Alternatively, US subway construction companies get more money for their subway than their peers in other countries.
The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
61–70 of 179 posts
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#62The US seems to get less of everything for its money than its peers. Geographic spread is a major macro factor, but you'd still think that a supposedly efficient capitalistic market would at least handle local services better.
For market based goods, the US does deliver pretty phenomenal, innovative and minimally priced outputs. Groceries, energy, technology, etc. "Local services" are almost always driven by non-market based considerations. Politics, not economics, determines contract awards for public works. It's as far from the market as you can get. And our society receives commensurate "value."
>Groceries
Are you serious? Groceries in the US are surprisingly expensive compared to Europe.
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heh. True in some ways, not in some others. Groceries for example - yes, I can buy chicken at Walmart for much cheaper than I would in the EU, for instance. But the chicken I’d buy in the EU would be of much higher quality. If I want a comparable chicken (not cage raised, not full of hormones, etc), I’ll end up going to Whole Foods or similar upscale store and end up paying roughly the same as I would in the EU.
Yes, there are different regulations, famously chicken in the EU can't be washed in chlorine as it can in the US. But your average EU supermarket selection is a flavourless, watered up battery chicken. It's not "much higher quality" by any stretch of the imagination.
At least watered up chicken has to be labeled in the EU. Battery cages have been banned since 2012.
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#64The US probably has the best, most efficient private sector of any developed country. And the worst, most inefficient public sector of any developed country. It chooses to prioritize the private sector over the public sector. Other countries choose otherwise. Each model has its advantages and disadvantages. This (efficiency of building public transit) is the outcome of the US model.
The US probably has the best, most efficient private sector of any developed country.
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#65The US probably has the best, most efficient private sector of any developed country. And the worst, most inefficient public sector of any developed country. It chooses to prioritize the private sector over the public sector. Other countries choose otherwise. Each model has its advantages and disadvantages. This (efficiency of building public transit) is the outcome of the US model.
> And the worst, most inefficient public sector of any developed country. I'm pretty sure most who live in their own developed country think their own public sector is the most inefficient. Well, maybe not the Swiss.
Nor the Germans, Danes, Dutch or Scandinavians...
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#66It seems like European infrastructure construction is more centralized than its American counterpart. In the Bay Area, there are two competing transit providers, each funded by the same taxpayers. Every city seems to run its own show, and CAHSR infamously rejected offers from European companies to do construction. It's just my view from 10000 feet, but the average city council has few civil engineers on board, so may…
I thought they were dumped by SNCF because they were making a pork barrel project instead of an actual rail system, and SNCF did not want to deal with the headache and reputation hit.
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#67I clicked on this expecting an article about sandwiches lol.
Edit: although im being downvoted, lowercase subway would make the title less ambiguous.
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
How was that possible and why does it not seem to happen today? What changed? Is it still privately owned?
Even back in the "dual system" days when two companies operated the majority of the subway, most of the lines / tunnels were built or financed by the city: https://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/Chapter_1:_Dual_System_of_Rap... Later on, the city built its own third competitor to the two private operators, and eventually ended up purchasing them both. These days the entire system is owned by the state of New York (which took…
The BRT was formed from the remains of the privately-financed Long Island Traction Company [1][2]. It went bankrupt and was merged into the more public-private bits. The lines it laid as a private enterprise remain today.
The IRT looked more like the British rail system, with the public lending to the company, which was under public-private management.
By mileage, the BRT built the most. By transit volume, the public-private Dual Contractors outperformed the IND, though that was in part due to the latter's late start. It remains that the bulk of the New York City subway system was, by any metric, built under private management and, by mileage, financed with private capital.
All that said, I have no illusions about whether private ownership would be possible today. (It is debatable whether it was possible then, given they went bankrupt.)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Island_Traction_Company
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_S...
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
For market based goods, the US does deliver pretty phenomenal, innovative and minimally priced outputs. Groceries, energy, technology, etc. "Local services" are almost always driven by non-market based considerations. Politics, not economics, determines contract awards for public works. It's as far from the market as you can get. And our society receives commensurate "value."
>Groceries Are you serious? Groceries in the US are surprisingly expensive compared to Europe.
... I have seen countless posts shocked by our price of eggs and beef. Eggs 50c a dozen, ground beef about $2.30-$3 depending on location.
It is one of those things that are hard to research effectively, but when I stayed in France for a few months groceries were definitely more expensive.
Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Specifically bad union rules. European countries also rely on union labor and don't have this problem. Another factor mentioned in the article is poor management which seems to be a common theme in America.
What do Europeans do differently? In the US the non-corrupt unions fade to obscurity.
When I look at Germany it looks to me that both sides are more reasonable and try to find compromise.
In the US either employers want to squeeze all they can out of the work force and get rid of unions or the unions get greedy (see police unions who happily bankrupt municipalities for their pensions). Maybe it's a reflection of the "winner takes it all" political system.