5 ms·

Just wait till you read how many (stunning) stations and lines of track in highly sanctioned (and supposedly beyond corrupt) Russia has laid in Moscow, it’s dep

Just wait till you read how many (stunning) stations and lines of track in highly sanctioned (and supposedly beyond corrupt) Russia has laid in Moscow, it’s depressing. If they can do it on time and under budget, why can’t America?

selectodude 3y ago
Pretty sure a decent amount of the Moscow metro was built with convict labor under Stalin.
- twelve40 3y ago
  Pretty sure the OP is referring to the more relevant fact that in the last decade they've built over 100 new stations and continue to do so at a rate of about 12 new stations every year, no slave labor involved.
  - acchow 3y ago
    Is this because politicians don’t need to be concerned with reelection?
    - yongjik 3y ago
      That's an odd take: where I grew up (Korea), everybody loves subway stations, and "I'll bring in more subway stations!" is a reliable way for politicians to buy more votes. Everywhere, including the most expensive districts. I'm afraid the American phenomenon of turning their nose up at public transportation projects is just that - a distinctly American phenomenon. They don't know what they are missing.
      - aylmao 3y ago
        I'm sure it can be attributed to a lot of factors. Geographically, the USA has a lot of space, so it's relatively easy to sprawl. Some places have to be more space-efficient. Ideologically, the USA has always been about individual rights, private property and self-reliance. Car ownership fits that model of thinking better. Politically, private companies have always had a lot of influence over government. When the car became widespread, it was easy to influence governments to build highways, favour cars in roads, pass parking minimums, etc. Historically, the USA has a history of segregation. Public transit mixes people from around the city, and I'm sure at a certain point in time there were people in power interested on reducing that as much as possible. I mean, there's that whole event with Rosa Parks as an example [1]. Moreover, a lot of the USA is "new". With a shorter tradition of city-building and more of a blank canvas to start, I'm not surprised what people expect and how they try to build their cities is different. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks#Refusal_to_move https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks#Refusal_to_move
      - throwaway2037 3y ago
        Real question: Why don't Korean car companies lobby against the metro? Same in Japan. In the US, the car companies were heavily invovled in the demolition of some mass transit (post WW2).
        yongjik 3y ago
        When an entire nation has bought on the idea that X is desirable, lobbyists can only go so far: you might as well ask why American factory owners don't lobby against Thanksgiving breaks. Another complication is that subway stations reliably increase real estate prices, and in Korea everybody desires higher real estate prices for their town. (Of course we then complain that the prices are too high and vote for the opposition. And then we demand the new government to increase real estate prices just for my town. The cycle continues. Don't ask me why, it's a whole can of worms.) In Korea, a company lobbying against subway would fare about as well as a company lobbying for real estate tax hike, that is, very poorly.
- csomar 3y ago
  Stalin labor is able to travel in time?
jedberg 3y ago
The one big advantage single party dictatorships have is that they can build infrastructure way faster than democracies can. There is no opposition party to block spending, and no one to complain about safety issues (I'm sure a bunch of people have died building those stations and tunnels but there were no records). They can also suppress worker complaints about unpaid overtime, and they don't have to negotiate with worker's unions. China is the same way. They can build infrastructure like nobody's business.
- berkes 3y ago
  And not to forget, they can disown land and ignore complaints of nearby residents fairly easy.
  - wildrhythms 3y ago
    To be honest, and this is just my opinion, when it comes to scaling up and scaling out public infrastructure I don't particularly give a damn about what the land owners think.
    - berkes 3y ago
      I guess that goes for almost everyone. Until you are the person disowned. Nimby. I and my family have been there twice. Thrice if you count my grandfather's quarry disowned by the Nazi's. Me and my parents were lucky to live in a lawful society. Where, at the very least, you can use the law to demand a fair price for the property, else we would've been without a house and without the money to get something new. First the garden for a road. Then the rest of the house for a new trains tunnel. We aren't some rich landowning, rent extracting family; just two working parents with a mortgage loan. It makes me understand why people oppose windfarms, public infra and such. Even though I also consider such projects crucial to survive the coming decennia.
- rospaya 3y ago
  That's only half true. Every party has various blocks, there are still interest groups and various levels of government (city, region, national). You still need to get everybody in line, just not in the same way. Spain has a higher democracy index than the US, yet they build infrastructure cheaper and faster.
tryauuum 3y ago
don't be depressed. Moscow is the only russian city that accomplishes that. Even Saint-Petersburg cannot do that.
- cpursley 3y ago
  Has St. Petersburg experienced enough growth to warrant big metro projects? I do remember their existing metros being beautiful and clean.
  - tryauuum 3y ago
    yes. I looked it up and Saint-Petersburg opened around 7 new stations during 2010-2020. Don't know if this is a success.
    - thriftwy 3y ago
      It's way behind of population growth since new construction is going on like crazy. Still better than nothing and important places became accessible, such as 300 years anniversary park with its waterfront. Also shaved 30-40 minutes from a trip to Kotlin.

