3 ms·
Looking at these complaints, how did the government ever get all the land needed for major infrastructure projects in the past - like the interstate network?
by spaceman_2020 4y ago
Looking at these complaints, how did the government ever get all the land needed for major infrastructure projects in the past - like the interstate network?
- pas 4y agoeminent domain. and it was sold as cleaning up the slums (eg. poor minority neighborhoods) and of course the response to that is why things are going very slowly nowadays https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2019/11/29/penn-station-robert-caro-073564 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2019/11/29/penn-stati...
- michaelt 4y agoThe first bit of infrastructure that gets put in produces huge economic benefits. Back in 1760, it made economic sense to have canals dug by hand because they were so much more efficient than transporting coal by horse and cart. It was incredibly expensive, but the thing that came before it was even moreso. And in the 1830s, private investors could expect to make a profit building a railway because it as so much faster. And compared to hand-digging a canal, the costs weren't that bad! It was incredibly expensive, but the thing that came before it was even moreso.
- whimsicalism 4y agoPublic comment/veto as it exists now did not exist at that point in history.
- michael1999 4y agoThat was the federal government building a military project during the Cold War. Very different political calculations.
- mywittyname 4y agoGovernment willingness to piss off people combined with the fact that the wealthier people were mostly unaffected. Highways destroyed the poor areas of most cities and enabled the suburban housing boom. There were a few successful attempts to stop the encroachment of the federal highway system into cities. I think the Bay Area was one of the first such victories.