Hacker News Reader

Comment by arbalasquide | Hacker News Reader

It goes beyond being a state of the art tool. It is a part of our culture having this observatory.

As a child, I loved going there and its the earliest part of my childhood that I remember something motivating me to pursue science/math. Even in my later part of my life I was able to do some research with the observatory which kick started my current career.

The island already suffers from a lack of funding in education, thus I fear the youth might miss out on this sense of awe and curiosity I was lucky enough to have as a child.

Another issue is that we have our brightest minds leaving the island because there's no fulfilling or well paying work to be done. The lack of this observatory is another reason more people will leave.

Here's a white paper the people in the observatory wrote about a new dish. It contains reasoning, beyond my socio-cultural observations, for having a new one. http://www.naic.edu/NGAT/NGAT_WhitePaper_v2_01022021.pdf

View on HN

Funding for local projects is competitive at the federal level from what I understand. If it doesn't serve a primary scientific purpose, then why would Puerto Rico be put at the front of the line?

i.e. there's 50 other states and D.C. competing to be the most attractive to big ticket project funding, which also deliver education, youth initiatives, high paying jobs, etc.

Because Puerto Rico is filled with American citizens who also deserve those things, and it's a vibrant island filled with scrappy, resilient people?

More deserving then all 50 other states and D.C.?

But you could ask this question of any state(+DC). Therefore we should not do anything.

Untrue. We'd simply spend federal funds into the best bang for the buck not accounting for population scrappiness.

Pick one and I'd be happy to ask if it's more deserving than all the rest.

JWST.

I'm not familiar with this US state. I'll remind you that we were taking about Puerto Rico being more or less deserving than other states(&DC).

No. You were talking about that. I was specifically saying that we aim for the best bang for the buck on scientific projects with local scrappiness not of relevance.

Correction: MichaelZuo set the topic and I followed. You seem to be wanting to discuss a different topic which can be done elsewhere.

So, Maryland.

Sure, but the other 50 states are also filled with American citizens who deserve things, many of whom are scrappy and resilient. OTOH, the money being spent is also ultimately that of the American citizens', so the government should strive to accomplish the most it can for any given mission and budget.

In this case, the calculus may simply be that the mission can be more comprehensively and efficiently achieved via investments elsewhere that will similarly benefit Americans near those areas as a reinvestment would have benefitted in Puerto Rico.

The major difference, of course, is that those states have federal representatives with voting power to advocate for their needs and Puerto Rico does not.

The story of the death of Arecibo is a stain on the way the United States treats its colonial territories.

That's a little over the top, if you want there to be a radio observatory in PR it would still be better to build a new one.

> (Also, the question of whether or not to make PR a state comes up periodically, and PR sides against it.)

All 3 referenda in PR since 2010 have favored statehood.

Interesting, I guess my information was out of date.

Notably many anti-statehood groups boycotted these plebiscites, and analysts noted that the questions were poorly structured. For example, the 2017 referendum had a result of 97% in favor of statehood... because only pro-statehood voters showed up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_movement_in_Puert...

They were boycotted because they were sham, non-binding referendums. There was never an effort from the mainland to introduce this into Congress seriously.

Therefore. Since nobody in Congress or White House lifts a finger, the referendum becomes just another political rally cry for the local pro-statehood party.

The United States and their political class have made it exceedingly clear that they favour the status quo -- both economically and politically -- at the expense of the island folk who suffer increasing austerity cuts and a deteriorating standard of living.

> was never an effort from the mainland to introduce this into Congress seriously

Statehood and its benefits isn’t something to be unilaterally demanded. Puerto Rico should have the option to declare independence. But it’s far too corrupt for political integration.

I wholly understand your point, but there's a huge power imbalance here. We can run all the referendums we want.

The US government has the full might of the US military, a reluctant political class and an economic interest in keeping the status quo.

There has to be cooperation in both sides for either statehood or independence, if decolonization is to be achieved peacefully. Sadly, there's no will to negotiate from the US gov’t.

About corruption, well, it’s true. Our ex-governor was recently indicted.

