From Governing’s 

March 2006 issue 

 

FINANCE COLUMN 

JOHN E. PETERSEN 

 

The Big Thaw

 

Voters may be coming around to the idea that government needs their money to keep public works up to speed.

 

In the swift, if shallow, downturn of 2002, state finances suffered. Not just from declining revenues but also from a freezing over of ability to move ahead with initiatives to accommodate changing times. Faced with sharply emerging deficits, the states, which had assiduously lowered tax rates in the late 1990s, took the only path politically possible — they chopped spending. Overall, states stopped expenditure growth in its tracks for a couple of years. Capital projects and maintenance were delayed. User charges and fees (such as college tuitions) surged.

 

...

 

thinking and long-term planning. Raising revenues to meet needs may once again be seen as a necessary part of governance, as opposed to an unacceptable option. Citizens of Denver and its suburbs, for instance, voted to raise taxes to support a new mass transit system, and Colorado voters suspended an onerous constitutional cap on state spending. If it happened there, it could happen elsewhere.

 

Read More...

Note the reference to our nation's rail systems.  UPS just pulled a significant portion of it's business off of the Union Pacific Railroad because the railroad does not have enough capacity to handle the business.  that lack of capacity is a direct result of the problems stated by UPS' CEO below.

 

March 30, 2006 02:00 PM US Eastern Timezone

Transportation Infrastructure Failing the Nation, Says UPS CEO

 

HOUSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 30, 2006--Describing the nation's roads, ports, railroads and airports as the backbone of global trade, UPS's chief executive officer today warned that America was taking a chance with its future by neglecting its infrastructure.

 

"What's shocking, quite frankly, is the inability of our transportation infrastructure to keep up with the normal day-to-day stresses imposed upon it," said UPS CEO Mike Eskew. "Our highways, waterways, railroads and aviation networks are simply not keeping up with ordinary demands.

 

Eskew noted the problem is receiving some recognition outside the transportation industry, citing a report card issued last year by the American Society of Civil Engineers. "In 2005, here's what our infrastructure report card looked like: our aviation system got a D+; navigable waterways a D-; roads a D, and rails a C-."

 

Read More...

National Association of Railroad Passengers: www.narprail.org

 

 

 

To Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta

June 13, 2006

 

 

The Honorable Norman Y. Mineta

Secretary of Transportation

United States Department of Transportation

400 7th Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20590

 

 

Dear Secretary Mineta:

 

While you are right to target congestion as a serious and growing national problem, we are dumbfounded that you failed even to mention rail in National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network.  We hope that your report will trigger a wide-ranging dialogue about the need for federal transportation policy reform, and urge you personally to exercise leadership to help the federal government—and, for that matter, the railroad industry—catch up with the American people who, according to polls, clearly understand how vital improved rail transportation is to our future.

 

Neglect of rail—both by federal policy and the state policies that it encourages—is the primary reason that our nation continues to spend enormous amounts on transportation infrastructure without satisfactory results, guided by “poor policy choices and [a failure] to separate solutions that are effective from those that are not.”

 

Your report has no recommendation for public/private partnerships with the railroad industry, and shows no recognition of passenger rail’s potential to form the foundation of such partnerships.  Rail is the area where public/private partnerships have the greatest potential to deliver rapid and dramatic improvements in our ability to move people and goods.  It is the area of transportation policy where the entrepreneurial ingenuity of the private sector is best positioned to guide the investment of public funds for the greatest benefit.

 

The Association urges you to expand the dialogue to include all forms of transportation, especially rail.  Federal policy has ignored the nation’s rail infrastructure needs for so long that you have an opportunity to harvest a large amount of “low hanging fruit” – projects where comparatively modest public investments would produce large and immediate payoffs in transportation quality and capacity. 

 

Private ownership of the nation’s rail infrastructure does not render it less valuable to the American people, place it beyond the purview of federal transportation policy or make it ineligible for public funding.  Consider, for example, the freight benefits of passenger-inspired projects in California, including the Los Angeles Metrolink (commuter rail) system, capacity improvements on BNSF’s San Joaquin Valley line, and restoration of double-track west of Sacramento on Union Pacific. 

