PDA

View Full Version : Raising Money


Roguish Lawyer
05-18-2004, 08:54
Reading some other threads, I am reminded that DLI is located on some of the most primo real estate in CA. I'm sure if it was sold, the proceeds would fund a very nice replacement facility in BFE somewhere plus some new toys or facilities for the military.

Reactions?

Team Sergeant
05-18-2004, 09:04
While I was attending DLI slick willie gave away Ft. Ord and all they did was complain.

I doubt the Pentagon will ever sell the land, most likely scenario would be to give it to the state of Kalif.

So what do we do about the cemetery located on DLI property?

TS

Roguish Lawyer
05-18-2004, 09:08
Originally posted by Team Sergeant
So what do we do about the cemetery located on DLI property?

Didn't know there was one, but you could carve it out of what is sold, I suppose.

BTW, not advocating this necessarily, but every time I go to Monterey I am amazed by the fact that DLI is located where it is. Not sure how big the facility is or anything, but that land would sell for BIG bucks. Seems to me the mission could be accomplished elsewhere.

Team Sergeant
05-18-2004, 09:14
So you would advocate selling our historical bases for money?

Roguish Lawyer
05-18-2004, 09:25
Originally posted by Team Sergeant
So you would advocate selling our historical bases for money?

Not sure what you mean by a "historical base," but I do think some consideration should be given to relocating bases sitting on land that is more valuable than required to fulfill the mission of the base or other facility. Then again, I am sure there is a downside to this that I am not seeing. (As indicated above, I would not say that I am "advocating" anything at this point, just raising a topic for discussion.)

Why shouldn't we relocate DLI and sell the land?

Shouldn't the military consider issues like this given the high cost of ongoing operations? Note that many corporations have moved their headquarters from expensive places like Manhattan to cheaper real estate . . .

Team Sergeant
05-18-2004, 10:07
Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer

Shouldn't the military consider issues like this given the high cost of ongoing operations? Note that many corporations have moved their headquarters from expensive places like Manhattan to cheaper real estate . . .


Most corporations were not fighting in the south pacific, northern Africa, the Alamo, north Korea, Vietnam either.

Don’t lump my beloved military in with capitalistic morally corrupt corporations. There’s no comparison.

Most will forever forget the crooked Enron corporation and how they dealt with Americans, none with forget the Alamo.

Go ahead and sell the Kalif historic military bases to raise money for gay weddings, illegal alien health care and the Hollywood stars retirement home. Just don’t call me to defend the Constitution of the United States when they begin to remove our nations monuments because “someone was offended by them”.

TS

Roguish Lawyer
05-18-2004, 10:10
Originally posted by Team Sergeant
Don’t lump my beloved military in with capitalistic morally corrupt corporations. There’s no comparison.

Did you give NDD your password? LOL

Razor
05-18-2004, 10:12
When you've lived for years on end in the places where the mission could be accomplished at a lower cost (Ft Irwin, Ft Polk, Ft Bliss, Ft Sill, etc), come back and espouse this opinion. Don't overlook the quality of life issues involved in base location. I'm willing to bet that the leadership of the corporations you mentioned didn't move from their multi-million dollar homes in exclusive neighborhoods to live in Bangladesh when they moved their production capabilities there.

Roguish Lawyer
05-18-2004, 10:20
Originally posted by Razor
When you've lived for years on end in the places where the mission could be accomplished at a lower cost (Ft Irwin, Ft Polk, Ft Bliss, Ft Sill, etc), come back and espouse this opinion. Don't overlook the quality of life issues involved in base location. I'm willing to bet that the leadership of the corporations you mentioned didn't move from their multi-million dollar homes in exclusive neighborhoods to live in Bangladesh when they moved their production capabilities there.

Good point, Razor. Makes sense to me.

The corporate relocations I've mentioned have been to places like Phoenix; not horrible places, but much less expensive than where they used to be. I have a client based in downtown Manhattan, across the street from Ground Zero. They could save many millions of dollars moving somewhere else, but they are staying in New York principally for prestige and other nonpecuniary reasons like the ones you've described.

Sorry if I've ruffled feathers with this one! ;)

Ambush Master
05-18-2004, 10:27
Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer
Not sure what you mean by a "historical base," but I do think some consideration should be given to relocating bases sitting on land that is more valuable than required to fulfill the mission of the base or other facility. Then again, I am sure there is a downside to this that I am not seeing. (As indicated above, I would not say that I am "advocating" anything at this point, just raising a topic for discussion.)

Why shouldn't we relocate DLI and sell the land?

Shouldn't the military consider issues like this given the high cost of ongoing operations? Note that many corporations have moved their headquarters from expensive places like Manhattan to cheaper real estate . . .

Why bother when the Government goes and GIVES AWAY VALUABLE PUBLIC LANDS for mineral rights leases for a whole $0.15 per acre ?!?!?!?!

Roguish Lawyer
05-18-2004, 10:30
Originally posted by Ambush Master
Why bother when the Government goes and GIVES AWAY VALUABLE PUBLIC LANDS for mineral rights leases for a whole $0.15 per acre ?!?!?!?!

I agree that's bad public policy, AM.

DanUCSB
05-18-2004, 12:03
Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer
some consideration should be given to relocating bases sitting on land that is more valuable than required

I would take issue with the idea of the 'value' of the land. Yes, it is worth a lot of money if you chopped it up and sold it off. But then it would only be of value to that corporation (be they selling Swiffers, SUVs, or ketchup), whereas as it stands, it is of value to every American (that values being an American, that is). High price, remember, does not necessarily equal value, and vice versa.

And then people wonder why corporations and fat cats are held in such high esteem, while values such as patriotism are denigrated. The best land -should- be for statehouses, courthouses, city halls, and military posts; not debased (horrible pun not intended) for use by the likes of Enron, Verizon, and Wal-Mart.

Besides, hell. The Army? Has more than enough bases on shitty land as it is. :)