Why Not Build Another Los Angeles (by the Bridge to Nowhere)?

Typical Los Angeles Resident

Los Angeles is America’s second-largest city, and is world-renowned for her diverse economy and global role in commerce, entertainment, and art.  All its people are reputed to be exceptionally beautiful, talented, and clever (at least by their own, uniform accounts).

If Los Angeles should be so valuable – and it is – why not build a second Los Angeles just outside Whitewater?  We could start the gateway to the project at the very spot where the Bridge to Nowhere ends.

If one city of the angels is good, wouldn’t two be far better? 

What if, since this project would be pricey, the U.S. Government would lend us the money?  Let’s say Uncle Sam would lend us a trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000.00) to start.  After all, America spent well over a trillion dollars in Iraq over the last decade. 

Should we start a Los Angeles 2.0?

If we build it, will they (super-smart, trendy people) not come to us in wave after wave?

There’s the big-talking developers’ problem: it’s only worthwhile if the gain (accurately measured) is more than the expense (fully calculated) of L.A. Part Deux. 

If simply building more of an expensive thing brought prosperity, every Whitewater resident would be building Phantoms, Ghosts, and Wraiths – and every resident would be prosperous by consequence.  

The climate of these times is filled with ‘if you build it, they will come’ projects. 

It’s so easy to say, so simple to talk up, and so few people press for details.

So, why not, big talkers? 

Just apply for some federal money.

If you don’t try to build another Los Angeles on the taxpayers’ tab, some other community might get that money.

Hurry now, there’s no time to lose…