The United States and their political class have made it exceedingly clear that they favour the status quo -- both economically and politically -- at the expense of the island folk who suffer increasing austerity cuts and a deteriorating standard of living.
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > was never an effort from the mainland to introduce this into Congress seriously Statehood and its benefits isn’t something to be unilaterally demanded. Puerto Rico should have the option to declare independence. But it’s far too corrupt for political integration.
        soulofmischief 4y ago
        I find it exceedingly impossible that Puerto Rico is more corrupt than my home state of Louisiana.
        sergiomattei 4y ago
        I wholly understand your point, but there's a huge power imbalance here. We can run all the referendums we want. The US government has the full might of the US military, a reluctant political class and an economic interest in keeping the status quo. There has to be cooperation in both sides for either statehood or independence, if decolonization is to be achieved peacefully. Sadly, there's no will to negotiate from the US gov’t. About corruption, well, it’s true. Our ex-governor was recently indicted. However, I also find corruption allegations a convenient way to perpetuate this image of Puerto Ricans as freeloaders—completely missing how much the mainland benefits from us economically, both as a tax haven and as a source of tax revenue (no IRS federal tax, but Jones Act import restrictions). For more on economic benefits, think about this: a market of 2-3 million people locked in exclusively into US goods and markets due to colonial import restrictions. Taxation without representation.
cbm-vic-20 4y ago
The state of the island's electrical infrastructure is a much larger stain than the loss of an aging radiotelescope. Spend the money on that, instead.
- soulofmischief 4y ago
  This statement is a prime example of a fallacy known as false dichotomy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
  - enjeyw 4y ago
    I’m not convinced it is. The statement translates to: “I think that the benefit for the community that infrastructure investment provides is so much greater than rebuilding the telescope, to the point that if I had absolute control of the limited gov budget I’d allocate all money to infrastructure.” That’s debatable, but it doesn’t seem like a logical fallacy.
    - ComplexSystems 4y ago
      You can build infrastructure and a telescope.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  Is PR’s electrical grid a federal responsibility? I’d assume it was a local/territorial responsibility (now LUMA). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LUMA_Energy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LUMA_Energy