9/11 memorial to cost $60 million a year to operate (1 Viewer)

[otello]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48960348/ns/us_news-security/#.UE0Ii1Euv1g

"The foundation that runs the memorial estimates that once the roughly $700 million project is complete, it will cost $60 million a year to operate."

"Just operating the two massive fountains that mark the spots where the twin towers once stood will cost another $4.5 million to $5 million annually, said the foundation's spokesman, Michael Frazier."

"The anticipated cost has bothered some critics and raised concerns even among the memorial's allies that the budget may be unsustainable without a hefty government subsidy."

 

[CrossEyed]

One of the reasons we're now $16 trillion in debt.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Part of me wants to say that they have a legitimate point that this project is hard to compare to other parks. But 1/3 again more than Arlington? That's a lot.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

One of the reasons we're now $16 trillion in debt.

Suppose this $60 million was picked up entirely by Washington, which it won't be. What percentage is that of our annual deficit?

 

[cstu]

The terrorists won again.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Part of me wants to say that they have a legitimate point that this project is hard to compare to other parks. But 1/3 again more than Arlington? That's a lot.

I've visited twice, it's really an amazing tribute. What they should have done is keep the small museum they already had, not build a huge underground one that has the same impact.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Part of me wants to say that they have a legitimate point that this project is hard to compare to other parks. But 1/3 again more than Arlington? That's a lot.

I've visited twice, it's really an amazing tribute. What they should have done is keep the small museum they already had, not build a huge underground one that has the same impact.

I'm not being critical, for the record. This is something that deserves a high-quality memorial.

 

[cstu]

The foundation plans to spend at least a fifth of its operating budget, or around $12 million per year, on private security because of terrorism fears. Visitors to the memorial plaza pass through airport-like security, and armed guards patrol the grounds.

Of all the terrorist targets in NY (including the new tower) is really necessary to have this much security for a couple of holes in the ground?

 

[Rayderr]

More than any of the Smithsonian Museums.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Part of me wants to say that they have a legitimate point that this project is hard to compare to other parks. But 1/3 again more than Arlington? That's a lot.

I've visited twice, it's really an amazing tribute. What they should have done is keep the small museum they already had, not build a huge underground one that has the same impact.

I'm not being critical, for the record. This is something that deserves a high-quality memorial.

Yeah I know you weren't and I agree with you, shouldn't cost more than Arlington. My point was the outdoor reflective pools/falls was plenty and stunning, and the museum they basically just threw together was great.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

Are they charging the tourists admission?

 

[Fennis]

Are they charging the tourists admission?

The admission price hasn't been set. But if the museum gets the 2 million visitors a year the foundation expects, a $12 fee, like the one charged at the memorial to the victims of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, would cover 40 percent of the operating costs. More money will be generated through fundraising and the sale of memorabilia.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

Are they charging the tourists admission?

The admission price hasn't been set. But if the museum gets the 2 million visitors a year the foundation expects, a $12 fee, like the one charged at the memorial to the victims of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, would cover 40 percent of the operating costs. More money will be generated through fundraising and the sale of memorabilia.

There you go. That should cover the operating expenses. You guys didn't think you can visit for free, did ya? Duh.

 

[CrossEyed]

One of the reasons we're now $16 trillion in debt.

Suppose this $60 million was picked up entirely by Washington, which it won't be. What percentage is that of our annual deficit?

I was actually referring to the idea that a private foundation would expect the government to subsidize any shortfall. But you've brought up another reason, which is the attitude that we're so far in debt why even worry about wasting a little more?

 

[FavreCo]

One of the reasons we're now $16 trillion in debt.

No biggie. We'll be at 20 trillion soon. That $16 trillion is meaningless.

 

[otello]

Proposed $20 to $25 ticket charge.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18059052-world-trade-center-911-museum-to-charge-20-25-admission-fee?lite

 

[shadyridr]

Proposed $20 to $25 ticket charge.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18059052-world-trade-center-911-museum-to-charge-20-25-admission-fee?lite

this is beyond ridiculous

 

[cstu]

Proposed $20 to $25 ticket charge.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18059052-world-trade-center-911-museum-to-charge-20-25-admission-fee?lite

Inside the museum:

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

As long as it's treated as a public trust where the fee goes directly for the facility (maintenance, etc.) I'll be happy to pay the fee, donate, and purchase merchandise. It's going to be an expensive memorial to maintain, that's the reality. Of course everyone wants it to be free, but the proposed fee is actually pretty in-line for what one can expect in NYC. It's what, roughly double the average movie theater ticket? I don't think this will keep people away if the memorial can do a good job of explaining why they need to charge.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

They also plan on offering times where the exhibits are free as well as discounts to seniors & children, which is traditional for other NYC landmarks, museums, zoos, etc.