 

Modernizing the nation’s rail system can be done quicker and at far lower cost than building more highway lanes.  There is a growing consensus supporting this strategy.  More than half the states have joined The States for Passenger Rail Coalition that supports federal investment in rail.  In 2003, AASHTO’s Standing Committee on Rail Transportation, then chaired by Joseph Boardman—now your Federal Railroad Administrator—outlined the needs in two reports: Intercity Passenger Rail Transportation and Freight-Rail Bottom Line Report.  Most importantly, survey after survey shows that the American people in every geographical area strongly desire a national network of modern passenger trains.  The Harris Poll released in February makes clear that that interest extends also to freight rail.  Investment in passenger rail will provide Americans with new travel choices that offer opportunities to avoid congestion - both on the ground and in the air.  Moreover, investments that improve the nation’s rail infrastructure for passenger trains also would benefit freight service – enabling us to divert a larger portion of commerce from highway to rail.

 

Four years ago, NARP issued Modern Passenger Trains: A National Necessity, a white paper that explained why an integrated national rail passenger network was essential to America’s future.  The conclusion in your statement could very well have been taken from our report. Yet your report’s failure to mention - much less propose - rail as a solution for passenger or for freight congestion and delay suggests a tunnel vision that, by failing to consider solutions that are effective, is at odds with common sense, what the public wants and what our energy and congestion problems demand.

 

We have lost four years.  Let’s not lose another four.  We urge you to take the foundation laid out in your report and build upon it to include the concept of improving passenger and freight rail service together with - for the first time - the creation of a stable, secure and ongoing mechanism to fund rail improvements.  America’s future mobility, economic development and quality of life demand it.  In this regard, our Association stands ready to serve you as a resource.

 

I would welcome an opportunity to meet with you personally.

 

Sincerely,

 

George Chilson

NARP President

 

 

Neal Peirce / Syndicated columnist

 

That's right: 23 lanes of traffic

 

WASHINGTON — Lacking any other noteworthy legacy, outgoing Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta may be best remembered for his proposals to relieve transportation congestion by encouraging private investment in mega-road projects.

 

The idea has merit: In some locations, private investment in toll roads can — with appropriate local deliberation — make sense.

 

But Mineta amazingly omitted both freight-railroad improvements and potential passenger-rail improvement in the expansive congestion-relief initiative for America he unveiled last month.

 

Read More...

Atlanta is going to be a "Peak Oil Ghetto" in the not-to-distant future if they don't do a 180-degree turn soon in their land use and transportation planning. Indeed, it may already be too late for them.

America's vulnerable infrastructure

Llewellyn King: Providence Journal

01:00 AM EDT on Wednesday, July 5, 2006

 

WASHINGTON -- hub of the Free World, nerve center of the only superpower and the nation's capital -- gurgled, splashed and nearly drowned in four days of intense rainfall last week.

 

As natural disasters go, it was small beer. But it was enough to have 2,000 people moved from behind a dam in suburban Montgomery County, Md., to shelters, and to cause truly monstrous traffic jams in and around Washington. Some federal buildings in Washington were flooded and their operations were curtailed.

 

...

 

As pumping stations failed and raw sewage flowed into the Potomac, it became writ large that Washington's infrastructure, as with many of the nation's cities, is old, crumbling and inadequate. The greatest vulnerability is in transportation.

 

Read More...

 

Those who might wish us harm were again reminded that very small perturbations can have devastating effects on the operations of the city and the government it houses.

 

I'd say that four days of torrential rains hardly constitutes a "small perturbation" - but I agree overall.  Churchill said in his history of WWII how, if Hitler had kept the Blitz concentrated just on London, the damage to the sewage system alone would have crippled the city in pretty short order - even with the RAF and all the tactics they used to fight the Blitz, enough bombs got through to keep damage ahead of repair, the city couldn't drain water or waste, and would have become uninhabitable.  Happily, Hitler spread the wealth over the rest of the country, and the capital was spared.

 

Actually, one more quibble:

Yet the solutions to infrastructure problems are piecemeal and inadequate. And they are compounded by the current political fear of taxes.

