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

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

bfi.uchicago.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 426 posts

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

#231

Post by bfeynman »

runnerup wrote: post #194
eagleinparadise wrote: post #115

CRE guy here. A lot of this "productivity loss" is also due to government related staffing issues and bureaucracy. Most people are describing more complex building codes, so I'll add something new. I had a project that was delayed by over a year during Covid because the city approved incorrect plans, came back and requested revisions, and then lost the physical plans (without us knowing until we checked in asking wha…

> made the required rent higher If, all along, you could have rented it out for more money ... why were you planning to rent it out for less money? I get that you wouldn't have to, but it appears that the "market rate rent" was higher than you initially anticipated. As a corollary, assuming that you had initially planned on the highest rent that the market would bear...it seems that after a year of unexpected delays…

My guess is they probably put more money into it (higher quality appliances and such) to get higher rent that would give acceptable cap rate.

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

#232

Post by flavius29663 »

swagasaurus-rex wrote: post #133
rqtwteye wrote: post #25

Easy. Have them to daily standups, sprint planning every two weeks and a day of retrospective and soon their producticity will be rockin'.

Make sure to have them point out each task ahead of time and then get upset if they take longer than the allocated points

also, get upset if their estimates are too high. They are agile, they should finish things faster

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

#233

Post by parineum »

jeffwask wrote: post #29
a-r-t wrote: post #15

Houses were much simpler 50 years ago. The building codes have changed a lot since then and modern houses have added construction complexity with better waterproofing, air sealing, fire proofing, bracing, and more advanced mechanical systems.

I also wonder if a focus on safety has slowed things some for the yolo days of just breathing in asbestos and lead.

I find both your parent and your comment to be the obvious answers for why "productivity" has dropped. People are probably just as, if not more, productive. It just takes more work to complete a single house/office/job due to both worker safety and building safety.

Having some experience in the field, the idea that migrant/undocumented/illegal/etc workers are spoiling the workforce is pretty absurd (as is suggested in a few other comments). There were plenty of terrible workers that I knew to be or suspected to be in that category but the rate that they were bad was no different than anyone else.

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

#234

Post by pixl97 »

bgentry wrote: post #10
greenthrow wrote: post #6

This is absurd. Houses are so much more complex than in the 1970s, and so much larger. In 1972 central AC was not common, now it's basically required. Square footage is way higher. Number of electrical outlets and switches per room. Moulding and trim are expected in many houses. Porches, decks, patios are much more ornate. Today's average house ia closer to the house of a millionaire in the 1970s than the average hou…

From https://www.energy.gov/articles/history-air-conditioning : > By the late 1960s, most new homes had central air conditioning So the addition of central HVAC likely isn't a big factor, because most new homes in the US already had it 50 years ago.

Eh, not 100% sure if it's a good comparison or not. Mid century homes with central hvac were typically poorly designed from my experience leading to over/under heated rooms. Modern systems typically have a much better designed return air system (hence more piping) rather than a single return at the unit.

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

#235

Post by baremetal »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #129
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Affordable housing is just a zoning issue. The cost of construction is a tiny fraction of the cost of a new house in major metros. No it is not. Construction costs (material, labor) are sky high even if property costs are as well. Building high-end housing has always been more profitable than otherwise, low-end housing is simply high-end housing 20 or 30 years in the future.

low-end housing is simply high-end housing 20 or 30 years in the future That was maybe true in the past, but todays exurban sheetrock palaces are impossible to be turned into low-income/entry-level housing. It starts with the zoning requirements - are you really going to divide a 2500 sqft McMansion into a duplex without an epic zoning fight? And then there's the transportation/parking issue. The real problem is that…

The new 1200sf entry level house is 2000sf. I've built quite a few of them.

It is my understanding that builders are responding to the demand from home buyers, and people that can afford a (starter) home want 2000sf at minimum.

Also the costs of a house dont scale linearly[1]. A small home costs almost as much as a 2000sf home.

[1]https://www.togal.ai/blog/the-average-cost-to-build-a-house-...

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

#236

Post by frankus »

notch656c wrote: post #199
toast0 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Upping the codes to require new construction to have those things, while not razing your parents' house, shows it's all about the pyramid scheme and not about actual safety. If it were about actual safety and such things are considered unsafe then unsafe houses like your parents home should be bulldozed for the good of the people.

I think it shows that there's at least a basic cost-benefit analysis taking place, where things that we've learned provide a safety benefit that can be added at minimal cost during construction are required, but bulldozing a house because it will burn down 15 minutes faster doesn't pencil out.

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

#238

Post by Nevermark »

aorloff wrote: post #216
huevosabio wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience (in the Bay Area) has been that regardless of country of origin, construction work is insanely inefficient. Lots of administrative bs, lots of made up rules, lack of communication between trades, tons of "not my job" attitude.

Wait until you hear how large software organizations run

The value generated by software often scales up with organization size, while the costs and inefficiencies are unlikely to scale at the same rate.

Given that, very large successful organizations whose competitive edge is not software may still have terrifyingly low software production efficiencies.

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

#239

Post by samstave »

jzebedee wrote: post #169
samstave wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you heard of Bangledesh, India, Phillipines and their relation to middle east construction practices project-managed by NL, UK pms? I hope you understand, because of the implications.

No, I haven't. What's the connection?

They hire the workers from poor countries, but hire the engineering/PM/construction mgmt talent from NL/UK and at times US... but those guys are making 6 figs while the workers are having their passports stolen.

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

#240

Post by JamesBarney »

elmomle wrote: post #193
hn_go_brrrrr wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Undocumented" is the current preferred euphemism for "illegal immigrant".

Or, "illegal immigrant" is a sometimes-used dysphemism for "undocumented immigrant". I'm not aware of any other class of people who break a law who are called "illegal" as a result; it's a rather dehumanizing impulse.

People refer to other people who break the law by the law they broke all the time.

Thieves, murders, fraudsters, etc

Illegal immigrant doesn't seem especially derogatory for someone who illegally immigrated.

I think it would be better to focus on the fact their felony crime rate is far below the native population than arguing over a pretty tame word used to describe them.

Post reply on HN