 

[McGarnicle]

Money well spent IMO. It looks like they did an amazing job with it and I can't wait to go.

 

[Nipsey]

As long as it's treated as a public trust where the fee goes directly for the facility (maintenance, etc.) I'll be happy to pay the fee, donate, and purchase merchandise. It's going to be an expensive memorial to maintain, that's the reality. Of course everyone wants it to be free, but the proposed fee is actually pretty in-line for what one can expect in NYC. It's what, roughly double the average movie theater ticket? I don't think this will keep people away if the memorial can do a good job of explaining why they need to charge.

merch?

I'm all for the memorial but the museum just seems like paying to see live disaster porn to me.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I don't understand memorials. Seems like a waste of time, space and resources.

Kind of like those silly make-shift memorials you see on the side of the road - who does that? Can we outlaw memorials?

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

As long as it's treated as a public trust where the fee goes directly for the facility (maintenance, etc.) I'll be happy to pay the fee, donate, and purchase merchandise. It's going to be an expensive memorial to maintain, that's the reality. Of course everyone wants it to be free, but the proposed fee is actually pretty in-line for what one can expect in NYC. It's what, roughly double the average movie theater ticket? I don't think this will keep people away if the memorial can do a good job of explaining why they need to charge.

merch?

I'm all for the memorial but the museum just seems like paying to see live disaster porn to me.

The article stated they would likely sell merchandise to help defray the costs, thus the reference to purchasing merchandise. The point being that I'll support the effort financially, understanding the costs they're dealing with.

 

[stbugs]

I don't understand memorials. Seems like a waste of time, space and resources.

Kind of like those silly make-shift memorials you see on the side of the road - who does that? Can we outlaw memorials?

Who does that? Most likely it is family members of the person who died there and for some odd reason they are sort of upset and maybe even trying to deal with their grief. Ahh, who knows, you are right, they are stupid.

 

[Zow]

I don't understand memorials. Seems like a waste of time, space and resources. Kind of like those silly make-shift memorials you see on the side of the road - who does that? Can we outlaw memorials?

Who does that? Most likely it is family members of the person who died there and for some odd reason they are sort of upset and maybe even trying to deal with their grief. Ahh, who knows, you are right, they are stupid.

I would think a less expensive one would have a similar impact.

 

[thetman]

Would this much be spent if a 9-11 type terrorist attack happened in South Dakota? I doubt it.

 

[stbugs]

I don't understand memorials. Seems like a waste of time, space and resources. Kind of like those silly make-shift memorials you see on the side of the road - who does that? Can we outlaw memorials?

Who does that? Most likely it is family members of the person who died there and for some odd reason they are sort of upset and maybe even trying to deal with their grief. Ahh, who knows, you are right, they are stupid.

I would think a less expensive one would have a similar impact.

I was referring to his asinine comment about silly make shift memorials on the side of the road. I know someone who got killed in a bike accident and his family understandably took it real hard and they put up a memorial where he was hit and died. He is saying that he is "bothered" by what they did to try and cope with the grief. Tough ####, he can deal.

 

[beer 302]

I'm just wondering what type of "memorabilia" they plan on selling? A flag with all the victims names is about all I can come up with that would be close to tasteful. I'm good with $25/head, happy to pay it.

 

[Nipsey]

I'm just wondering what type of "memorabilia" they plan on selling? A flag with all the victims names is about all I can come up with that would be close to tasteful.

Wat? Who would buy that?

Gotta be 9-11 "never forget" type museum t-shirts, freedom tower t shirts, books, etc. Still, the idea of selling souvenirs seems pretty odd.

 

[Smack Tripper]

Would this much be spent if a 9-11 type terrorist attack happened in South Dakota? I doubt it.

How does South Dakota compare to New York in terms of being an economic engine?

Would you rather see a wal-mart built in place of this?

 

[Sinn Fein]

I don't understand memorials. Seems like a waste of time, space and resources. Kind of like those silly make-shift memorials you see on the side of the road - who does that? Can we outlaw memorials?

Who does that? Most likely it is family members of the person who died there and for some odd reason they are sort of upset and maybe even trying to deal with their grief. Ahh, who knows, you are right, they are stupid.

I would think a less expensive one would have a similar impact.

I was referring to his asinine comment about silly make shift memorials on the side of the road. I know someone who got killed in a bike accident and his family understandably took it real hard and they put up a memorial where he was hit and died. He is saying that he is "bothered" by what they did to try and cope with the grief. Tough ####, he can deal.

the memorials are asinine imo. My brother died in a car accident. I never once felt the need to prop up a cross or other memento on the place he died. It's not sacred ground - it's the scene of an accident.