 

There is nothing "current" about the political fear of taxes.  From colonial days to the present, taxes have always been an issue.  Who pays how much has always been, and will always be, a basic issue in every political campaign - from the Stamp Act to the American System to the 16th Amendment to today, it's always been All About the Benjamins.

 

 

Close-up

Experts warn U.S. is coming apart at the seams

By Chuck McCutcheon

Newhouse News Service

 

WASHINGTON — A pipeline shuts down in Alaska. Equipment failures disrupt air travel in Los Angeles. Electricity runs short at a spy agency in Maryland.

 

None of these recent events resulted from a natural disaster or terrorist attack, but they may as well have, some homeland security experts say. They worry that too little attention is paid to how fast the country's basic operating systems are deteriorating.

 

"When I see events like these, I become concerned that we've lost focus on the core operational functionality of the nation's infrastructure and are becoming a fragile nation, which is just as bad — if not worse — as being an insecure nation," said Christian Beckner, a Washington analyst who runs the respected Web site Homeland Security Watch (www.christianbeckner.com).

 

Read More...

Rebuilding the middle class

Forget tax cuts and minimum-wage hikes; it's time for massive infrastructure projects that put millions to work in well-paying jobs.

By Joel Kotkin and David Friedman

JOEL KOTKIN is an Irvine senior fellow at the New America Foundation and the author of "The City: A Global History." DAVID FRIEDMAN is also a senior fellow at the foundation.

 

December 3, 2006

 

OVER THE LAST 20 years, the United States has regressed into what one economist calls a "plutonomy" — a society in which the largest economic gains flow to an ever smaller portion of the population. According to recent economic statistics, from 1999 to 2004, the inflation-adjusted income of the bottom 90% of all U.S. households grew by 2%, compared with a 57% jump for the richest 10%. Incomes rose by more than 87% for households annually making $1 million and more than doubled for those that take home about $20 million a year.

 

Most disturbingly, workers losing the most economic ground are not the uneducated and unskilled but those with high school, community college and even four-year degrees. Overall, the middle class, in relative if not absolute terms, has lost purchasing power, especially in big coastal cities where the highest earners and the super-rich have driven up prices for housing and the cost of living. Globalization and automation have not only hurt manufacturing workers but also mid-level managers, engineers and software programmers. Despite enormous media and stock market hype, for instance, the U.S. has lost more than 700,000 information industry jobs since early 2001.

 

Is there any way to restore the prospects of middle- and working-class Americans? A comprehensive program to rebuild the nation's highways and bridges, upgrade its ports, construct and expand its energy lifelines and enlarge its public transportation systems could generate hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs. Admittedly, this back-to-basics strategy is not glamorous. But it has helped narrow economic inequality in the past by producing more balanced economic growth.

 

Read More...

Typical Joel Kotkin - everything he writes has a pro-highway lobby, anti-city slant.

But the kernel of truth in his essay is that a massive reinvestment in our infrastructure, particularly in mass transit and rail, will generate a lot of jobs.  For instance, the Ohio Hub Plan is estimated to create over 6,000 construction jobs, 1,500 permanent railroad jobs and another 6,000-plus permanent jobs tied to development along the corridors.

 

Except for that... yeah, your right... typical Kotkin. 

U.S. Infrastructure Found to Be in Disrepair

Higher Taxes Are Forecast

To Meet Investment Need; Reconsidering Cities

By THADDEUS HERRICK

May 9, 2007; Page B4

 

Airports, roads, rail, bridges and other transit infrastructure are deteriorating across the U.S. because of insufficient investment, according to a report.

 

Chicago needs $6 billion to bring its subways into good repair, says the report to be released today by the Urban Land Institute and Ernst & Young LLP. Rehabilitation or replacement of the Tappan Zee Bridge north of New York City could cost as much as $14.5 billion. And in Atlanta, current rush-hour trips by car could take 75% longer by 2030.

 

The report, entitled "Infrastructure 2007: A Global Perspective," says the failure to address what the co-authors call an emerging crisis in mobility will undermine the ability of the U.S. to compete internationally. "At some point, the system is going to grind to a halt," says Dale Ann Reiss, global director of real estate at the New York-based Ernst & Young accounting firm and vice chairman of the Urban Land Institute, a land-use think tank in Washington.