However, I also find corruption allegations a convenient way to perpetuate this image of Puerto Ricans as freeloaders—completely missing how much the mainland benefits from us economically, both as a tax haven and as a source of tax revenue (no IRS federal tax, but Jones Act import restrictions).

For more on economic benefits, think about this: a market of 2-3 million people locked in exclusively into US goods and markets due to colonial import restrictions.

Taxation without representation.

I thought Puerto Rico residents with income sourced from Puerto Rico didn’t have to file (or pay) US income tax. Is that mistaken?

That's correct! But federal income tax isn't the only way to get taxed.

1) All goods sold in PR have to pass by mainland US ports, raising living costs significantly. This means re-boarding into a US vessel on the mainland, then sailing to PR if coming internationally.

2) We pay other federal taxes (as freelancer, I pay social security tax among others).

3) Related to #1, customs taxes and levies on all goods transported, paid to the US Treasury.

This is an excellent overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Puerto_Rico

Too corrupt as opposed to say, Illinois? I forget the exact numbers now, but something like 6 of the last 12 governors have gone to jail for corruption, most recently Blagojevich. That's just at the top level; there's problems throughout the state... Not saying PR doesn't have problems, just pointing out actual states do, too.

Sorry, but I fail to see the relevance. Did Illinois declare independence from the US with its current apparently corrupt political class?

If corruption prevented political integration several current US states would not be integrated.

I find it exceedingly impossible that Puerto Rico is more corrupt than my home state of Louisiana.

The state of the island's electrical infrastructure is a much larger stain than the loss of an aging radiotelescope. Spend the money on that, instead.

This statement is a prime example of a fallacy known as false dichotomy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

I’m not convinced it is. The statement translates to:

“I think that the benefit for the community that infrastructure investment provides is so much greater than rebuilding the telescope, to the point that if I had absolute control of the limited gov budget I’d allocate all money to infrastructure.”

That’s debatable, but it doesn’t seem like a logical fallacy.

You can build infrastructure and a telescope.

Is PR’s electrical grid a federal responsibility? I’d assume it was a local/territorial responsibility (now LUMA).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LUMA_Energy

Puertoricans are American citizens by name only - they can’t vote, for example. It’s a colony, and US treats it as such - it doesn’t enjoy the privileges of actual US territory.

If you want to help, becoming a proper, independent country could be a good start. The majority of citizens opposes the current colonial status, as evidenced by several referendums, but, well, it’s not theirs to decide - because they are just a colony and aren’t allowed to vote.

Puertoricans wear the same uniform and fight in the same wars as all Americans so that folks can continue to say ignorant stuff like the comment above. My great grandfather did it. My grandfather. I did it. And I’m sure the tradition will continue.

From Title 8-ALIENS AND NATIONALITY CHAPTER 12-IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY SUBCHAPTER III-NATIONALITY AND NATURALIZATION Part I-Nationality at Birth and Collective Naturalization

All persons born in Puerto Rico on or after April 11, 1899, and prior to January 13, 1941, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, residing on January 13, 1941, in Puerto Rico or other territory over which the United States exercises rights of sovereignty and not citizens of the United States under any other Act, are declared to be citizens of the United States as of January 13, 1941. All persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, are citizens of the United States at birth.

Yes, they get to die for the USA. But they don't get a say like real citizens - no congressmen, no electoral votes, no senators. They do get to pay taxes though. Before you rant about how that's not important, I'd like to remind you of a certain group of English citizens who didn't have representation but were allowed to die and pay taxes for England.

Was I not a citizen until I was first able to vote for federal representation at the age of 25 after moving out of my hometown of DC?

Yes.

Real is probably the wrong term here, but certainly a citizen without the full suite of rights granted to you. If you have all the obligations without all the rights, you are a second class citizen. It's frankly absurd that someone can live within the US as a "citizen" without getting have meaningful representation.

That's a weird argument. By the same logic current and former convicts are not citizens either.

Well no - convicts are being punished for breaking the law.

People born, raised and still living in DC, Puerto Rico, US virgin islands, Guam, and Marianas are being punished for not breaking the law.

That's a different argument though. Punished or not, they are still citizens - so clearly whether you can or cannot vote doesn't change your citizenship.

