In long run, the benefits outweigh costs

THE BIG DIG DEBT

THE BIG Dig cost more than it should have, and there should have been greater oversight during its construction. But inflating the Big Dig's cost by including the interest on the loans, as Sean Murphy did in his front-page July 17 article, "Big Dig's red ink engulfs state," creates an unfair comparison with everything else the state, homeowners, or businesses do on borrowed money. If we want to get really tricky, we can easily manipulate the price by changing the length of the loan.

Using such an inflation technique can make the new Central Artery seem not worth the "price." But good transportation networks not only reduce the implicit cost of commuting time and the costs incurred from accidents, they increase real economic growth. By 2006, the Big Dig had already stimulated housing, retail, and commercial development projects worth more than $7 billion, helping to generate 43,000 jobs. This increased development is also adding up to $120 million in annual property tax revenues for the city. So even if you include the long-term costs of interest charges on the Big Dig, a serious accounting of the long-term gains yields a benefit/cost ratio well above 1. Too costly perhaps, but nonetheless a good deal.

BARRY BLUESTONE, Boston
The writer is dean of the School of Social Science, Urban Affairs, and Public Policy at Northeastern University.