 

Read More...

Already posted this on this thread:

 

Overseas, the Trains and the Market for Them Accelerate

This article, published yesterday on the print and online versions of the Wall-Street Journal, is unlike the other articles posted under the "Overseas, the Trains and the Market for Them Accelerate" thread. This article is not entirely based around other nation's development projects and is specific to the infrastructure in the United States in disrepair.

Atlanta's at 15%!  Impressive for such a sprawling city.  I'm also impressed that New York has a higher transit usage rate than London or Paris, which is closer to DC and SF than NY.  It'd be interesting to know how walking and biking add up with transit to make up a "non-auto" commuter total for all those cities.

The highest in the states is Bolder at 22% of all total commuters (for biking), IIRC. It's in an earlier thread I posted about bicycle commuters.

We all know the reason why buses have such big windows is to humiliate the minorities sitting inside!!!1

The United States’ lack of investment in public transit, airports, railroads, roads and bridges will compromise the ability of the nation’s cities to compete globally, according to a report recently released by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) and Ernst & Young. “Infrastructure 2007: A Global Perspective” reviews the status of current and planned infrastructure investments in countries worldwide, and discusses the evolving infrastructure market.  “America is more of a follower and no longer a world leader when it comes to infrastructure,” the report states. “Too often in the U.S., projects focus on restoration rather than rethinking the model and finding possible efficiencies. There is a tendency to invest in the infrastructure we have instead of the infrastructure we need.”  For example, Japan currently operates 1,250 miles of high-speed rail and will build about 185 miles more by 2020, and China is planning to build more than 1,500 miles of high-speed rail by 2020. In comparison, the U.S. operates about 185 miles of high-speed rail and currently is not building any more. Also, as of 2000, there were more than 750 cars per 1,000 people in the United States; 500 cars per 1,000 people in the United Kingdom; and less than 50 cars per 1,000 people in China.

 

Also included in the report is a ULI survey of 30 state transportation planning directors, which found that 83 percent of those responding to the survey said the nation’s transportation infrastructure is not capable of meeting the country’s needs during the next 10 years. The planners also said that 97 percent of roads, bridges and tunnels, and 88 percent of transit systems will require at least moderate improvements in the coming years.  The book can be purchased from ULI at

 

 

 

http://www.uli.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Bookstore&Template=Ecommerce/ProductDisplay.cfm&Productid=1675

They can do all the studies they like, and lay out all the facts.  The sad truth however, is that it isn't going to make a bit of difference.  All we have in this country regarding infrastructure improvements is a bunch of empty rhetoric.  Nothing will happen because there isn't any money to make it happen.  All the money is tied up... we won't accept new taxes... there is NO money to do this stuff.  Sure, we can keep adding it to debt, but is that any more responsible than letting the infrastructure fall into disrepair?  There are some fundamental problems with the way our country is set up that is holding us back... and I don't claim to know what they all are.  I think it's obvious a large piece of it has to do with the fact that self-centeredness has taken a prominent position in our country.  "If it doesn't benefit ME, NOW, I'm against it."

The following is an op-ed piece by Ret. U.S. Army General Barry McCaffrey re: our need to invest in our transportation infrastructure.  McCaffrey will be appearing this Thursday in Columbus to address a luncheon meeting and the regular meeting of the Ohio Rail Development Commission.  I was able to obtain a copy of similar remarks he made at a recent appearance in Texas. 

 

Keep in mind, this is someone who commanded on-the-ground forces in the first Gulf War, so the man knows a few things about moving people and equipment.

 

Austin Business Journal  

Texas: At an Infrastructure Crossroads

Transportation challenges must be overcome and opportunities seized in order to sustain economic growth within the state.

By Barry R. McCaffrey

 

Without adequate investment in our transportation infrastructure, our nation’s security and economic growth cannot be sustained.

 

For the past 50 years, Texas has sustained a population growth rate in excess of 20 percent per decade. Now with 23 million people, Texas’ population is projected to exceed 50 million by 2040. In addition to this huge demographic growth, the state is at the crossroads of burgeoning international trade. 

