5 ms·

That explanation doesn’t really seem to explain why there is such a huge difference between the US and other countries with an arguably larger administrative st

by airza 4y ago

That explanation doesn’t really seem to explain why there is such a huge difference between the US and other countries with an arguably larger administrative state and higher union participation.

pencilguin 4y ago
The US is more corrupt than many other countries. Our innovation was to make corruption explicitly legal, so there is no risk of indictments.
akira2501 4y ago
The US is just that.. a union of states that enjoy a much higher level of independence than in other countries and at the same time have to deal with their own counties. The states all have differing levels of competence, enforcement and leadership. The federal government has limited oversight, except for cases of particular types of criminal corruption. In my mind what screwed a lot of states up was the financial collapse of 2007, many did not adjust their spending forecasts and reconsider these projects appropriately in the face of the decade that came after. Finally, add in the pandemic and remote work, and it really undercut the rationale and scope of many of these projects that were never adjusted in the face of this.
- bigbacaloa 4y ago
  The US states are no more autonomous than the analogous regions in many countries. For example, Madrid's transport system is controlled regionally in a way that involves region, city, and private entities and is far better than anything in the US (NYC included). The US has institutionalized and legalized practices that are viewed as corruption in most countries and this becomes very evident in regards to public contracts and public works.
  - Robotbeat 4y ago
    Can you provide very specific examples of these practices?
    - largepeepee 4y ago
      Ever heard of super pacs?
- panick21_ 4y ago
  This isn't really universally true. In Switzerand we have cantons that manage their own school system, regional rail, social security and the list goes on and on. Some of those cantons have something like 200k people. California itself is larger and richer then most of the world. There is no excuse not to be able to do it.
bobthepanda 4y ago
The exact shape of the bureaucracy is the problem. The US lacks in-house capacity and relies on outside consultants and contractors who are more than happy to overbill if not audited properly. The California HSR project was at one point using a staff of less than a hundred full-time staff to monitor over a thousand consultants which led to a lot of cost blowouts.
- largepeepee 4y ago
  Yes and this is corruption by design, to allow the top to profit "off the books" legally. Consultants shower the brass lavishly with creative methods of legal bribery, like inviting them for talks and paying them huge fees or promising comfy positions after their retirement from public office. To earn that back, they overcharge through the nose for projects.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  > The US lacks in-house capacity and relies on outside consultants and contractors This trope needs to be taken out back and shot. All the big early and mid 20th century projects were done by contractors as was the bulk of the design work. The difference is that the government and by proxy the people didn't just bend over and take it when their money got wasted. And everything was a lot less codified and process-ified so there was more room for competition (and also real graft).
  - bobthepanda 4y ago
    The reliance on contractors has continued to shift, and for the CA HSR project in question, at one point reached ridiculous levels: https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-high-speed-rail-consultants-20190426-story.html https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-hi... > Today, these consultants manage nearly every aspect of the job: They direct day-to-day construction work in the Central Valley and negotiate with farmers to buy land. They assess the geological conditions in the San Gabriel Mountains and estimate how many people will ride the future system. They produce tens of thousands of pages of reports and attend community meetings. They even oversee other consultants. > But significant portions of this work have been flawed or mismanaged, according to records reviewed by The Times and interviews with dozens of people involved in the project. Despite repeated warnings since 2010 about weaknesses in its staffing, the rail authority believed it could reduce overall costs by relying on consultants and avoiding a large permanent workforce. But that strategy has failed to keep project costs from soaring. Ten years after voters approved it, the project is $44 billion over budget and 13 years behind schedule. > When state rail authority employees go to their Sacramento headquarters, they work in offices rented by a consultant. When they turn on their computers, much of their data is stored on servers owned by consultants. The software they use to help manage the project is the property of a consultant. > Given the enormity of building a 520-mile rail system, the 10-member rail authority team that existed in the early years amounted to a “cheer squad,” Kopp said. > Several rail authority employees said in interviews that the audit correctly identified the confused relationship between state employees and consultants. In some cases, they said, state employees report to consultants, rather than the other way around. --- Private public partnerships (PPPs or P3s) are also similarly overhyped. Done correctly they can shift financial risk, but investors are actually sophisticated and not dumb idiots, so they'll either raise their prices to deal with additional risk, or they'll walk away from a deal that turns really sour. https://www.constructiondive.com/news/joint-venture-walks-away-from-marylands-purple-line-project/585824/ https://www.constructiondive.com/news/joint-venture-walks-aw...
gernb 4y ago
Because in the US (except NYC), all public transporation is seen as something for poor people where as in most other countries public transportation is for everyone.
- gnz11 4y ago
  Eh, Boston, Chicago, DC, et al. The large metropolitan areas of the US rely heavily on public transit. The areas that adopt that “only for poor people” are generally the mid-tier cities in places like the Midwest or central plains were everything is built around the car.
  - britch 4y ago
    Public transit in all the cities you listed places is a joke when compared with the rest of the world, regardless of how heavily they're relied upon. The Boston metro unexpectedly stopped running for a bit earlier this year. I grew up in one of these cities. It's not uncommon for a certain type of person to refuse to ride the bus or train
    - robswc 4y ago
      I always avoid public transport if possible. If you ever work retail, you'll know dealing with the public is generally not fun. Lots of people looking to pick fights by being obnoxious on purpose and no authority to turn to (at least none that will do anything meaningful). I'm generally introverted, so having the peace and comfort of a car beats holding a pole surrounded by strangers. I also have lots of "emergency" supplies in my car. Has nothing to do with "class." It's not uncommon to see all types riding the metro in DC. For some people, public transport just isn't as appealing.
      - panick21_ 4y ago
        I'm also introverted, but I love riding the train. Sit down, with headphones, a book, take a nap, finish up some work. But I guess if I had to be on some shitty US urban bus I would feel differently. “A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation” – Gustavo Petro, Mayor of Bogotá Rich people are the people that complain when things are dirty or late. In Switzerland if a train is late nobody will be like 'well you should have planned for that'. Because its only late so few times that its actually quite exceptional for this to happen. The trains are full with people in suits working on laptops, having business meetings and so on. There is First Class even on the S-Bahn.

