4 ms·
Agreed. The Apollo project was 2-3% of GDP at the time, compared to some modern projects: - Second Avenue Subway at a projected total cost across all phases of
by prottog 3y ago
Agreed. The Apollo project was 2-3% of GDP at the time, compared to some modern projects:
- Second Avenue Subway at a projected total cost across all phases of $17B vs. the GDP of NYC at $1T = 1.7%
- Berlin Brandenburg Airport at a final cost of €7B vs. the GDP of the city of Berlin and the federal state of Brandenburg combined at €228B = 3%
- California High Speed Rail at a current estimate of $128B for the full LA-SF system vs. the GDP of California at $3.6T = 3.5%
And all of these examples understate the problem, since the GDP was lower when the projects began, the costs may continue to rise as the projects progress, and outside (national-level) funding assistance is also used. So there is at least some merit to the idea that we just can't build as well as we used to.
- mschuster91 3y ago> So there is at least some merit to the idea that we just can't build as well as we used to. We could, there is nothing preventing the US or Europe to return to 1970s taxation for companies and the filthy rich. The reason why we can't build like back then is to a very large part the erosion of the tax base to pay for it.
- prottog 3y agoThe data does not support your claim. US government expenditure as a fraction of the GDP was lower in the 70s (30-35%) than it is now (35-40%). The government revenue, about the same (around 30%). So the tax base is roughly the same relative to economic output, and spending slightly higher, with the difference made up for by deficits. The Transcontinental Railroad was built in the 1860s and the Hoover Dam in the 1930s, both when government expenditure as well as taxation at all levels were a single-digit percent of GDP. I suppose by your logic we would be a galaxy-faring species if only we were able to tax the likes of Bezos and Musk?