 

U.S.-Mexico bilateral trade has more than tripled since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement from $81.5 billion in 1993 to $290.5 billion in 2005, which represents an increase of 256 percent, and is projected to double again by 2020. The majority of this trade is funneled through Texas. Six of the top 10 border ports for U.S.–Mexico trade are in Texas, including the top two, Laredo and El Paso. Yet investments in border infrastructure have not kept pace. Delays at border crossings account for 10 percent of international trade’s transportation costs.

 

Read More...

Published on Friday, July 20, 2007 by Associated Press

Blast Shows Age of US Infrastructure

by David B. Caruso

 

http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne+News/World/Story/A1Story20070720-19124.html

 

NEW YORK - With a blast that made skyscrapers tremble, an 83-year-old steam pipe sent a powerful message that the miles of tubes, wires and iron beneath New York and other U.S. cities are getting older and could become dangerously unstable...

 

 

 

The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that it will take $1.6 trillion over the next five years to get the nation’s roads, bridges, dams, water systems and airports into good condition....

 

 

 

Associated Press writers Adam Goldman and Karen Matthews contributed to this report.

 

© 2007 The Associated Press.

The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that it will take $1.6 trillion over the next five years to get the nation’s roads, bridges, dams, water systems and airports into good condition.

 

Too bad the federal Highway Trust Fund will be slipping into insolvency next year. We love our amenities in America. We just don't think we should pay for them!

Submitted without comment:

 

The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that it will take $1.6 trillion over the next five years to get the nation’s roads, bridges, dams, water systems and airports into good condition.

 

Too bad the federal Highway Trust Fund will be slipping into insolvency next year. We love our amenities in America. We just don't think we should pay for them!

 

"Good condition"

 

That's too vague and the estimate does not need to be anywhere near that high. People panic over "structural" and "functional" deficiencies. Structural indicates that there are problems, structurally, with the bridge, but that doesn't mean it is falling apart. It can be anything from a spot of rust on a ball bearing that needs cleaning, to missing or loose guide rails, to standard cracking, to worn bridge expansion joints. Functional indicates that the bridge is not necessarily up to modern code -- narrower lane widths (the preferred standard is 12 ft., anything less falls under "functionally obsolete"), narrow shoulders, etc. But of course, the media doesn't determine the difference, and go into panic mode, saying that a nice chunk of the bridges are deficient and are falling apart. Then you have the whackos who believe that we should stop driving over the deficient bridges until they are brought up to code (sadly, I've read comments on this).

That figure isn't just for roads an bridges.  It says "roads, bridges, dams, water systems and airports"  At $1.6 trillion, those numbers aren't off the mark.  We've been deferring maintenance on just about every major form of infrastructure in this country for the past few decades.   

We all know the reason why buses have such big windows is to humiliate the minorities sitting inside!!!1

 

Actually the majority of the buses that COTA uses in Columbus are tinted so you can't really see who is inside.

 

I'm sure they have some sort of definition for "good", most engineers can't stand abstract definitions such as that.

 

I don't really buy into the whole "people only want what they think is best for them right now" argument.  This may be what is translated from how the general public acts but then again the general public has little knowledge on how much transportation is factored into how they live.  Sure they drive cars but do they know why the road is where it is and the ramifications of driving so many hours on a certain path per day?  or how streets play into neighborhood design?  Really I think that the lack of information presented to people is an issue.  There are plenty of "open to the public" presentations but really is the average person going to go to one of those?  Not likely because in general the public does not think about the secondary and more abstract effects that their actions cause.

 

I am hoping that if information is brought to people they will become more aware and thoughtful about their actions.  Obviously some people will not change, in fact most people will not change, immediately but over time they may make more "beneficial" choices.  This makes me wonder if the assumed lack of true local community in sprawling suburbs contributes to the "selfish" mentality, reinforcing the inefficiencies of the typical sub(ex)urb.

I think it will be more defined along the generational lines.   Most young people today will at least, throw around the idea of moving into an already established urban area where most of our parents grew up trying to get out of it.   Look at how the demographics have changed in the last 50 years.   Sadly, it will be another 10 to 20 years before we see the true results of what I say.     (And I could be completely wrong about this too!)

