Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in columns and letters are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Daily or organizations with which the author(s) are associated. 

Concerning your editorial on Apple, you make a statement that implies that there is a spending choice to be made between providing incentives to Apple vs lowering the hikes on tuition. This is a false choice.

A partial forgiveness of future tax revenue is not the same thing as an expense. Simply put, the State of Iowa isn’t paying Apple any money. The State of Iowa gets no money from Apple without the project. If the State of Iowa incentivizes Apple by saying they owe less than they would otherwise owe, the State of Iowa hasn’t spent any money. The State never had the money from Apple to begin with. 

Your argument would be valid only under two circumstances. 1) The Apple project would have come to Iowa anyway without any incentives by Iowa. 2) There is a legitimate alternative land use of equal value ($1.3B) to the Apple data center that will happen within the inventive period (20 yrs) and will require no incentives.

Scenario #1 is absurd and given that Waukee just began their massive Kettlestone development focus for the next several decades, the informed opinion is that the land this Apple project sits on will remain farmland for many, many years to come.

You’re promoting a false choice. Iowa has no spending choice between these Apple incentives and reducing tuition. An informed opinion on this issue must start with an understanding of the mathematical difference between a government expense and a partial forgiveness of future tax revenue.