09-08-2008, 10:53 AM
Jerry,
Many thanks for that... 'reckoned you were on the hunt
The 20% on-the-ground spending is a useful benchmark for comparing other proposals. The distribution of jobs and salaries would also be usable in comparisons.
Certainly, the on-the-ground spending and the annual operations are relevant. There may also be non-tangible benefits, i.e., the scientific center status.
There are also costs -- real and non-tangible. The cost of anything is what you give up to have it. Honest inquiry for the telescope, geothermal, 4-lane highway, Super ferry, wind farm, alternate Puna road, whatever: What do we give up to have it?
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
Many thanks for that... 'reckoned you were on the hunt
The 20% on-the-ground spending is a useful benchmark for comparing other proposals. The distribution of jobs and salaries would also be usable in comparisons.
Certainly, the on-the-ground spending and the annual operations are relevant. There may also be non-tangible benefits, i.e., the scientific center status.
There are also costs -- real and non-tangible. The cost of anything is what you give up to have it. Honest inquiry for the telescope, geothermal, 4-lane highway, Super ferry, wind farm, alternate Puna road, whatever: What do we give up to have it?
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park