The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector • Hacker News Board

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#151

Post by kube-system » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:37 PM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #137

pirate787 wrote: post #39

In this time-period there has been a large-scale introduction of undocumented workers into the construction labor force. They are a quarter of some construction labor categories. Perhaps using undocumented subcontractors may play a role in lower productivity growth (cheap, unstable, and relatively unskilled labor) or maybe just distorting the statistics. https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/...

>undocumented workers [are responsible for the productivity drop] I am confused by this assertion. If they are undocumented, wouldn't they be excluded in the stats? And if they aren't included in the stats, shouldn't we expect an artificial increase in worker productivity? If there is a 4:1 undocumented to documented ratio, then that 1 documented person will get "credit" for the work of 5 people! Even if 4 of those p…

Undocumented workers show up in many statistics. "Undocumented" doesn't literally mean that there is nothing recorded about this person, it means they do not have permission to work in the US.

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#152

Post by withinboredom » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:39 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #132

wmil wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no reason they would be excluded. They are getting paid so they'd show up on the books.

I mean, if you're illegally hiring someone, you're not gonna pay them on the book.

It's on the books, under "toilets" or something. That money has to go somewhere. Also, undocumented workers still have to pay income taxes.

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#153

Post by lazzlazzlazz » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:39 PM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #137

pirate787 wrote: post #39

In this time-period there has been a large-scale introduction of undocumented workers into the construction labor force. They are a quarter of some construction labor categories. Perhaps using undocumented subcontractors may play a role in lower productivity growth (cheap, unstable, and relatively unskilled labor) or maybe just distorting the statistics. https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/...

>undocumented workers [are responsible for the productivity drop] I am confused by this assertion. If they are undocumented, wouldn't they be excluded in the stats? And if they aren't included in the stats, shouldn't we expect an artificial increase in worker productivity? If there is a 4:1 undocumented to documented ratio, then that 1 documented person will get "credit" for the work of 5 people! Even if 4 of those p…

"Undocumented" means they lack citizenship or a valid visa. It doesn't mean they aren't calculated in productivity statistics. Many undocumented workers even pay taxes to the IRS, are counted in censuses, and more.

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#154

Post by ericmay » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:39 PM UTC

HEmanZ wrote: post #121

thereddaikon wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Affordable housing has little to do with the cost of building the house.

In Manhattan or San Francisco? Probably not. But in most of the gigantic, sprawling USA, I suspect affordable housing absolutely has everything to do with cost of building a house.

If I had to guess it's not so much the actual cost of building the house as it is the profit margin of those who are building homes. Why build a $200,000 "starter home" when you can build a $478,000 home with gigantic margin on "luxury" trim like cheap granite countertops and "hardwood" floors for roughly the same cost? And then once you get the ugly design down you can just copy and paste it with few adjustments and save even more money.

Unfortunately we have bad incentives aligned here versus stated goals.

Manhattan and San Francisco are like Japan and Argentina in economics. They're just not the same market as most places. In Manhattan in particular the value really is the land.

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#155

Post by michaelmrose » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

taeric wrote: post #148

javajosh wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>undocumented workers [are responsible for the productivity drop] I am confused by this assertion. If they are undocumented, wouldn't they be excluded in the stats? And if they aren't included in the stats, shouldn't we expect an artificial increase in worker productivity? If there is a 4:1 undocumented to documented ratio, then that 1 documented person will get "credit" for the work of 5 people! Even if 4 of those p…

I'm inclined to take your side on this. By virtue of being undocumented, they should be boosting the perceived productivity, not dampening it. If I was to steelman the idea, though; I would guess that removing incentives in the form of higher pay will lower the contributions of everyone involved?

If your labor hours are billable why on Earth should undocumented in this context mean unaccounted for?

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#156

Post by vkou » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

swagasaurus-rex wrote: post #100

sokoloff wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It cannot be the case that “all expenses” have grown faster than inflation (which is what real wages takes into account).

All expenses have grown faster than wages, or wages have not kept up with inflation Either way its a pay drop.

> All expenses have grown faster than wages, or wages have not kept up with inflation

Your expense is someone else's wage + a capitalist's profit margin.

Expenses across the entire economy can only outgrow wages if someone's taking a bigger slice of profit off the top.

When we talk about inflation, we always conflate the two, as if they are the same thing. They are not.

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#157

Post by latchkey » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:41 PM UTC

switch007 wrote: post #80

latchkey wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm remodeling my place right now. You're totally right, the building codes are a lot more complex and there is more 'work' to do as a result. No more just hiding electrical boxes in the walls. Heh. That said, the products being used have improved a lot. Things like PEX tubing for plumbing (instead of copper) and glue on walls for showers (over doing tile work), make some aspects go a lot faster. Edit: Oh, I forgot t…

Those glue on walls seemed to be priced at “we know how much tiling costs”. £36m2 (cheapest I could find on a site similar to Home Depot) for some composite plastic seems crazy. They have some double that price too.

Yes, they know the value and have priced accordingly.

~$800usd vs. tile+labor.

Definitely a product that is ripe for disruption.

There aren't even many manufacturers.

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#158

Post by monocasa » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:41 PM UTC

HEmanZ wrote: post #121

thereddaikon wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Affordable housing has little to do with the cost of building the house.

In Manhattan or San Francisco? Probably not. But in most of the gigantic, sprawling USA, I suspect affordable housing absolutely has everything to do with cost of building a house.

Most of the places where houses are already so cheap that the price of actually building a house is a blocker for affordable housing typically have a large glut of unwanted property from population drained to other areas.

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#159

Post by autokad » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:42 PM UTC

thereddaikon wrote: post #98

nxm wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But people still want and yell for “affordable housing”. Can’t have your cake and eat it too

Affordable housing has little to do with the cost of building the house.

I am pretty sure it does. Lets assume an income of 32,000$ (~median US income) and 30% to pay for housing. That gives them 9,300$/year for a mortgage or 775$. with a 7% interest rate, that means the person would not be able to easily afford to buy a new home > 175,000$.

There are lots of levers that determine if a person can afford a home. income, interest rates, % income that goes towards housing, etc. But its obvious cost of building the home plays a factor.

Re: The strange and awful path of productivity in the US construction sector

#160

Post by toast0 » Mon, Jan 23, 2023, 6:42 PM UTC

recuter wrote: post #86

toomuchtodo wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gotta start somewhere. Older houses were built when energy was cheap and plentiful, and we're transitioning to a future where that isn't as clear.

You can pay the greenie winnie tax and go full passive house and be completely off grid sitting pretty in an airtight optimally efficient home: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhbLjEKKLVM It would also triple the construction cost of the house. Reasons. But hey, $0 energy bill. Most builders don't do any of that stuff, like at all. Just the bare minimum required. They aren't incentivized. Most consumers would - and d…

The bare minimum is a lot more than it used to be. My parents' house was built with zero attic insulation, and I believe no wall insulation either. Just framed, drywalled insided and stucco outside. I can't imagine there's any fire blocks between studs either.