Opinion: Missile defense should not be treated as a Rust Belt jobs program

To the editor: In 1983, President Reagan proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative, which became known as “Star Wars.” The plan was to build a space- and Earth-based anti-missile system to destroy incoming weapons from the Soviet Union. (“The nation’s missile-defense system has serious flaws. So why is the Pentagon moving to expand it?” Dec. 13)

Surely such a program would have employed thousands of people, but it was never implemented due to the enormous cost and unreliability of the system.

The idea of building additional missile defense bases in economically devastated Rust Belt states for the sole purpose of job creation is a bad one. Spending taxpayer dollars with no return on investment for an unreliable and expensive anti-missile system is unsustainable.

It would be far better for the relevant Rust Belt states to sell bonds for construction and implementation of revenue-producing infrastructure such as water projects and high-speed rail.

Craig Simmons, Northridge

..

To the editor: Does anybody remember the term economic conversion?

When the Berlin Wall came down in 1981, the idea was to shift funds away from combating the Soviet Union and put them into long-neglected domestic projects. The idea lingered until the Democratic primary in 1992; there was even a candidate, Larry Agran, who had a plan to start implementing it.

Sadly, he never got into the debates, and the nation never got to hear his plan.

But the idea still makes a lot of sense. It has been maintained for years that you get far more job creation bang for your tax buck investing in education, healthcare and infrastructure projects than in defense.

Let’s fight joblessness, not an imaginary foe with an inefficient weapon system. This would appeal to people everywhere, not just in the Rust Belt.

Steve Varalyay, Torrance

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook