Originally published in the Grand Rapids Business Journal, September 20, 2005.

Growing up in South Carolina, I had decided as an eight year-old that I would smoke at least an occasional cigarette upon adulthood. Why? Because it was explained to me that the hot smoke was good for burning off bad germs in my lungs.... Honest to God! This was accepted wisdom. Hard to believe, huh?

Well, not really. I mean, hot smoke does seem like it would kill off living things like germs, doesn't it? It's plausible that heat could roast a germ, fire removes oxygen and suffocates, and the chemicals and soot can't be good for germs either. Plus there are all those tobacco farmers who need to sell their crop. And all those factories next door in North Carolina that need to pay all their workers. So buying a carton of Marlboros now and then is really the Christian thing to do....

And this is how really bad ideas become good ideas. Suspect science and a desire to make something happen because we *want* it to happen. Sort of like building a city on a river delta.

What I would argue is this: Let's have a little humility and before we do something big let's consider that our good idea might not be a good idea in 30 years. Developers develop. They build things; they rebuild things. Nothing inherently bad in that. Environmentalists environ. The protect things; they allow things to re-grow. Nothing inherently bad in that, either. So what we need an arbiter to decide on what makes the best sense. Who could that be?

The government, of course. We need a government for these huge projects that
not only has a plan but also the nads to enforce it. We need a government with the -- dare I say it? -- leadership. A government who isn't going to wuss-out and say "let market forces decide" or "the majority rules, especially when it's convenient for us" or "it's not my fault."

"Rebuild at any cost." That's not a plan. That's a campaign slogan. And very likely, a recipe for another disaster....