by airza 4y ago

That explanation doesn’t really seem to explain why there is such a huge difference between the US and other countries with an arguably larger administrative state and higher union participation.

pencilguin 4y ago

The US is more corrupt than many other countries. Our innovation was to make corruption explicitly legal, so there is no risk of indictments.

akira2501 4y ago

The US is just that.. a union of states that enjoy a much higher level of independence than in other countries and at the same time have to deal with their own counties. The states all have differing levels of competence, enforcement and leadership. The federal government has limited oversight, except for cases of particular types of criminal corruption. In my mind what screwed a lot of states up was the financial collapse of 2007, many did not adjust their spending forecasts and reconsider these projects appropriately in the face of the decade that came after. Finally, add in the pandemic and remote work, and it really undercut the rationale and scope of many of these projects that were never adjusted in the face of this.

bigbacaloa 4y ago
The US states are no more autonomous than the analogous regions in many countries. For example, Madrid's transport system is controlled regionally in a way that involves region, city, and private entities and is far better than anything in the US (NYC included). The US has institutionalized and legalized practices that are viewed as corruption in most countries and this becomes very evident in regards to public contracts and public works.
- Robotbeat 4y ago
  Can you provide very specific examples of these practices?
  - largepeepee 4y ago
    Ever heard of super pacs?
panick21_ 4y ago
This isn't really universally true. In Switzerand we have cantons that manage their own school system, regional rail, social security and the list goes on and on. Some of those cantons have something like 200k people. California itself is larger and richer then most of the world. There is no excuse not to be able to do it.

bobthepanda 4y ago

The exact shape of the bureaucracy is the problem. The US lacks in-house capacity and relies on outside consultants and contractors who are more than happy to overbill if not audited properly. The California HSR project was at one point using a staff of less than a hundred full-time staff to monitor over a thousand consultants which led to a lot of cost blowouts.