 

Sorry, off subject!

Editorial: Locally or nationally, you can't let the infrastructure slide forever

Friday, October 05, 2007

 

Posted by the editors at http://blog.cleveland.com/post_riposte/ on 10/1/07 at 4:50 p.m.

Cleveland has a problem involving a shift ing slope, a ruined road and a threatened 60-inch-diameter sewer

line that carries up to 20 million gallons of waste and storm water during a big rain.

In Minneapolis, the problem was the Interstate 35 bridge, which collapsed spectacularly Aug. 1, killing 13

commuters...

 

 

© 2007 The Plain Dealer

© 2007 cleveland.com All Rights Reserved[/size]

Section of I-95 in Philadelphia (both directions) Closed Due to Severely Cracked Pillar:

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=4469828

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23684974/

^ On that note. Just think of some of these older skyscrapers where it's not easy to see the cracks. I suspect in the next 50-100 years alot of them will start to fall down. Nothing lasts forever except radiation.

Infrastructure advances in the rest-of-the-world will blow your mind.

 

"The United States is being left behind. We will -- absent major change -- never be able to catch up with the infrastructure of Asia and Europe, given current political conditions in this country. And the most tragic part of this decline is that it's being actively promoted by our leaders."

 

Read full article at:  http://www.opednews.com/articles/Infrastructure-advances-in-by-Daily-Kos-Infrastructure_Infrastructure-US-141222-174.html

 

That figure isn't just for roads an bridges.  It says "roads, bridges, dams, water systems and airports"  At $1.6 trillion, those numbers aren't off the mark.  We've been deferring maintenance on just about every major form of infrastructure in this country for the past few decades.   

 

Throw another $400 billion or so for intercity passenger rail. Make it an even $2 trillion. That $1.6 trillion figure is probably too low.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/03/john-olivers-solution-to-americas-infrastructure-crisis/386549/?utm_source=SFFB

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/03/john-olivers-solution-to-americas-infrastructure-crisis/386549/?utm_source=SFFB

 

Government builds better than it maintains not just because of the ribbon syndrome, but because there are easily measurable goals and objectives.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/03/john-olivers-solution-to-americas-infrastructure-crisis/386549/?utm_source=SFFB

Government builds better than it maintains not just because of the ribbon syndrome, but because there are easily measurable goals and objectives.

 

I resent the dig at "Government" as if getting rid of government solves all problems.  Anarchy won't fix the roads either.

 

You can measure maintenance, the measurements just aren't any more exciting than the results of maintenance.  Measurables might include how many cracks wider than one centimeter.  How many potholes bigger than X per mile.  Depth of corrosion on bolts.  Percentage of area covered in paint/rust.  We know from experience statistically how long an iron pipe will last when buried in Cleveland mud. 

 

It's not just government that fails to do sufficient maintenance.  Most of Amtrak's lines are privately owned and poorly maintained (relative to the standards required for passenger rail, to which the private railroads are supposed to meet).  Every manufacturer is looking for ways to reduce maintenance costs to the bare minimum.  Replace that machine when we can no longer repair it, not a moment before (unless we can pay back the replacement cost within one year!)

 

The problem with government isn't that government workers are worse than private contractors, it's that politicians' careers depend on getting reelected (rehired) and We The People like new bridges more than resurfaced roads.  So we don't hold our politicians accountable for adequate maintenance spending or for making sure we can fund the maintenance before building more stuff that has to be maintained. 

 

We now have more stuff than we can afford to maintain.  We The People, whether we realize it or not, have to choose what transportation assets to maintain and what to let fail.  The people probably aren't being educated very well about this.  As a result, We The People choose - failure of assets.  Who knows where the next bridge will fall, but fall it will....

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/03/john-olivers-solution-to-americas-infrastructure-crisis/386549/?utm_source=SFFB

Government builds better than it maintains not just because of the ribbon syndrome, but because there are easily measurable goals and objectives.

 

I resent the dig at "Government" as if getting rid of government solves all problems.  Anarchy won't fix the roads either.

