Dear Source:
I share the intent to improve the standard of living in our territory, as voiced by Paul Devine in his recent commentary, The Virgin Islands vs. Hawaii. The intriguing title of the article enticed me with the hope of an insightful comparison between the two regions and a sketch of small island prosperity. Instead, I fear that Mr. Devine lacks an understanding of Hawaiian history and geography. His cry for economic equality, therefore, discredits Hawaii and gives little incentive or directive for Virgin Islanders.
At first glance, several indicators point to similarities among the two island groups. As Mr. Devine points out, tax revenue, annual visitors, and population are all comparable in scale. These variables contribute to economic well being, so one may ask, "What is different in the Virgin Islands?"
First of all, geography. The Virgin Islands is smaller and more densely populated than Hawaii. The result is increased expenses on land-valued services such as waste management. Next, Hawaii's land is fertile and water is abundant. Let's face it, poor soils and arid seasons make it difficult to produce a bountiful crop in the Virgin Islands. And lastly, Hawaii has a large US military presence and associated industries. Hawaii is home to Marine, Air Force, and Navy bases, as well as a naval shipyard. These important facts help explain the health and diversity of Hawaii's economy, public and private. Unlike the Virgin Islands, which is 80% dependent on tourism, only 25% of Hawaii's tax revenue can be directly associated to tourism services.
How do these facts affect quality of life? The Virgin Islands government faces many difficult problems. The landscape weakens government's ability to provide basic services such as postal delivery, running water, and emergency services. On top of this, our islands are small, and this puts the Virgin Islands at a disadvantage in terms of economies of scale. While tourism is a vibrant economic sector, the focus on satisfying the tourism sector leads to shortsighted decisions aimed to collect a quick buck. Problems requiring long-term solutions, like traffic congestion and energy infrastructure, are neglected. Solutions to these problems will requirement investments, more than would be necessary in Hawaii due to our unique circumstances.
While Mr. Devine's concern with government waste is understandable, there is a deeper issue that he falls prey to. A natural reaction to fiscal instability is hording. Mr. Devine's inclination is to control spending of his taxpayer dollar. The corrupt government official he describes also pilfers public funds, with no regard for the cost to the community. In each case, the individual feels entitled to an improved living standard. Unfortunately, both cases exemplify a zero-sum game, adding no value from the territory-wide perspective.
Sixty years ago, Hawaii was as dependent on agriculture as the VI is on tourism today. With our distinct obstacles, to create an economic turnaround matching Hawaii's, we Virgin Islanders must support comprehensive, long-term initiatives for economic development. We must be prepared to spend, or invest, at higher rates than other regions of the United States. And we must unify and support each other in this endeavor; it will not be easy.
A first world living standard is not a right; it is an economic definition. In light of our current policy, but for the grace of God do the Virgin Islands look yearningly towards our Haitian neighbors.
John Bradford
St. Thomas
Editor's note: We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.
