What is the best American Acquisition? In your Opinion Alaska Purchase Texas Annexation Louisiana Purchase Mexican Cession Oregon Country In terms of Value versus cost Rocket River I know we are biased!
In terms of value I think you have to go Louisian Purchase. When the sellers(the French)feels they got hoodwinked you know you got a good deal.
The Louisiana Purchase. Without it, we don't acquire Texas by treaty between the two countries, and we don't acquire the vast area west of the Louisiana Purchase and Texas, in my humble opinion. We might have still managed to purchase Alaska from the stupid Russians. Maybe. Interesting thread. -
Gadsden Purchase has to be the worst. My money is on the Mexican Cession because California and we finally fulfilled Manifest Destiny
Definitely Texas. Texas is an economic powerhouse. Without Texas, there would be no United States. (We would've conquered it all by now.)
What about Manhattan for a bag of chips? What are the Jeremy Lin Acquisitions, that had negative value.
As well as parts of New Mexico, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Kansas, as you know. Frankly, I wish Texas had insisted on keeping those bits of what became future states of our Great Nation. I would have enjoyed climbing in the Rocky Mountains of Texas. As one nation signing a treaty with another nation, our Founding Fathers should have held out for a better deal!
Found this rate of return article on historical purchase. The purchase of Manhattan indeed wins over Louisiana Purchase. But Alaska beats them both. http://mises.org/daily/6799/What-Is-the-Rate-of-Return-on-the-Louisiana-Purchase The article further concludes that these are solid returns, but nothing spectacular. Although it adjust for economic growth in general, which means *everything* increased value in pioneering days, so you have to adjust as you look at growth over centuries. But it does further talk about their intangibles. <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="607"><tbody><tr><td width="193" nowrap=""><p><strong>Deal</strong></p></td><td width="64" nowrap=""><p align="center"><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td width="86"><p align="center"><strong>Historic Cost</strong></p></td><td width="154"><p align="center"><strong>Present Value of Current Output</strong></p></td><td width="110"><p align="center"><strong>Rate of Return (%)</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td width="193" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p> Manhattan </p></td><td width="64" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">1626 </p></td><td width="86" valign="bottom"><p align="center">$24 </p></td><td width="154" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">$24 trillion </p></td><td width="110" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">7.4 </p></td></tr><tr><td width="193" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p>Louisiana Purchase </p></td><td width="64" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">1803 </p></td><td width="86" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">$15 million </p></td><td width="154" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">$30 trillion </p></td><td width="110" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">7.1 </p></td></tr><tr><td width="193" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p>Alaska Purchase </p></td><td width="64" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">1876 </p></td><td width="86" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">$7.2 million </p></td><td width="154" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">$1 trillion </p></td><td width="110" nowrap="" valign="bottom"><p align="center">9.0 </p></td></tr></tbody></table> While historians often give credit for these purchases to the foresight of the governments of Thomas Jefferson and Ulysses S. Grant, in reality they haven’t paid off as well as one might expect. The Louisiana Purchase in particular has only “returned” about 7 percent once we adjust the figures for economic growth since 1803. The purchase of Manhattan hasn’t fared much better, and the figure would even be worse if we were to include only output produced within Manhattan, instead of the greater New York metropolitan area. All three purchases experienced fairly standard rates of return compared to what the general American economy has been able to generate. By all appearances, instead of being wonder-investments they are just par-for-the-course. In comparison to many investors, like Warren Buffet for example, these returns are downright dismal. To be fair, there are intangible benefits to each of these purchases not apparent in the objective numbers. Manhattan provided a trading foothold in the new world. The Louisiana Purchase secured the Mississippi River watershed, and with it, removed the ability of Napoleon and the French from halting the westward advance of Americans. Finally, Alaska has suffered from centuries of public ownership of its lands with heavy-handed regulations stopping entrepreneurs from developing its resources and putting them to good use.