 

You can measure maintenance, the measurements just aren't any more exciting than the results of maintenance.  Measurables might include how many cracks wider than one centimeter.  How many potholes bigger than X per mile.  Depth of corrosion on bolts.  Percentage of area covered in paint/rust.  We know from experience statistically how long an iron pipe will last when buried in Cleveland mud. 

 

It's not just government that fails to do sufficient maintenance.  Most of Amtrak's lines are privately owned and poorly maintained (relative to the standards required for passenger rail, to which the private railroads are supposed to meet).  Every manufacturer is looking for ways to reduce maintenance costs to the bare minimum.  Replace that machine when we can no longer repair it, not a moment before (unless we can pay back the replacement cost within one year!)

 

The problem with government isn't that government workers are worse than private contractors, it's that politicians' careers depend on getting reelected (rehired) and We The People like new bridges more than resurfaced roads.  So we don't hold our politicians accountable for adequate maintenance spending or for making sure we can fund the maintenance before building more stuff that has to be maintained. 

 

We now have more stuff than we can afford to maintain.  We The People, whether we realize it or not, have to choose what transportation assets to maintain and what to let fail.  The people probably aren't being educated very well about this.  As a result, We The People choose - failure of assets.  Who knows where the next bridge will fall, but fall it will....

 

It wasn't meant as a dig this time, although when I mention government it usually is.

 

Government does a decent job, in the same ballpark as the private sector, when the task is clear and success can be measured.  Especially "closed end" projects.  Wars, building the highway system, Apollo come to mind.  Where it falters is things that are open ended.  Especially when the foxes end up watching the henhouse.

One of the worst ways to get rich is to work for Uncle Sam directly. So a janitor makes 10% more working for the government than he does the private sector. Big whoop. It's very tough to break $100k working for the government. At the high end, a position in the private sector with the same level of responsibility makes 2-10X as much or more. A four-star General makes 112K for example, whereas a 1LT could go overseas and make 175k working security for contractors.

 

I'd imagine government would work better if they were allowed to hire some real super stars and pay them big bucks. You'd probably also see a lot less sketchy bouncing back and forth between regulatory positions and the private sector if the private sector wasn't paying them 5X as much as Uncle Sam. But some on the Right would lose their minds seeing someone get paid well for improving the government. They don't want it to work and don't want people who work for it making money.

One of the worst ways to get rich is to work for Uncle Sam directly. So a janitor makes 10% more working for the government than he does the private sector. Big whoop. It's very tough to break $100k working for the government. At the high end, a position in the private sector with the same level of responsibility makes 2-10X as much or more. A four-star General makes 112K for example, whereas a 1LT could go overseas and make 175k working security for contractors.

 

I'd imagine government would work better if they were allowed to hire some real super stars and pay them big bucks. You'd probably also see a lot less sketchy bouncing back and forth between regulatory positions and the private sector if the private sector wasn't paying them 5X as much as Uncle Sam. But some on the Right would lose their minds seeing someone get paid well for improving the government. They don't want it to work and don't want people who work for it making money.

The problem we have isn’t so much with government being effective is with what it might do if it is.  There’s no checks on the size and reach of the government outside of general Congressional oversight.

 

For example, if you want to do something or gather a certain type of information at a corporate level, you have to demonstrate an impact on the bottom line.  In government, all you have to do is convince enough people that it would be “good” to do so.  To make matters worse, it can compel private sector compliance and assistance.

 

Plus, the very nature of bureaucracy incentivitzes growth of reach and size.  More to do means bigger budgets and more subordinates,  efficiency is not rewarded.

 

Elections are a check on the size and reach of government, most directly on its budget.  Look no further than the title of this thread for an example.

One of the worst ways to get rich is to work for Uncle Sam directly. So a janitor makes 10% more working for the government than he does the private sector. Big whoop. It's very tough to break $100k working for the government. At the high end, a position in the private sector with the same level of responsibility makes 2-10X as much or more. A four-star General makes 112K for example, whereas a 1LT could go overseas and make 175k working security for contractors.

