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

The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 179 posts

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#91

Post by jedrek »

heurist wrote: post #4

The 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.

> Geographic spread is a major macro factor

There's already an amazing nationwide public-private transit network: they're called airplanes. But on the local level it's politicians kowtowing to the people who scream bloody murder when anything but heavily subsidized private transportation is incentivized.

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#92

Post by ucaetano »

xya3453 wrote: post #54
ucaetano wrote: post #39

The 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 public sector is actually middle of the pack [1]. 1. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/PublicSe...

The US spends 80%-90% of what Germany, Netherlands and Switzerland spend per capita PPP, yet the public services and social welfare in the US are abysmally bad.

Here's one issue with your source:

> The United States is one of the most efficient countries because no other country achieves its level of public sector performance with less government spending.

This is an unfair comparison, since public spending in other countries include national health systems, national pension systems, etc. A fair comparison would be the US vs. other countries including only the same expenditures as the US.

The indicators also seem weird, the US has a higher Education indicator than Germany and Switzerland, a higher infrastructure indicator than Belgium.

Also, the study is from 2007, using data up to 2005. Things changed dramatically in the past 10 years. Take a look at all the government shut-downs, etc.

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#93

Post by rospaya »

kken wrote: post #62
bkohlmann wrote: post #9

Earlier 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 often read frugal tips and tricks on reddit, and it's phenomenal what you can get in the states for little money. That's not possible in a lot of places in Europe.

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#95

Post by [deleted] »

jonknee wrote: post #34
bsder wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agenda much? Is anybody in this thread doing basic math? 200 ghost workers at $100K per year (probably a bit high, thanks) is $20 million per year. Um, so much for that causing the cost overrun. Project management is generally the failure. And, generally, it starts with the asinine "low bid" rules. Everyone successful at dealing with the government knows that you bid as low as possible to get the contract and then yo…

> Agenda much? Is anybody in this thread doing basic math? 200 ghost workers at $100K per year (probably a bit high, thanks) is $20 million per year. Did you bother to read the article? Right at the start it says these 200 workers "were each being paid about $1,000 every day".

[deleted]

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#96

Post by [deleted] »

bsder wrote: post #31
Hasz wrote: post #6

NYT has a great writeup on the East Side Access tunnel. In short, the costs work out to 3.5bn/mile (!), there's ~200 "ghost" workers, and the usual spot of corruption and favoritism. It's a mess, and the MTA is deferring regular maintenance to pay for it. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-...

Agenda much? Is anybody in this thread doing basic math? 200 ghost workers at $100K per year (probably a bit high, thanks) is $20 million per year. Um, so much for that causing the cost overrun. Project management is generally the failure. And, generally, it starts with the asinine "low bid" rules. Everyone successful at dealing with the government knows that you bid as low as possible to get the contract and then yo…

[deleted]

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#97

Post by [deleted] »

indoordinosaur wrote: post #78
ska wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US probably has the best, most efficient private sector of any developed country. All you have to do is look at healthcare to realize this is (at least a) questionable assertion. I mean, it's dogmatic to believe so as an American but it's at least worth a proper look at.

I would argue that because healthcare is so regulated its more of a public sector thing. Also, an enormous amount of money going into the healthcare sector comes from public sources (medicare, medicaid, obamacare, etc.) Note: I'm not saying regulation is bad. Just making the point that healthcare is really not a free-market in this country and never has been.

[deleted]

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#98

Post by mseebach »

lyschoening wrote: post #63
mseebach wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sorry, fair point, it’s not battery chicken then. Not sure what the correct term is, but it’s certainly nor free range organic animals we’re dealing with here.

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#99

Post by narrator »

twblalock wrote: post #75

This ultimately has to come back to voter standards. Other first-world countries in Europe and Asia manage to create comprehensive public transit systems cheaper and faster than the US does -- yet they also have environmental reviews, safety standards, unions, contractors, etc. They are able to do it simply because the people running the city fear that they won't be reelected if they fail to provide comprehensive, pr…

Why does it cost 1 billion dollars a mile to build a subway in San Francisco? Where are all the costs coming from? It's the same with healthcare. Nobody knows why it's so ridiculously expensive. I wish they could hire some smart forensic accountants to figure out what is behind the ridiculous cost and then actually fix the problems by replacing the guys who are price gouging or work with the government to change regulations to make it cheaper.

Re: The U.S. Gets Less Subway for Its Money Than Its Peers

#100

Post by ghayes »

twblalock wrote: post #75

This ultimately has to come back to voter standards. Other first-world countries in Europe and Asia manage to create comprehensive public transit systems cheaper and faster than the US does -- yet they also have environmental reviews, safety standards, unions, contractors, etc. They are able to do it simply because the people running the city fear that they won't be reelected if they fail to provide comprehensive, pr…

When you say Asia, are you including China? It's likely that the situation is different in each country, and grouping "Europe and Asia" versus the "US" leads to a pretty sweeping generalization.
Post reply on HN