4 ms·

> Perhaps, but if we're being practical we should account for a similar increase in costs to any future solution. It's not like corruption will go away by the t

> Perhaps, but if we're being practical we should account for a similar increase in costs to any future solution. It's not like corruption will go away by the time the procurements for the next project go on... This meek fetal-position defeatism is why infrastructure costs spiral up and up and up forever. Raise costs on project A Baseline the expected costs for project B based on project A Raise costs further on project B Repeat endlessly It doesn’t have to be this way. Italy itself halved its rail construction costs by cracking down on corruption in the 90s. We always have a choice.

coldtea 3y ago
>This meek fetal-position defeatism is why infrastructure costs spiral up and up and up forever. Really? I thought the reason was corruption! Perhaps if we all think positively it goes away!
- FredPret 3y ago
  Combine positive thinking with action, and yes, it will
  - scotty79 3y ago
    No it won't. Corruption is one of the main reasons those project go anywhere. People in positions of power want to do them because they can get money on the side while they are done. If we figured out how we can make combating climate change rife with corruption 30 years ago, we'd be in much better place right now.
    - FredPret 3y ago
      OK, complain and do nothing and remain defeated.
      - scotty79 3y ago
        I don't complain. And as soon as someone figures out other thing than corruption profits that will motivate people in power to get things done I'll be fully onboard. Elections kinda do that up to a point, called elections. Corruption is longer term mechanism.
      - coldtea 3y ago
        How is doing something working out for you?
        FredPret 3y ago
        I'm happy and am making measurable progress in life. How is complaining and pessimism working out for you?
    - bryananderson 3y ago
      > Corruption is one of the main reasons those project go anywhere. People in positions of power want to do them because they can get money on the side while they are done. This misunderstands the relationship between corruption and state capacity. The key insight is that corruption does not require a project to actually deliver the promised benefits, or even to be completed at all. > If we figured out how we can make combating climate change rife with corruption 30 years ago, we'd be in much better place right now. Fortunately there’s a great test case for this theory: California High Speed Rail. It was justified in climate terms but actually got underway so that numerous local/regional special interests and parasitic consultants and contractors could extract profit from it. And the result is a fatally flawed project that is decades late, has swallowed money that could’ve paid for numerous other rail projects, may not be completed at all, and will never deliver the originally promised benefits in any case (too slow because of sweetheart deals for numerous Very Special cities). Meanwhile, lower-corruption countries that haven’t gutted their state capacity can and do build immense amounts of beneficial infrastructure.
      - coldtea 3y ago
        >The key insight is that corruption does not require a project to actually deliver the promised benefits, or even to be completed at all. No, but another key insight is that it helps corruption very much if it's completed and delivers the promised benefits, since it means less chances for people to complain, and for later investigations (e.g. by political opponents) to deduce wrongdoing... As for the California example, this is in a place with supposedly less or no corruption (and no "mafia ties" level corruption). So, "Local/regional special interests and parasitic consultants and contractors" messing up the project is more about a huge bureaucracy and a too disjointed process, with baroque procurement laws, and decision makers who have to satisfy and yield to all kinds of interested parties along the way. Plus of course the totally hand-tieing legal framework, and ligitation heavy environment leading to paralysis. Sure there would also be some corruption, but in the California case I'd venture to guess that you don't need much of it, and it's all both systemic and legal. It's just regular interested parties and middlemen getting their say and their legal share (but too many of them, and with high multipliers), and costly elaborate and unneeded procedures having to be followed.
- bryananderson 3y ago
  > Really? I thought the reason was corruption! Perhaps if we all think positively it goes away! I could have added a few words to my comment to make it clearer: “This meek fetal-position defeatism in the face of corruption is why infrastructure costs spiral up and up and up forever.” Corruption can be defeated, or at least minimized, but only if we fight it head-on rather than submissively accepting it and factoring it into our future expectations.
bobthepanda 3y ago
Honestly, this is much cheaper than the US equivalent. Floodgates on New York Harbor have been costed at over $100B.
- bryananderson 3y ago
  Yes, the procurement situation in the United States is at least an order of magnitude more dire than in Italy.

coldtea 3y ago

>This meek fetal-position defeatism is why infrastructure costs spiral up and up and up forever. Really? I thought the reason was corruption! Perhaps if we all think positively it goes away!

FredPret 3y ago
Combine positive thinking with action, and yes, it will
- scotty79 3y ago
  No it won't. Corruption is one of the main reasons those project go anywhere. People in positions of power want to do them because they can get money on the side while they are done. If we figured out how we can make combating climate change rife with corruption 30 years ago, we'd be in much better place right now.
  - FredPret 3y ago
    OK, complain and do nothing and remain defeated.
    - scotty79 3y ago
      I don't complain. And as soon as someone figures out other thing than corruption profits that will motivate people in power to get things done I'll be fully onboard. Elections kinda do that up to a point, called elections. Corruption is longer term mechanism.
    - coldtea 3y ago
      How is doing something working out for you?
      - FredPret 3y ago
        I'm happy and am making measurable progress in life. How is complaining and pessimism working out for you?
  - bryananderson 3y ago
    > Corruption is one of the main reasons those project go anywhere. People in positions of power want to do them because they can get money on the side while they are done. This misunderstands the relationship between corruption and state capacity. The key insight is that corruption does not require a project to actually deliver the promised benefits, or even to be completed at all. > If we figured out how we can make combating climate change rife with corruption 30 years ago, we'd be in much better place right now. Fortunately there’s a great test case for this theory: California High Speed Rail. It was justified in climate terms but actually got underway so that numerous local/regional special interests and parasitic consultants and contractors could extract profit from it. And the result is a fatally flawed project that is decades late, has swallowed money that could’ve paid for numerous other rail projects, may not be completed at all, and will never deliver the originally promised benefits in any case (too slow because of sweetheart deals for numerous Very Special cities). Meanwhile, lower-corruption countries that haven’t gutted their state capacity can and do build immense amounts of beneficial infrastructure.
    - coldtea 3y ago
      >The key insight is that corruption does not require a project to actually deliver the promised benefits, or even to be completed at all. No, but another key insight is that it helps corruption very much if it's completed and delivers the promised benefits, since it means less chances for people to complain, and for later investigations (e.g. by political opponents) to deduce wrongdoing... As for the California example, this is in a place with supposedly less or no corruption (and no "mafia ties" level corruption). So, "Local/regional special interests and parasitic consultants and contractors" messing up the project is more about a huge bureaucracy and a too disjointed process, with baroque procurement laws, and decision makers who have to satisfy and yield to all kinds of interested parties along the way. Plus of course the totally hand-tieing legal framework, and ligitation heavy environment leading to paralysis. Sure there would also be some corruption, but in the California case I'd venture to guess that you don't need much of it, and it's all both systemic and legal. It's just regular interested parties and middlemen getting their say and their legal share (but too many of them, and with high multipliers), and costly elaborate and unneeded procedures having to be followed.
bryananderson 3y ago
> Really? I thought the reason was corruption! Perhaps if we all think positively it goes away! I could have added a few words to my comment to make it clearer: “This meek fetal-position defeatism in the face of corruption is why infrastructure costs spiral up and up and up forever.” Corruption can be defeated, or at least minimized, but only if we fight it head-on rather than submissively accepting it and factoring it into our future expectations.

bobthepanda 3y ago

Honestly, this is much cheaper than the US equivalent. Floodgates on New York Harbor have been costed at over $100B.

bryananderson 3y ago
Yes, the procurement situation in the United States is at least an order of magnitude more dire than in Italy.