 

I'd imagine government would work better if they were allowed to hire some real super stars and pay them big bucks. You'd probably also see a lot less sketchy bouncing back and forth between regulatory positions and the private sector if the private sector wasn't paying them 5X as much as Uncle Sam. But some on the Right would lose their minds seeing someone get paid well for improving the government. They don't want it to work and don't want people who work for it making money.

 

Cincinnati's City Manager, who overseas about 5,000 employees, earns around $250,00.  The CEO of a company of a similar size would earn a much higher salary, a bonus, and loads of company stock. 

 

Cincinnati's City Manager, who overseas about 5,000 employees, earns around $250,00.  The CEO of a company of a similar size would earn a much higher salary, a bonus, and loads of company stock. 

 

Some would say that that is a sign that the city should spend more.  But isn't $250,000 plus all the perks enough?  (Adding in all the other benefits and it's a lot more than $250,000.) 

 

In my view, most CEOs of publicly-traded companies are grossly overpaid. 

One of the worst ways to get rich is to work for Uncle Sam directly. So a janitor makes 10% more working for the government than he does the private sector. Big whoop. It's very tough to break $100k working for the government. At the high end, a position in the private sector with the same level of responsibility makes 2-10X as much or more. A four-star General makes 112K for example, whereas a 1LT could go overseas and make 175k working security for contractors.

 

I'd imagine government would work better if they were allowed to hire some real super stars and pay them big bucks. You'd probably also see a lot less sketchy bouncing back and forth between regulatory positions and the private sector if the private sector wasn't paying them 5X as much as Uncle Sam. But some on the Right would lose their minds seeing someone get paid well for improving the government. They don't want it to work and don't want people who work for it making money.

 

Cincinnati's City Manager, who overseas about 5,000 employees, earns around $250,00.  The CEO of a company of a similar size would earn a much higher salary, a bonus, and loads of company stock. 

 

 

Seems to me that cities actually pay the most of all government entities.

Back to infrastructure, please.

So...it's been nine years since US infrastructure was "found to be in disrepair" and this thread was started.  Can anybody say we've actually made any measurable improvement?

So...it's been nine years since US infrastructure was "found to be in disrepair" and this thread was started.  Can anybody say we've actually made any measurable improvement?

 

Infrastructure was found to be in disrepair long before that. I've been involved in transportation policies and issues since the 1980s and our infrastructure as a general condition has been poorly rated the entire time.

So...it's been nine years since US infrastructure was "found to be in disrepair" and this thread was started.  Can anybody say we've actually made any measurable improvement?

 

Innerbelt bridge?

This blogger nails it:  US roads are built by the lowest bidder, with no quality controls in place:

 

http://aproposfrance-usa.blogspot.com/2011/08/on-why-roads-are-worse-in-us-than-in.html

 

While our military has some of the most exacting standards for suppliers of even the most miniscule parts, the public puts little emphasis on safety and durability of something we use every day.  I don't see any improvement in this as long as the congressional culture of "spending money on anything is bad" exists (except, of course, when the money is spent in their home district--then bring on the pork!).

This blogger nails it:  US roads are built by the lowest bidder, with no quality controls in place:

 

http://aproposfrance-usa.blogspot.com/2011/08/on-why-roads-are-worse-in-us-than-in.html

 

While our military has some of the most exacting standards for suppliers of even the most miniscule parts, the public puts little emphasis on safety and durability of something we use every day.  I don't see any improvement in this as long as the congressional culture of "spending money on anything is bad" exists (except, of course, when the money is spent in their home district--then bring on the pork!).

 

Two reasons:

 

1)  Making roads too durable can mean fewer construction jobs later on.

 

2)  The part about military specs is dead on.  But once you have a road contract, it's a lot tougher to change the contractor than it is to change a part supplier, especially when two or more companies are making the same part.

 

 

Two reasons:

 

1)  Making roads too durable can mean fewer construction jobs later on.

 

2)  The part about military specs is dead on.  But once you have a road contract, it's a lot tougher to change the contractor than it is to change a part supplier, especially when two or more companies are making the same part.

 

I understand this argument, and why the proponents would argue for it (union lobbys, etc).

 

But just the upgrading roads and bridges to better standards would take a generation to complete, probably more if we included rail, etc.    I don't see why they could fight against it, given that they would be employed for years to come.