 

[Rayderr]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

 

[bonesman]

I'm just wondering what type of "memorabilia" they plan on selling? A flag with all the victims names is about all I can come up with that would be close to tasteful.

Wat? Who would buy that?

Gotta be 9-11 "never forget" type museum t-shirts, freedom tower t shirts, books, etc. Still, the idea of selling souvenirs seems pretty odd.

Little pewter statues of the moment the 2nd tower hit.

 

[NCCommish]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

I liked what they did in Pennsylvania for Flight 93. It's fairly simple but at the same time simple seems to work best.

 

[FlapJacks]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

Agree

we are a stupid nation

 

[Smack Tripper]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

 

[Rayderr]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

 

[pantherclub]

Bin Laden was an effing genius

 

[Smack Tripper]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

I live miles from this thing and haven't been. But I'm going to guess the museum, once you get past the construction cost, is not the significant operational expense here. The article seems to reflect the fountains and I'm sure this is a rather recurrent engineering monitoring that goes on in lower Manhattan which has a significant amount of fill. When you add the security into this, I can forsee this being an expensive operation.

I think the debate here is interesting, if not poorly channeled.

If "taxpayer dollars" had to cover this expense, it would cost us all 20 cents a year.

When you compare that to the actions and the ongoing war that still rages, I guess I'm just puzzled as to why this is where we start to get fiscally prudent, over a multi million dollar memorial, while a trillion dollar war wages with no end in sight.

If you are concerned about tightening the belt, I'd see that as a better place to start.

 

[NCCommish]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

I live miles from this thing and haven't been. But I'm going to guess the museum, once you get past the construction cost, is not the significant operational expense here. The article seems to reflect the fountains and I'm sure this is a rather recurrent engineering monitoring that goes on in lower Manhattan which has a significant amount of fill. When you add the security into this, I can forsee this being an expensive operation.

I think the debate here is interesting, if not poorly channeled.

If "taxpayer dollars" had to cover this expense, it would cost us all 20 cents a year.

When you compare that to the actions and the ongoing war that still rages, I guess I'm just puzzled as to why this is where we start to get fiscally prudent, over a multi million dollar memorial, while a trillion dollar war wages with no end in sight.

If you are concerned about tightening the belt, I'd see that as a better place to start.

Actually I wouldn't have a problem with the state and the feds fully subsidizing it. But I do question it in it's grandiose excess. I think a nice park and a black granite wall with all the names on it would have been just as good as some artsy, fancy fountains and a museum.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Proposed $20 to $25 ticket charge.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18059052-world-trade-center-911-museum-to-charge-20-25-admission-fee?lite

Inside the museum:

Doesn't it cost around $40-45 just to go up to the observation deck at the Empire State Building? I doubt $20 is going to deter those that really want to see it.

 

[Smack Tripper]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

I live miles from this thing and haven't been. But I'm going to guess the museum, once you get past the construction cost, is not the significant operational expense here. The article seems to reflect the fountains and I'm sure this is a rather recurrent engineering monitoring that goes on in lower Manhattan which has a significant amount of fill. When you add the security into this, I can forsee this being an expensive operation.

I think the debate here is interesting, if not poorly channeled.

If "taxpayer dollars" had to cover this expense, it would cost us all 20 cents a year.

When you compare that to the actions and the ongoing war that still rages, I guess I'm just puzzled as to why this is where we start to get fiscally prudent, over a multi million dollar memorial, while a trillion dollar war wages with no end in sight.

If you are concerned about tightening the belt, I'd see that as a better place to start.

Actually I wouldn't have a problem with the state and the feds fully subsidizing it. But I do question it in it's grandiose excess. I think a nice park and a black granite wall with all the names on it would have been just as good as some artsy, fancy fountains and a museum.

I've not personally heard it described as grandiose. Have you been there? Was that your experience?

The issue with this particular space has always been, with the families of the dead most vocally, is that the hole, the footprint of the building, once removed of debris, but somewhat preserved as a concept, again as an acknowledgement of their death. They did not want the holes filled in. So yeah, now we are down to a question of waterfalls.

The names in the manner you suggest do appear in that format, as I understand it, the names ring the waterfalls.

 

[Rayderr]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

I live miles from this thing and haven't been. But I'm going to guess the museum, once you get past the construction cost, is not the significant operational expense here. The article seems to reflect the fountains and I'm sure this is a rather recurrent engineering monitoring that goes on in lower Manhattan which has a significant amount of fill. When you add the security into this, I can forsee this being an expensive operation.