largepeepee 4y ago
Yes and this is corruption by design, to allow the top to profit "off the books" legally. Consultants shower the brass lavishly with creative methods of legal bribery, like inviting them for talks and paying them huge fees or promising comfy positions after their retirement from public office. To earn that back, they overcharge through the nose for projects.
dsfyu404ed 4y ago
> The US lacks in-house capacity and relies on outside consultants and contractors This trope needs to be taken out back and shot. All the big early and mid 20th century projects were done by contractors as was the bulk of the design work. The difference is that the government and by proxy the people didn't just bend over and take it when their money got wasted. And everything was a lot less codified and process-ified so there was more room for competition (and also real graft).
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  The reliance on contractors has continued to shift, and for the CA HSR project in question, at one point reached ridiculous levels: https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-high-speed-rail-consultants-20190426-story.html https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-hi... > Today, these consultants manage nearly every aspect of the job: They direct day-to-day construction work in the Central Valley and negotiate with farmers to buy land. They assess the geological conditions in the San Gabriel Mountains and estimate how many people will ride the future system. They produce tens of thousands of pages of reports and attend community meetings. They even oversee other consultants. > But significant portions of this work have been flawed or mismanaged, according to records reviewed by The Times and interviews with dozens of people involved in the project. Despite repeated warnings since 2010 about weaknesses in its staffing, the rail authority believed it could reduce overall costs by relying on consultants and avoiding a large permanent workforce. But that strategy has failed to keep project costs from soaring. Ten years after voters approved it, the project is $44 billion over budget and 13 years behind schedule. > When state rail authority employees go to their Sacramento headquarters, they work in offices rented by a consultant. When they turn on their computers, much of their data is stored on servers owned by consultants. The software they use to help manage the project is the property of a consultant. > Given the enormity of building a 520-mile rail system, the 10-member rail authority team that existed in the early years amounted to a “cheer squad,” Kopp said. > Several rail authority employees said in interviews that the audit correctly identified the confused relationship between state employees and consultants. In some cases, they said, state employees report to consultants, rather than the other way around. --- Private public partnerships (PPPs or P3s) are also similarly overhyped. Done correctly they can shift financial risk, but investors are actually sophisticated and not dumb idiots, so they'll either raise their prices to deal with additional risk, or they'll walk away from a deal that turns really sour. https://www.constructiondive.com/news/joint-venture-walks-away-from-marylands-purple-line-project/585824/ https://www.constructiondive.com/news/joint-venture-walks-aw...

gernb 4y ago

Because in the US (except NYC), all public transporation is seen as something for poor people where as in most other countries public transportation is for everyone.

gnz11 4y ago
Eh, Boston, Chicago, DC, et al. The large metropolitan areas of the US rely heavily on public transit. The areas that adopt that “only for poor people” are generally the mid-tier cities in places like the Midwest or central plains were everything is built around the car.
- britch 4y ago
  Public transit in all the cities you listed places is a joke when compared with the rest of the world, regardless of how heavily they're relied upon. The Boston metro unexpectedly stopped running for a bit earlier this year. I grew up in one of these cities. It's not uncommon for a certain type of person to refuse to ride the bus or train
  - robswc 4y ago
    I always avoid public transport if possible. If you ever work retail, you'll know dealing with the public is generally not fun. Lots of people looking to pick fights by being obnoxious on purpose and no authority to turn to (at least none that will do anything meaningful). I'm generally introverted, so having the peace and comfort of a car beats holding a pole surrounded by strangers. I also have lots of "emergency" supplies in my car. Has nothing to do with "class." It's not uncommon to see all types riding the metro in DC. For some people, public transport just isn't as appealing.
    - panick21_ 4y ago
      I'm also introverted, but I love riding the train. Sit down, with headphones, a book, take a nap, finish up some work. But I guess if I had to be on some shitty US urban bus I would feel differently. “A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation” – Gustavo Petro, Mayor of Bogotá Rich people are the people that complain when things are dirty or late. In Switzerland if a train is late nobody will be like 'well you should have planned for that'. Because its only late so few times that its actually quite exceptional for this to happen. The trains are full with people in suits working on laptops, having business meetings and so on. There is First Class even on the S-Bahn.