See the first post of mine that you responded to:

> Real is probably the wrong term here, but certainly a citizen without the full suite of rights granted to you.

I acknowledged the thing you are objecting to before you started objecting. If you want to bikeshed a loosely used term after it's been acknowledged as being the incorrect term - have fun.

In the strictest sense of the word they _are_, but they lose a significant portion of their rights as citizens, even after serving their mandated sentence and "paying their debt to society" or whatever. I would actually argue that ex-cons aren't citizens in the practical sense specifically because they lose out on a bunch of rights they could freely exercise before their conviction.

And before we get into a debate about whether ex-cons "deserve" rights, their sentence is supposed to be them paying their debt to society. Why shouldn't their rights be restored after that?

Many Americans are second-class citizens because they live in areas where even if they DID vote, it wouldn't count for anything.

If Puerto Rico and DC were suddenly made part of California, nothing would change but suddenly they'd be "first class citizens"? (Besides now paying federal income tax)

I wish residents of DC didn't have to pay federal income tax :P

DC being part of California would marginally change the distribution of the House. Agreed the Senate & FPTP is undemocratic.

That's just factually not true. Yes, the presidential election is fucked because the electoral college means that >70% of americans' votes are meaningless, but at the state and local level elections make a HUGE difference. And yes, that's not ideal, but it's a bit flippant and defeatist to write off all elections just because the presidential elections are screwed up.

It's not that the people of Puerto Ricans are lesser americans. It's that Puerto Rico itself as an institution has less rights. If a Puerto Rican moves to Alabama, they get the same rights and privileges, like voting, as anybody else.

NOT a colony.... we're a territory. If you think puerto rico becoming it's own country and missing out on the aid, support and ease of travel provided by the federal government you are either malevolent or naive.

Puerto Rican residents can vote on everything aside from federal elections.

"Vote on everything aside federal elections" - what precisely did you think this means? We can't vote for the president, our elected officials to Congress can't vote on the laws that are passed. What "voting" can we do, other than yes, local elections?

Yukon is a territory. Here, the "territory" is just a pretty name for a colony. You can't vote, US constitution doesn't quite apply, you're getting peanuts from federal aid, and when there's a humanitarian catastrophe you're left for a month without electricity - but you are very welcomed in armed forces, because you're competent and when you die it doesn't matter to decision makers, because you can't vote. In short - you pay the price, but you don't get the benefits. How's that different from a colony?

And yeah, becoming a US state would be better than independence, but it won't happen, because - you guessed it, you can't vote. By becoming an independent country you could get major powers to compete to do business with you - I'm pretty sure China would invest billions into your infrastructure, you could literally become America's Taiwan.

> You can't [...] you're getting peanuts [...] you can't vote

It kinda feels like you're trying to shame Puerto Ricans for being the USA's bitches or something but I don't think that's reasonable. Puerto Ricans are US citizens and can move anywhere in the USA which is not only valuable and lets them send money home but shows that they're respected as just other Americans.

> By becoming an independent country you could get major powers to compete to do business with you - I'm pretty sure China would invest billions into your infrastructure, you could literally become America's Taiwan.

Leave the one country that helps you, though maybe not enough, to be the puppet of their enemy. Like that's not going to end in pain, but that's not your concern as an outsider trying to accelerate chaos.

I’m absolutely not trying to shame anyone; I’m pointing out they are being exploited.

> Puerto Rican residents can vote on everything aside from federal elections.

So, a colony? Taxation without representation. We might not get taxed IRS federal planillas, but all the levies and duties plus the harmful Jones Act beg to differ with your characterization.

The US is choking our economy in its current status. Statehood or independence, a binding referendum is urgent at this point.

Oh, and don't you remember how the US Supreme Court declared us second-class citizens recently? [0]

[0]: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/scotus-declares-u-...

> NOT a colony.... we're a territory

How did the US acquire said territory? And after they acquired it, what did they do to those who did not want their nation to be a "territory?" For those unaware, I'll give you a hint: it did not involve a hearty Socratic discussion followed by a game of badminton [0].

