A few days before Christmas, with very little fanfare, the last U.S. combat troops in Iraq crossed back over the border into Kuwait. For the troops and their families it was a time of great celebration. There was a small official ceremony, but, certainly no one was hanging "Mission Accomplished" banners anywhere. For the most part, back home, the ending of the eight-plus-year war went pretty much unnoticed. I guess that was fitting, because for the most part, the war itself went pretty much unnoticed. We didn't raise taxes to pay for it. No war bonds. No rationing. No shared sacrifice. And, really, it was Christmas, after all. We were too busy doing our patriotic duty at the local mall.
In one of the few articles I saw about the end of the war, I noticed that the whole thing was estimated to have cost the U.S. $800 billion. I say "few articles" because of the lack of coverage it got. Don't believe me? Google "Iraq war ends" and look at the number of results. Then, try "Justin Bieber" or "Kim Kardashian" or even "honey badger." Scary, right? But, I digress.
So, the direct financial costs of the Iraq war were estimated to be about $800 billion, with a 'B.' That struck me as a lot of money. I started thinking: "What else could we have done with $800 billion over eight years?"
Well, there're the obvious ones -- don't borrow it from the Chinese in the first place, or borrow it from the Chinese to retire older debt with higher interest rates. Too boring? Okay.
For about $50 billion a year we could have provided health care to all of America's uninsured. With the remainder, we could have provided housing and services to the approximately 3.5 million Americans who experience homelessness during a given year. How about schools? Roads? Bridges? Mass transit? I could go on and on and on.
But, if we had a burning desire to use that money as an investment in our future? Why not spend it rebuilding one of America's great cities? What could we have done with that money in Detroit?
Let's assume that we couldn't convince Washington to spend the whole lot in Detroit -- unless we pretended to have weapons of mass destruction, that is. So, we'd have to share it. Maybe we could have gotten them to pick 10 cities and split it up in a new American urban Marshall Plan. That's still $80 billion apiece. I could live with that. But, what if we just had to spread it back out to the states evenly? That's not very intuitive given the wide population disparities, but I could see it happening to get it passed the Senate. So, we end up with a paltry $16 billion over eight years. I'll take it.
Now, the big jump is to get it all spent in Detroit. Since it's my blog post, I'm going to use my prerogative to say that the federal money came to the states with the caveat that it had to be spent in cities with a population of more than 500,000 or the largest city in the state, if a state doesn't have a city that big. OK, hurdle cleared.
So what should we do with our $16 billion? I'll get us started. Obviously I'm rounding and oversimplifying, but you get my point. Here are some things we could have done:
• Build the Woodward Light Rail from Downtown to 8 Mile - Cost: $500 million. That leaves plenty for an endowment for operating subsidy. Heck that leaves plenty to take the thing all the way to Pontiac. Why not add a spur up Gratiot, Grand River?
• Pay off the City of Detroit's outstanding debt obligations - Cost: $1.8 billion. This would save the city $145 million a year in interest payments and eliminate a big chunk of its structural deficit.
• Pay for the costs of the Cobo renovations - Cost: $300 million. Imagine if we could have kept the Auto Show without all of the handwringing and political grandstanding that paralyzed cooperation in the region for what seemed like an eternity.
• Shore up the Detroit Water and Sewer system's maintenance issues for the next 30 years - Cost: $4 billion. A 2001 SEMCOG study called for $135 million a year for the next 30 years to help plug a shortfall in the $15-$25 billion through 2030 needed to address the aging sewer infrastructure that serves over 4 million people in Southeast Michigan. I'll put my money in up front!
• New hockey arena - Cost: $350-400 million. I love the Joe, but it's time for a new stadium...
• Gap funding for new housing developments in the city. Cost $1 billion. A pot of money this large, if only used to fill equity gaps for developers (not to pay for projects entirely) would leverage tens of billions of outside financing and transform parts of the city.
• Reopen the Belle Isle Aquarium, Detroit Science Center, etc. - Cost: depends. The aquarium lost about $400,000 a year and the Science Center was $5.8 million in the hole. Surely $50 million would reopen them both and provide an endowment to cover operating shortfalls. Throw in another $250 million and we've got an endowment to cover the Detroit Zoo millage and one for the DIA.
Clearly this isn't a complete list. That's OK. I only used about half of the money! How about a new bridge to Canada? Reopen, restore, and maintain all of our city parks? No more potholes? More teachers, new books, better schools? High speed rail to Chicago?
I've spent about $8 billion above (it's my post, I can do what I like), but there's $8 billion to go. In the comments, tell me what you'd like to spend it on.
Follow Ned Staebler on Twitter: www.twitter.com/nedstaebler
Many folks would no doubt argue that public safety is far more important than artworks: to save lives, let the Van Goghs go in a van. Fortunately, Detroit doesn't face such a stark choice. New museum management tools let museums mobilize the financial value of a collection without selling it outright, and at least one tool -- mine -- lets them keep complete cultural control. Detroit can have its Monet and money too! That's better than a bankruptcy court selling artworks to fulfill police, firefighter and paramedic contracts. With a DIA art collection valued in the billions, Detroit has money to invest in public safety, the arts, sciences and humanities, and the infrastructure investments you call for. Detroit just has to mobilize its arts collection's value.
Some folks would no doubt say public safety is more important than artworks and argue that Detroit should sell its DIA art collection to fully fund police, firefighters and paramedics. Fortunately, Detroit doesn't face such a stark choice. New management tools are giving museums new ways to mobilize the financial value in their collections, so the choices are no longer limited to artworks or public safety. Detroit can have its Monet and money too if it modernizes its management.
But again, no one wants to hear that. Most people just want to complain.
Getting our money's worth, Republicans?
Kennedy.
At a time when Detroit was one of the most beautiful cities in the world, with pristine beaches, he flew in and met with the mayor and promised to make it the multicultural mecca of the world.
So much for what happens when the federal government "helps" you. With friends like that we don't need enemas.
The only fix, is government policies and taxation, that promote jobs, and a strong middle class. That's how Detroit was great in the 50s and 60s.
In reality, the city and it's suburbs work together as one region. And yes, Detroit represents a poorer area in that region.
Gov. policies and taxation are a couple ways. But I think one way is entrepreneurship. That's what Detroit will thrive on -- the mid-level, privately owned business.
That's what the suburbs thrive on -- minus all the businesses which live and die with the Big 3.
I can think of at least 800 billion better ways to spend my $2,567.
Just think what we could've done with that. Or, since it's all borrowed, how much less debt we'd all have.
Failure of a switch in political parties despite failure to govern well and repeated convictions of Dem officials.
A failed school system that has resisted reform.
Multiple instances of jury nullification.A history of misspent public funds. (But, I do miss the drivers and cars the school board used to get.)
A city that wants more People Movers'
Complaints about public officials that donate their salary. (the mayor and the governor).
More later.
In addition, Detroit reached its peak only because of WWII factory production, and has been punished for that in many ways. Greg34, the "unions and city gov't" have been corrupt since the 1950s, but what Northern city can claim that they haven't been just as bad?
I might agree with the Iraq war being wasteful. But so is blowing $800 billion on dead/dying cities that need to clean up their act first. The federal government spent a lot on Detroit in the 70's, with nothing to show for itself.
Cobo is currently being renovated, and the Auto show signed on for several more years.
The government spend a lot on destroying Detroit in the 1960s, and that is why it's so bad today.
How about a column where you don't ask for someone to give the city large amounts of money? Just to see if you can?