America's elite have been gutting our society under a guise of building a "service economy" for decades now in a long line and history of the elite exploiting the systems they have a strange hold on. Silicon Valley and the tech industry have their role to play in it too.
The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
251–260 of 564 posts
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#252I 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…
There is two problems with this theory. The first is that governments have immunity from litigation. They can only be sued where they consent to the lawsuit. The second is that in most states, employee-related injury claims must proceed through a worker's compensation system outside the normal litigation channel where the costs are much less. I always say there are not too many lawsuits, but too many laws. Legislatur…
The government and its workers are not immune from litigation either, both have been sued, and successfully held responsible for damages.
Actual construction is performed by contractors, corporations that are contracted by the government. In the US, it is rare for a construction project to be built, or even be designed, by government workers. These corporations and their workers can be sued, and take on additional liabilities due to the contracts and laws that apply specifically to them.
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
The abusive relationship love-affair is the best explanation I've ever heard of cars in the USA. Just like a an abusive relationship, the car love affair still produces some good things. It's not all dark and dreary. "I hate that he comes home drunk and hits me, but he's so loving and apologetic the next morning." "I hate that I get so stressed from my daily commute, but being able to drive to the countryside on the…
Can we try to get through one thread on HN without frothing at the mouth about how much we hate cars? Message received, you happen to be in a situation where you don't need a car — I am genuinely happy for you, as well as envious. But it is not necessary or helpful for someone to bang on about it in every single thread that has anything to do with building stuff. It doesn't help anything, and it just annoys people wh…
If people don't bang on about it, nothing will ever change ... seriously, everyone will simply move on and build the next urban sprawl center, and the next shitty road, out to the next desolate subdivision because that's what's easy. No one wants to be agitated. Well, too bad, we _should_ be agitated. Those without the good fortune _should_ raise hell to the city planners, and attend city council meetings, and vote in local elections.
btw, I live in a place that definitely is an urban sprawl, and is in danger of getting worse as more and more people move here (Orlando, FL). So, I'm in the same place as it sounds like you are ... and I wish _more_ people would bang on
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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…
>For simplification, let's say if one wants to run for president, they can only use whatever is in the FEC public coffers. What in particular would they not be allowed to use private money to do? Would individuals that aren't running be allowed to use private money to do those things?
Countries that have limits on pre-election advertising spending generally include any and all public advertising expenses in that - TV, newspapers, online media, billboards, public space, physical mail campaigns, sponsorship of events/teams/whatever, etc. Pre-election ads by other people is limited - small amounts per person are exempted, but you can't simply buy a $10k radio ad praising whatever candidate you like, nor can a radio station do it on their own.
Also, in the pre-election time mass media have to offer equal conditions for all parties - if you own a TV station and run ads for one party for $1/minute, then you have to offer the same ad slots for the same price to all other parties as well.
I mean, it's not simple and it does require some limitations of what the people and media can do - which might conflict with USA 1st amendment, but in general the problem is somewhat solvable, it's somehow done elsewhere and so you can look at worldwide experience to pick out the bits that work best.
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
What is the test for reasonable constraints on free speech? And what will be the penalty for breaking the ban? If it is just a fine, you have basically just made it so the rich can pay more to have a stronger voice. If it is jail time... well we already know how well the legal system goes after the rich. A law would benefit those who have the power to break it while harming those weaker.
There is a substantial body of case law to consult when deciding reasonable constraints on free speech.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Supreme_...
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anecdotally, having moved to Western Europe, I get the sense that this is the major factor as well. If I walk down the street and there is a group of workers excavating a road, there's a lot more of a relaxed attitude about fencing, walking underneath construction equipment, etc. After all - use your common sense - don't fall into the hole. If you do, isn't it kind of your own fault? Nobody's going to sue anybody. Ad…
The abusive relationship love-affair is the best explanation I've ever heard of cars in the USA. Just like a an abusive relationship, the car love affair still produces some good things. It's not all dark and dreary. "I hate that he comes home drunk and hits me, but he's so loving and apologetic the next morning." "I hate that I get so stressed from my daily commute, but being able to drive to the countryside on the…
> "I hate that I get so stressed from my daily commute, but being able to drive to the countryside on the weekend is so nice."
I have truly never understood this line of thinking. These two are not tied together.
I grew up in a car-centric city, but moved away in my teens. I've never personally owned a car and haven't had one in the household since I was 17. I hear this supposed "upside" of cars from my friends who are still stuck in LA, and what no one has ever been able to answer is:
What prevents you from renting a car when you want to drive out to the countryside? I drive out somewhere beautiful on a sunny weekend probably 3x as much as any of my friends who own cars, and I'm still paying less for total transportation than they do (let alone the occasional hassle that owning a car exposes you to). The only actual negative I can think of is the mental friction of having to pay each time, and this is just an irrational speedbump that really isn't that difficult to surmount.
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
The development of the atomic bomb also amazes me. I get a kick out of this video setting up the first test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7CmcsOubZ8 No hard-hats No shirts Free climbing tower with no safety lines Cigarette hanging from mouth No way they could ever pull this off today. No way the Apollo program could be pulled off either.
SpaceX is well on their way to re-inventing the Apollo program. Those rockets are huge compared to a Falcon Heavy, and they would literally need a much larger facility to build them, but they'll do it. And they'll do it with hard hats, shirts, safety lines, and in a smoke free environment.
A fair comparison is not what SpaceX is doing today, but what SpaceX could be doing with today's technology with multi-percentage points of US GDP as their funding.
In that context it's not at all impressive that they're just getting past beating 60s technology, and not even in all cases. Yes they've got reusability, but there's still nothing as big as the Saturn V.
Edit: To clarify, I think SpaceX is very impressive, but I think we as a species are doing proportionally less impressive things than in the 20th century given the level of technology we have. It's not their fault we aren't spending multi-percentage points of GDP on similarly impressive projects.
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
You assume those that live in small cities work there as well. A large number of people living rural areas or small cities drive to big cities to work. There are very few "small" cities on the coasts (<10,000 people) so perhaps that is what you are referring to by small cities for which this works.
If a large number of people all have to go in the same direction at a similar time, isn't that what public transit is for? Cars are more useful when people need to go to random places at indeterminate times.
> If a large number of people all have to go in the same direction at a similar time, isn't that what public transit is for?
Yes, and in a sane nation, this would mean that people could live in small cities, take transit to work, then take transit back. But there are many, many places where this is not the case.
I lived on the outskirts of Dallas; it took ages for the rail system to approach usefulness, and individual cities along the route could opt out of having stations (and therefore, opt out of paying for them.)
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the explanation is some fundamental law of economics/politics as you seem to be suggesting, what is the reason the USA is afflicted more by the problem than other first world nations, or than the USA of a century ago?
The U.S. political system is remarkably vulnerable to pressure from interest groups because power is so fragmented. We have three branches of government at the federal level, with a bicameral legislature, and 50 individual states, each with three branches of government and plethora of local governments. And you need them all on board to do anything big. Imagine that you are the Sierra Club and you want to block const…
I don't believe the Hoover Dam should be replicated. It's a marvel of engineering but I'm opposed to damming any rivers.
Damming our rivers like that has had such terrible and unforeseen environmental and economic consequences that I can only hope we un-dam wherever possible.
Re: The US has forgotten how to do infrastructure
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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 organiz…
I had an idea somewhere along the lines of your un-PAC. However, the one I imagined would hire lobbyists who would shmooze politicians to pass anti-lobbying laws. The PAC's job would get harder and harder the more successful it was.