> If you think puerto rico becoming it's own country and missing out on the aid, support and ease of travel provided by the federal government you are either malevolent or naive.

This worked out rather well for the Hawaiians, who are currently having their groundwater poisoned by the US military [1], and their ancestral land acquired by mainlanders while they are made homeless [2].

In the recent non-binding referenda, and the bill to have a binding referendum which recently died in committee, there has been an option for "independence with free association" -- that is, an independent nation-state but with strong free trade and free travel agreements baked in [2]. Statehood is that, plus being subject to the whims of voters in Wisconsin, Idaho, et al. as to whether Puerto Ricans should be allowed funding for things. Keep in mind that there is no way out of this setup short of insurrection.

Given Puerto Rico has a distinct language, culture, etc. from the US, I can only assume we're deciding that the Westphalian model of the nation-state is not a consideration. Given this, I would also like to propose the following for statehood:

1. Korea

2. Vietnam

3. Iraq

4. Iran

5. Afghanistan

6. Somalia

7. Syria

8. Mexico

9. Haiti

10. Dominican Republic

These countries would surely flourish with the support and aid provided by the US federal government. And they were already, at one point or another, occupied by the US. So I can think of no reason not to annex them, short of naïveté or malevolence.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utuado_uprising

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/04/the-us...

[2]: https://thehomemoreproject.org/blog/the-hawaiian-homelessnes...

America acquired it fair and square, the same way nearly all land is acquired throughout human and animal history. Conquest. Those other areas haven't been annexed in the same way, because, after developments in the post WW2 era, acquisition evolved from outright colonization, to control using local proxies and a comprador class economically dependent on the core.

The US does not grant the states a right to become independent countries either.

> Puertoricans are American citizens by name only - they can’t vote, for example.

The veterans who died for the continental US beg to differ.

> If you want to help, becoming a proper, independent country could be a good start.

The US government has the full might of the US military, a reluctant political class and an economic interest in keeping it that way. It's difficult -- whether you're pro-statehood or independence.

> The veterans who died for the continental US beg to differ.

Only if they skipped their history classes - dying for the empire is a standard part of being a colony.

The arrangement of Puerto Rico being a territory was a strategic decision. PR independence has a long history, but ultimately the economic and military benefits of being US citizens ended up outweighing the desire for independence. Being a self governing territory won out as being a sort of best of both worlds.

So, they should build something state-of-the-art there instead of what will effectively be a museum.

(This would probably be a lot easier to get funded if Puerto Rico were a state...)

Who deserve what, a gigantic concrete telescope from the 80s?

Maybe look past your sentimentality and notice that if money in Puerto Rico goes to anything it should be the electrical grid itself that manages to go down for weeks anytime something as mild as a tropical depression looks in the island's direction.

and their residents pay taxes too.

Some taxes, not all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Puerto_Rico

> Puerto Rico is an unincorporated territory of the United States and Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens; however, Puerto Rico is not a U.S. state, but a U.S. insular area. Consequently, while all Puerto Rico residents pay federal taxes, many residents are not required to pay federal income taxes. Aside from income tax, U.S. federal taxes include customs taxes, federal commodity taxes, and federal payroll taxes (Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment taxes).

Any attempt to give PR statehood or make it part of an existing state (Florida, I guess?) would meet with vociferous objection from Puerto Rico.

>As a child, I loved going there and its the earliest part of my childhood that I remember something motivating me to pursue science/math. Even in my later part of my life I was able to do some research with the observatory which kick started my current career.

Honestly seems like this is what they considered most when deciding to turn it into an education center.

> Another issue is that we have our brightest minds leaving the island because there's no fulfilling or well paying work to be done. The lack of this observatory is another reason more people will leave.

The problem with this line of logic isn't that it's wrong or even that it ignores the goal of scientific funding to produce scientific research. The primary problem with this line of argument is that it's equally good for Wyoming, West Virginia, and a dozen or more other deprived places that could all benefit substantially from the STEM-inspiration of a local megaproject.

West Virginia already has Green Bank, no?

They also published a video with some renders of the NGAT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=518&v=2qiu86-ZZdU

I really wish it had been built.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com