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

How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

worksinprogress.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 189 posts

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#171

Post by gib444 »

jodrellblank wrote: post #153
gib444 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK infrastructure projects are about creating jobs and making their friends rich first, and providing some kind of useful infrastructure last (and also optional) There is so much thievery of public funds it's just corruption disguised as incompetence and the public believe it every time

> "the public believe it every time" This reads a lot like GB News announcing in Feb 2026 " The "biggest scandal in British history" [South Asian child grooming/rape gangs] has been blown wide open this week as an independent inquiry into the grooming gang epidemic heard harrowing testimonies. Rupert Lowe, Independent MP for Great Yarmouth, launched the proceedings on Monday " Despite Andrew Norfolk being "2014 Journ…

You've been dying to find a tangentially related comment to shoehorn that into haven't you? Hah

Good info though mate well done

The rape gangs are truly horrific and one of the worst things to happen to Britain in recent history

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#172

Post by anovikov »

frollogaston wrote: post #168
anovikov wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like, solution is "company towns" where everything is built by giant mega-corporation, completely greenfield, and nothing is sold - just rented out.

Plenty of those exist in the US too, with public transit. The people complaining about NIMBYs can live there, but they don't. They're more popular among younger people without kids.

So perhaps there is no problem there? People can live in places like that and build wealth by investing it stocks (it beats real estate anyway).

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#173

Post by gib444 »

amiga386 wrote: post #159
gib444 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK infrastructure projects are about creating jobs and making their friends rich first, and providing some kind of useful infrastructure last (and also optional) There is so much thievery of public funds it's just corruption disguised as incompetence and the public believe it every time

That's somewhat unfair. In rail, it's more like is that there's nothing for 20 years, then the government announces one project. Everyone piles onto that one project and gold-plates everything because they already know there's not going to be any more projects after this one for 20 years. Then the project overruns by billions. The government pays, then vows not to make that mistake again, so they don't have any more…

Sorry but it's errant nonsense that HS2 is the only rail project of the last 20 years

Crossrail, Transpennine Route Upgrade, East West Rail, MML upgrade, Borders railway, Thameslink upgrades

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#174

Post by tancop »

KaiserPro wrote: post #152
gib444 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who ensures those planning laws remain as they are - expensive and annoying and enabling of NIMBYs? Politicians. These things were created with laws, they can be undone with them We rarely have impediments such as a minority government who can't change laws You don't need to dig too deep to connect the dots.

I share your frustration, but having seen the last two governments, can you, hand on heart, actually see them _deliberately_ trying to keep planning laws the same to benefit certain companies? I mean you can see them try, but actually succeed and keep it a secret? [1] They do not have the cognitive capacity to run a party, let alone a secret conspiracy. The sad truth is this: Planning law is a huge tangled web of law…

planning law changes today are either made to benefit loud nimbys or rich developers. i dont think pressure groups actually represent an average person from the neighborhood. imo the best way to fix it is by-right development for public interest projects (the government can build power lines or cheap housing anywhere it wants) and democratic resident vote for anything else. no fixed zoning maps or years long meetings. that way a loud minority cant block a project but if most locals really dont want it they still have a way to fight.

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#175

Post by frollogaston »

anovikov wrote: post #172
frollogaston wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of those exist in the US too, with public transit. The people complaining about NIMBYs can live there, but they don't. They're more popular among younger people without kids.

So perhaps there is no problem there? People can live in places like that and build wealth by investing it stocks (it beats real estate anyway).

I agree, home ownership is overrated as an investment. It's not bad but not necessary.

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#176

Post by KaiserPro »

tancop wrote: post #174
KaiserPro wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I share your frustration, but having seen the last two governments, can you, hand on heart, actually see them _deliberately_ trying to keep planning laws the same to benefit certain companies? I mean you can see them try, but actually succeed and keep it a secret? [1] They do not have the cognitive capacity to run a party, let alone a secret conspiracy. The sad truth is this: Planning law is a huge tangled web of law…

planning law changes today are either made to benefit loud nimbys or rich developers. i dont think pressure groups actually represent an average person from the neighborhood. imo the best way to fix it is by-right development for public interest projects (the government can build power lines or cheap housing anywhere it wants) and democratic resident vote for anything else. no fixed zoning maps or years long meetings…

> I dont think pressure groups actually represent an average person from the neighborhood

I think for most places, that is a safe assumption.

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#177

Post by amiga386 »

gib444 wrote: post #173
amiga386 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's somewhat unfair. In rail, it's more like is that there's nothing for 20 years, then the government announces one project. Everyone piles onto that one project and gold-plates everything because they already know there's not going to be any more projects after this one for 20 years. Then the project overruns by billions. The government pays, then vows not to make that mistake again, so they don't have any more…

Sorry but it's errant nonsense that HS2 is the only rail project of the last 20 years Crossrail, Transpennine Route Upgrade, East West Rail, MML upgrade, Borders railway, Thameslink upgrades

If it wasn't clear, I was talking about high-speed rail. Of course the other lines are very welcome! You can throw in the electrification projects too, all good.

HS1 was meant to start in 1996, only began in earnest in 2001, and was completed by 2007. HS2 was launched in 2009, only began in earnest in 2019, and is still ongoing.

So all we currently have to show for the past 30 years and billions in investment is a little bit of high-speed rail between London and the Channel Tunnel.

By comparison, the Italian high-speed network expands every year or so, as they keep completing phases of routes all over the country.

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#178

Post by casey2 »

thatmf wrote: post #8

> Unlike infrastructure projects in Britain or America, which are heavily reliant on external consultants to handle all stages of the project, this group of well-paid in-house engineers led much of the Madrid Metro expansion. The team stayed largely the same throughout the different projects, meaning that they were able to learn from their experience and apply it to future projects. Imagine that: building expertise i…

America at least needs highly paid consultants so they can maintain their massive suburban project.

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#179

Post by stymaar »

presentation wrote: post #122
stymaar wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/america-needs-a-bigger-better- ... Woah, this is really a “worst person you known just made a great point” moment for me.

Curious, what do you dislike about him? I find many of his takes to be pretty reasonable, though he gets temperamental and snarky sometimes.

Too many strongly held and unnuanced opinion about topics he has no qualification for.

Pundits like him are among the cancers of democracy.

Re: How Madrid built its metro cheaply (2024)

#180

Post by contubernio »

throwaway_2626 wrote: post #123
contubernio wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Madrid where the average monthly pretax salary is below 1500 a shared room with four strangers costs 400-709 a month and small aprtments in bad neighborhoods cost 3000-4000 a square meter to buy.

Average monthly pretax salary in Madrid: 2 575.46 EUR (source in es_ES: https://www.abc.es/espana/madrid/evolucionado-salario-medio-... ) Also, a shared apartment costs as much as you say. Not a room (source: idealista.es). Purchase prices are high, but I'm curious as to what you consider a bad neighborhood, given the overall safety statistics in Spain, and Madrid in particular. Housing affordability is a real proble…

No one lives in rooms. Everyone in Madrid lives in apartment.

The average salary refers to those who have a job. Most family units have some that don't.

Post reply on HN