I think the debate here is interesting, if not poorly channeled.

If "taxpayer dollars" had to cover this expense, it would cost us all 20 cents a year.

When you compare that to the actions and the ongoing war that still rages, I guess I'm just puzzled as to why this is where we start to get fiscally prudent, over a multi million dollar memorial, while a trillion dollar war wages with no end in sight.

If you are concerned about tightening the belt, I'd see that as a better place to start.

Per the original article, the fountains only count for $5mil and is not part of the $60mil annual budget.

 

[NCCommish]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

I live miles from this thing and haven't been. But I'm going to guess the museum, once you get past the construction cost, is not the significant operational expense here. The article seems to reflect the fountains and I'm sure this is a rather recurrent engineering monitoring that goes on in lower Manhattan which has a significant amount of fill. When you add the security into this, I can forsee this being an expensive operation.

I think the debate here is interesting, if not poorly channeled.

If "taxpayer dollars" had to cover this expense, it would cost us all 20 cents a year.

When you compare that to the actions and the ongoing war that still rages, I guess I'm just puzzled as to why this is where we start to get fiscally prudent, over a multi million dollar memorial, while a trillion dollar war wages with no end in sight.

If you are concerned about tightening the belt, I'd see that as a better place to start.

Actually I wouldn't have a problem with the state and the feds fully subsidizing it. But I do question it in it's grandiose excess. I think a nice park and a black granite wall with all the names on it would have been just as good as some artsy, fancy fountains and a museum.

I've not personally heard it described as grandiose. Have you been there? Was that your experience?

The issue with this particular space has always been, with the families of the dead most vocally, is that the hole, the footprint of the building, once removed of debris, but somewhat preserved as a concept, again as an acknowledgement of their death. They did not want the holes filled in. So yeah, now we are down to a question of waterfalls.

The names in the manner you suggest do appear in that format, as I understand it, the names ring the waterfalls.

Just going by pictures. It seems like a little much to me in comparison to other memorials.

 

[stbugs]

I don't understand memorials. Seems like a waste of time, space and resources. Kind of like those silly make-shift memorials you see on the side of the road - who does that? Can we outlaw memorials?

Who does that? Most likely it is family members of the person who died there and for some odd reason they are sort of upset and maybe even trying to deal with their grief. Ahh, who knows, you are right, they are stupid.

I would think a less expensive one would have a similar impact.

I was referring to his asinine comment about silly make shift memorials on the side of the road. I know someone who got killed in a bike accident and his family understandably took it real hard and they put up a memorial where he was hit and died. He is saying that he is "bothered" by what they did to try and cope with the grief. Tough ####, he can deal.

the memorials are asinine imo.My brother died in a car accident. I never once felt the need to prop up a cross or other memento on the place he died. It's not sacred ground - it's the scene of an accident.

That's awesome for you, it's not surprising. If children feel better doing a memorial to cope, then I am fine with that. Not everyone is like you and that my friend is a good thing.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I was referring to his asinine comment about silly make shift memorials on the side of the road. I know someone who got killed in a bike accident and his family understandably took it real hard and they put up a memorial where he was hit and died. ...

Bothered is hardly the right word for me, but when I see these roadside (or around here RR track side) memorials I always hope and pray that those that put them up are able to focus on more than the tragic end of their loved one's life. From personal experience I know how hard and important this step is in the healing. Which makes me wonder if this memorial/museum helps or hurt the families and friends of those directly impacted? I'm sure it is a lot of both for different people, and for the same person at different times.

 

[Smack Tripper]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

I live miles from this thing and haven't been. But I'm going to guess the museum, once you get past the construction cost, is not the significant operational expense here. The article seems to reflect the fountains and I'm sure this is a rather recurrent engineering monitoring that goes on in lower Manhattan which has a significant amount of fill. When you add the security into this, I can forsee this being an expensive operation.

I think the debate here is interesting, if not poorly channeled.

If "taxpayer dollars" had to cover this expense, it would cost us all 20 cents a year.

When you compare that to the actions and the ongoing war that still rages, I guess I'm just puzzled as to why this is where we start to get fiscally prudent, over a multi million dollar memorial, while a trillion dollar war wages with no end in sight.

If you are concerned about tightening the belt, I'd see that as a better place to start.

Actually I wouldn't have a problem with the state and the feds fully subsidizing it. But I do question it in it's grandiose excess. I think a nice park and a black granite wall with all the names on it would have been just as good as some artsy, fancy fountains and a museum.

I've not personally heard it described as grandiose. Have you been there? Was that your experience?