selectodude 3y ago

Pretty sure a decent amount of the Moscow metro was built with convict labor under Stalin.

twelve40 3y ago
Pretty sure the OP is referring to the more relevant fact that in the last decade they've built over 100 new stations and continue to do so at a rate of about 12 new stations every year, no slave labor involved.
- acchow 3y ago
  Is this because politicians don’t need to be concerned with reelection?
  - yongjik 3y ago
    That's an odd take: where I grew up (Korea), everybody loves subway stations, and "I'll bring in more subway stations!" is a reliable way for politicians to buy more votes. Everywhere, including the most expensive districts. I'm afraid the American phenomenon of turning their nose up at public transportation projects is just that - a distinctly American phenomenon. They don't know what they are missing.
    - aylmao 3y ago
      I'm sure it can be attributed to a lot of factors. Geographically, the USA has a lot of space, so it's relatively easy to sprawl. Some places have to be more space-efficient. Ideologically, the USA has always been about individual rights, private property and self-reliance. Car ownership fits that model of thinking better. Politically, private companies have always had a lot of influence over government. When the car became widespread, it was easy to influence governments to build highways, favour cars in roads, pass parking minimums, etc. Historically, the USA has a history of segregation. Public transit mixes people from around the city, and I'm sure at a certain point in time there were people in power interested on reducing that as much as possible. I mean, there's that whole event with Rosa Parks as an example [1]. Moreover, a lot of the USA is "new". With a shorter tradition of city-building and more of a blank canvas to start, I'm not surprised what people expect and how they try to build their cities is different. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks#Refusal_to_move https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks#Refusal_to_move
    - throwaway2037 3y ago
      Real question: Why don't Korean car companies lobby against the metro? Same in Japan. In the US, the car companies were heavily invovled in the demolition of some mass transit (post WW2).
      - yongjik 3y ago
        When an entire nation has bought on the idea that X is desirable, lobbyists can only go so far: you might as well ask why American factory owners don't lobby against Thanksgiving breaks. Another complication is that subway stations reliably increase real estate prices, and in Korea everybody desires higher real estate prices for their town. (Of course we then complain that the prices are too high and vote for the opposition. And then we demand the new government to increase real estate prices just for my town. The cycle continues. Don't ask me why, it's a whole can of worms.) In Korea, a company lobbying against subway would fare about as well as a company lobbying for real estate tax hike, that is, very poorly.
csomar 3y ago
Stalin labor is able to travel in time?

jedberg 3y ago

The one big advantage single party dictatorships have is that they can build infrastructure way faster than democracies can. There is no opposition party to block spending, and no one to complain about safety issues (I'm sure a bunch of people have died building those stations and tunnels but there were no records). They can also suppress worker complaints about unpaid overtime, and they don't have to negotiate with worker's unions. China is the same way. They can build infrastructure like nobody's business.

berkes 3y ago
And not to forget, they can disown land and ignore complaints of nearby residents fairly easy.
- wildrhythms 3y ago
  To be honest, and this is just my opinion, when it comes to scaling up and scaling out public infrastructure I don't particularly give a damn about what the land owners think.
  - berkes 3y ago
    I guess that goes for almost everyone. Until you are the person disowned. Nimby. I and my family have been there twice. Thrice if you count my grandfather's quarry disowned by the Nazi's. Me and my parents were lucky to live in a lawful society. Where, at the very least, you can use the law to demand a fair price for the property, else we would've been without a house and without the money to get something new. First the garden for a road. Then the rest of the house for a new trains tunnel. We aren't some rich landowning, rent extracting family; just two working parents with a mortgage loan. It makes me understand why people oppose windfarms, public infra and such. Even though I also consider such projects crucial to survive the coming decennia.
rospaya 3y ago
That's only half true. Every party has various blocks, there are still interest groups and various levels of government (city, region, national). You still need to get everybody in line, just not in the same way. Spain has a higher democracy index than the US, yet they build infrastructure cheaper and faster.

tryauuum 3y ago

don't be depressed. Moscow is the only russian city that accomplishes that. Even Saint-Petersburg cannot do that.

cpursley 3y ago
Has St. Petersburg experienced enough growth to warrant big metro projects? I do remember their existing metros being beautiful and clean.
- tryauuum 3y ago
  yes. I looked it up and Saint-Petersburg opened around 7 new stations during 2010-2020. Don't know if this is a success.
  - thriftwy 3y ago
    It's way behind of population growth since new construction is going on like crazy. Still better than nothing and important places became accessible, such as 300 years anniversary park with its waterfront. Also shaved 30-40 minutes from a trip to Kotlin.