3 ms·

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 bl

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.

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.