The issue with this particular space has always been, with the families of the dead most vocally, is that the hole, the footprint of the building, once removed of debris, but somewhat preserved as a concept, again as an acknowledgement of their death. They did not want the holes filled in. So yeah, now we are down to a question of waterfalls.

The names in the manner you suggest do appear in that format, as I understand it, the names ring the waterfalls.

Just going by pictures. It seems like a little much to me in comparison to other memorials.

So what would yo have done?

 

[NCCommish]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

I live miles from this thing and haven't been. But I'm going to guess the museum, once you get past the construction cost, is not the significant operational expense here. The article seems to reflect the fountains and I'm sure this is a rather recurrent engineering monitoring that goes on in lower Manhattan which has a significant amount of fill. When you add the security into this, I can forsee this being an expensive operation.

I think the debate here is interesting, if not poorly channeled.

If "taxpayer dollars" had to cover this expense, it would cost us all 20 cents a year.

When you compare that to the actions and the ongoing war that still rages, I guess I'm just puzzled as to why this is where we start to get fiscally prudent, over a multi million dollar memorial, while a trillion dollar war wages with no end in sight.

If you are concerned about tightening the belt, I'd see that as a better place to start.

Actually I wouldn't have a problem with the state and the feds fully subsidizing it. But I do question it in it's grandiose excess. I think a nice park and a black granite wall with all the names on it would have been just as good as some artsy, fancy fountains and a museum.

I've not personally heard it described as grandiose. Have you been there? Was that your experience?

The issue with this particular space has always been, with the families of the dead most vocally, is that the hole, the footprint of the building, once removed of debris, but somewhat preserved as a concept, again as an acknowledgement of their death. They did not want the holes filled in. So yeah, now we are down to a question of waterfalls.

The names in the manner you suggest do appear in that format, as I understand it, the names ring the waterfalls.

Just going by pictures. It seems like a little much to me in comparison to other memorials.

So what would yo have done?

I think I mentioned a park and a something like a Vietnam Memorial wall. Maybe a nice stand of trees. I think simpler is better.

 

[dgreen]

The Vietname Wall is one of, if not the most popular memorial in DC. It's simple. Just a list of victims chiseled into black stone. Upkeep costs is probably considerably less than the 9/11 one. A few bucks to keep the grass trimmed and to wipe down the wall with Windex. Why couldn't they just do something like that? That seems to be a far more meaningful tribute than a museum that costs $25 to get in.

The issue and debate in New York is, the majority of the dead were entirely unrecovered so the footprint of the buildings is the final resting place of thousands of people.

So building a museum is more appropriate?

I live miles from this thing and haven't been. But I'm going to guess the museum, once you get past the construction cost, is not the significant operational expense here. The article seems to reflect the fountains and I'm sure this is a rather recurrent engineering monitoring that goes on in lower Manhattan which has a significant amount of fill. When you add the security into this, I can forsee this being an expensive operation.

I think the debate here is interesting, if not poorly channeled.

If "taxpayer dollars" had to cover this expense, it would cost us all 20 cents a year.

When you compare that to the actions and the ongoing war that still rages, I guess I'm just puzzled as to why this is where we start to get fiscally prudent, over a multi million dollar memorial, while a trillion dollar war wages with no end in sight.

If you are concerned about tightening the belt, I'd see that as a better place to start.

Actually I wouldn't have a problem with the state and the feds fully subsidizing it. But I do question it in it's grandiose excess. I think a nice park and a black granite wall with all the names on it would have been just as good as some artsy, fancy fountains and a museum.

I've not personally heard it described as grandiose. Have you been there? Was that your experience?

The issue with this particular space has always been, with the families of the dead most vocally, is that the hole, the footprint of the building, once removed of debris, but somewhat preserved as a concept, again as an acknowledgement of their death. They did not want the holes filled in. So yeah, now we are down to a question of waterfalls.

The names in the manner you suggest do appear in that format, as I understand it, the names ring the waterfalls.

Just going by pictures. It seems like a little much to me in comparison to other memorials.

So what would yo have done?

I think I mentioned a park and a something like a Vietnam Memorial wall. Maybe a nice stand of trees. I think simpler is better.

When the WWII Memorial opened in DC, a lot of older people (namely WWII vets) didn't like the atmosphere of the memorial. While the Vietnam Memorial is a very solemn place, the WWII Memorial is a fun hangout for tourists. Sure, part of that could be how distant WWII is now and the fact that 90% of the visitors to the memorial weren't even born when the war ended. But, I think design of the memorial also has something to do with it. I can't imagine the Vietnam Memorial's atmosphere being much different in 30 years, but maybe it will.