I didn't click the link... so might be a dumb question... but it's hard to imagine they've factored in all the direct and indirect returns of these investments over the years. Not that that is really possible, numerically... just pointing out on its surface at least seems to be a somewhat stupid way of looking at it...
Louisiana Purchase, but I'm from Arkansas. No different from all the biased Texas people . But objectively, I still think the Louisiana Purchase wins
As an aficionado of finance and economics I prefer the part where we got the First Nations and Natives land for free. That is like the best discount ever.
Yeah, they remarked on that in the "Intangibles" comment in the last paragraph that I posted. Also in fairness, we probably can say that they compared the three in a fair manner. The comments about them being solid but not spectacular investments is questionable. here it is again: To be fair, there are intangible benefits to each of these purchases not apparent in the objective numbers. Manhattan provided a trading foothold in the new world. The Louisiana Purchase secured the Mississippi River watershed, and with it, removed the ability of Napoleon and the French from halting the westward advance of Americans. Finally, Alaska has suffered from centuries of public ownership of its lands with heavy-handed regulations stopping entrepreneurs from developing its resources and putting them to good use. Now the question for D&D, were the regulations and public ownership of land good or bad for Alaska. That comment above seems to say Alaska was not put to "good use." Seems to me like America did quite well without needing to rape the pristine Alaskan wilderness.
I used to live in North Dakota, where they are doing the type of "good use" to the land that the author described. Western North Dakota is going to be a wasteland in 20 years with all of the virtually unregulated fracking going on there. Quite a shame too because its actually quite beautiful out there. I'm ok with us not ruining Alaska in the same way. It is possible to drill and preserve the environment at the same time but I dont trust state regulators today to ever achieve that kind of balance. They're all way too cozy with the oil industry today.
He'd probably trade Hawaii to Japan in a three-way trade for Easter Island and rights to a two, future volcanic islands.
He'd probably hold on to Puerto Rico and wait to see if Iceland, Ireland, and England make a decision of staying in Europe, then lose Puerto Rico to Cuba.
louisiana purchase. best bargain most land set precedent for future land acquisition (cough, cough...seizure) set stage for annexation of texas and lands further west didnt have to fight a war over it
I grew up in Louisiana and took La. History The Purchase of course was a BIG DEAL always seemed to be the key to the west as someone pointed out Overall just looked like the pivotal acquisition that started rapid expansion momentum I was just curious . . .wondering if I was overvalueing it. Rocket River
Manifest destiny beeyotch. We didn't ask we just took, and killed every buffalo in sight along the way. God gave us dominion over our buffalo and our guns dammit.
