Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 564 posts

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#191

Post by ethagknight »

efsavage wrote: post #175
imgabe wrote: post #80

I don't know the answers, but as someone who works in the industry (on the design side). I think a big unmentioned factor is probably liability and the prospect of litigation. If you look at old blueprints for projects in the past, they are a LOT less detailed. They had to be, because it was physically more difficult to produce them since they had to be drawn by hand. A lot was left to the contractor to figure out in…

This is correct. I wonder if anyone has tried doing "design and build" contracts where this becomes an internal cost center instead of a profit driver, and would theoretically get optimized out.

I am on the developer side on a project with a design-build contract with a major contractor. the architecture side and contractors are pitting against each other internally, because the architect is still liable for his drawings being correct, and the contractor is still liable for the work being complete to the contract documents. Seeking to align efforts to minimize detailing costs is a recipe for very costly mistakes down the road when something doesn't satisfy fire code, building code, ADA, insurance, lender requirements, hotel brand standard (in my case). Theoretically, I suppose you would only see streamlining if the Owner-Architect-Engineer-GC-Regulator was one entity, like a government maybe.

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#192

Post by mason240 »

Mz wrote: post #182
mason240 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're free to live how you choose, but don't force others to live how you see fit.

I don't see where you get the idea that I am doing anything or have any goal to force anyone to do anything. That seems like a huge and unwarranted leap of logic.

>I think we can change this substantially.

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#193

Post by coding123 »

BurningFrog wrote: post #137
akshatpradhan wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This means every time there's a question, it has to be submitted through a formal process, tracked, answered, documented. I don't know why you think proper change control is a bad thing. In both software and systems engineering you submit change requests that are tracked, reviewed, assessed for risk, approved and documented. You do this to create an audit trail to identify "how we got here". Any concerns? It's docum…

OP points out the costs of this. You point out the benefits. Both true. But the interesting question is if and when the costs outweigh the benefits.

Well and perhaps even more interesting is the effect on delayed fixes has on TCO and safety of aging roads. Not to mention reduction in jobs sites across the Nation also reduces the individual performance of infrastructure construction companies except for a lucky few. Lots of push and pull from all directions.

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#194

Post by babesh »

It's a symptom of captured large government in the US.

The smaller 25k person town I live in doesn't nearly have the same issues. We've managed to put up new school buildings the last couple of years with not too much fuss and on budget. On the other hand, the town is relatively well off and there is seemingly good community participation.

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#195

Post by blackguardx »

flubert wrote: post #161
imgabe wrote: post #80

I don't know the answers, but as someone who works in the industry (on the design side). I think a big unmentioned factor is probably liability and the prospect of litigation. If you look at old blueprints for projects in the past, they are a LOT less detailed. They had to be, because it was physically more difficult to produce them since they had to be drawn by hand. A lot was left to the contractor to figure out in…

>Now, drawings are more detailed and contractors are incredibly reluctant to make even the smallest decisions on their own. I also wonder about the effect of building codes, etc.. It might be interesting to plot construction costs and number pages of building code vs. time for the U.S., Japan, France, etc., and see if there are any correlations. That type of plot seems like it might almost be doable.

The people onsite know the codes as well.

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#196

Post by Mz »

mason240 wrote: post #192
Mz wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see where you get the idea that I am doing anything or have any goal to force anyone to do anything. That seems like a huge and unwarranted leap of logic.

>I think we can change this substantially.

I don't see how that in any way suggests what you are saying. There are a lot of people who currently feel forced into long commutes who hate them. There are a lot of people who are trapped in the situation of they need a car to get to work, they need a job to afford a car because a car is often the second biggest household expense after housing itself.

I am talking about opening up options, not putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to give up their car. We currently have many people who feel they have a gun to their head in terms of being forced into needing a car they don't want. Where is your sympathy for their right to choose?

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#197

Post by kcorbitt »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #95
michaelt wrote: post #12

That suggests that U.S. costs are high due to general inefficiency [...] Americans have simply ponied up more and more cash over the years while ignoring the fact that they were getting less and less for their money. There's a general effect in political systems, that if a law takes $20 from 1,000,000 people and gives $100,000 to 200 people, the people who lose money won't have enough incentive to put up a big fight;…

>campaign finance reform, perhaps? Abso-fucking-lutely. I think in order to run at any levels of office, you should be using public money. For simplification, let's say if one wants to run for president, they can only use whatever is in the FEC public coffers. In return, we levy a federal FEC tax to boost it way higher than its current rates. We replicate a similar tax at state and local levels. Completely remove pri…

Expecting Washington to determine who is a serious candidate (and then policing their use of federal funds) is a major conflict of interest, because policymakers will almost certainly set standards that benefit the two entrenched parties. I've toyed with an alternative concept, though, that might achieve the same effect with less required oversight.

The idea is a sort of non-partisan "un-PAC" -- a fundraising organization explicitly dedicated to combating corporate political donations. If a presidential candidate or his affiliated PACs recieved eg. $5MM in fundraising from oil executives, the un-PAC would spend $5MM on negative advertising linking him in the public's mind with that industry. If the un-PAC raised enough money, eventually a large multiple of corporate donations could be spent counteracting them, and at some point it would become uneconomical for politicians to accept those donations at all.

We spent about $6B on the 2016 federal elections (https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/cost.php). That comes out to about $20 for every American. That's a big number to beat, but not impossible, and every bit along the way helps.

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#198

Post by ethagknight »

snowwindwaves wrote: post #178
bluGill wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of contracts are design build though. One company bids to design and build the bridge. The cost overruns are back on them.

those contracts often cost more to the owner though since there is less risk for them.

Design-Build does not necessarily cost more, because each entity carries the same risk as if they were separate (architect and GC). However, with a Design-Build GMP, which is what we typically use on our developments, that costs a premium, but its a cost we can be comfortable with on the front end, so I will (and do!) gladly pay a premium for a guaranteed cost of construction, particularly since the contractor has the significant information advantage on dealing with problem that arise.

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#199

Post by mason240 »

Mz wrote: post #196
mason240 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think we can change this substantially.

I don't see how that in any way suggests what you are saying. There are a lot of people who currently feel forced into long commutes who hate them. There are a lot of people who are trapped in the situation of they need a car to get to work, they need a job to afford a car because a car is often the second biggest household expense after housing itself. I am talking about opening up options, not putting a gun to anyo…

They have right to choose to limit their standard of living, as you have done, and move to an urban core and be completely dependent on transit for transportation.

Only one of us wants to "change this substantially."

Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure

#200

Post by rch »

BearGoesChirp wrote: post #136
bluGill wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm running for president, fund my trips around the country, and my ads on TV. Nobody in their right mind would elect me, but I have yet to see a fair way to exclude me.

I'm a private company (or private billionaire). I like your opponent. I put ads up on TV for them using my money. How can anyone stop me without it being a First Amendment violation? And while it isn't giving that politician money, there are plenty who will recognize that my paying for their add is giving them a service that is worth money. It isn't quite as direct as donating, but the effect is the same.

I'd impose a 72 hour pre-election silence to give the public time to process all the campaign noise.

I believe such a ban would be in keeping with existing reasonable constraints on free speech, and help contextualize paid messaging in general.

Post reply on HN