Republicans & Conservatives Archives

I like fallen leaves, too, and hate noisy leaf blowers.

Think I’ll buy some shades.

C&J
I have not seen one leaf blower in the RP. Remember rakes?
These glowing post you sometimes put up always put me in a negative position. They are typically conservative,”There is no problem,so don’t talk about it”..kind of thing.
There are problems with a rapidly expanding population,obviosly,land and resource use, education,law enforcement,transportation etc.
Health care reform will help,the sooner the better. Some new studies have come out predicting that at current rates of inflation Americans will be paying close to $9000 per person per year for health care by 2015. That is not just swell.
We will need better land transport and now is the time to start building it. The high speed rail system on the drawing boards as part of an economic stimulus is a vital step in the right direction. More emphesis on education,both plant and systems is also prudent planning. These steps are also being proposed by the BHO administartion.
In short, we have a forward looking administration,attempting to put in place the kinds of policies and programs we will need in the rosey future you speak of and all we get from your politcal party is lies and obstruction. Stop it please.

Bills

One of the people in the audience asked about infrastructure. Most of the people in the room were and most agreed that we need to build and maintain our infrastructure. The discussion went to why we don’t do it.

Somebody pointed out that Fiorello Laguardia built the airport that used to carry his name in ten months. The Pentagon building was built in about that much time. Today we couldn’t get through the environmental impact statement in that amount of time.

They built a pedestrian overpass near my house. IT took years to plan and almost a year to build.

We just cannot seem to build anything quickly or inexpensively anymore.

I think about things you say and you seem very reasonable. I ask myself why I am so suspicious of enlarged Federal government. I think it is because it spends so much time with procedures and protecting the rights of the non-participants that it gets pretty much nothing done.

I have been calling for the government to get back to its core functions, do them right after that we can talk about expansion.

I am optimistic about the American nation, as I wrote in other places. We have to get the American government to do its appropriate duties. That would include more infrastructure and less redistribution.

I would add that many things can happen w/o overt government planning. The market provides a method for aggregating decentralized decisions. This does not function well in all situations, but works better than central planning for most things.

Christine,

You say we cannot build things quickly or inexpensively today. Nonsense.

No, we no longer build at 1930’s era prices. Are you willing to work at those wage rates?

Private buildings and structures are built quickly and often planned quickly.

Chain Restaurants are often built on 60 day schedules. It takes specialized crews to accomplish this seemingly impossible feat.

Public roads are often built with incentivised schedules that contractors complete way ahead of schedule.

You seem to suggest no one should worry about environmental impacts. Of course, failure to worry about such things has led to massive, expensive clean ups. Impact studies as you suggest are only required for massive, high impact projects. The impact studies of small projects are not outlandishly long. Why do you want to rush forward like an idiot?

This is the “ignorance attitude” that Republicans are selling to Americans. You display your complete ignorance of construction and engineering with your comment and then go on to poo poo people who actually know what they are talking about.

In your wallowing, stupid rant, you gripe about things from a pop cultural- instant gratification mindset. Most construction project work on fast schedules. It contains costs. Most construction workers commonly put in 12-16 hour days, to take advantage of good weather. Yeah, you might need to slow down for a year for a massive road project. Whine about it, while you drink your coffee in the comfort of your car looking at the workers trying to keep warm or sweating bullets. Try actually doing some work on one and then tell me how slow it is.

Are there any projects held up by controversy? Sure. Are there any projects in which conditions encountered weren’t anticipated or design errors are found? Sure. However, the vast majority of projects are on time, or ahead of time and on budget. The contractor’s and engineers that don’t deliver this, don’t build the next one.

Watching Sarah Palin speak was fascinating. She lies continuously and no one calls her on it. She and the Republican party apparently think so little of the electorate that they believe them to be completely ignorant. They are angry. And they aren’t as stupid as some seem to think. I am so sick of the elitist Republicans pretending they know anything about the way everyday Americans live or work. They clearly don’t have a clue.

Two notes.

Laguardia airport as built in Laguardia’s time couldn’t land a jet liner. Nor were there the issues of the large city and air traffic of today. BTW, wikipedia says it was built in 2 years…not 10 months. Construction began in 1937 and it was dedicated in 1939. Compare apples to apples.

The overpass you talked about likely was the subject of funding priorities. If you think that building your pedestrian overpass was the single most important project in your locale, then that again shows your completely tunnel like focus on your own particular selfish needs.

Designing it wasn’t likely the hold up.

Gergel
It seems that I offended you in a way I didn’t intend. If so, I apologize. I am not disparaging the workers or construction firms. I think the system in which they work has become dysfunctional.

I don’t use that overpass, BTW, but I have observed it being built and how it is “overengineered.” Speaking of my “tunnel vision” on that same highway there is an underpass, a tunnel actually, that I do use. I would not want to say too much about it, since I am convinced that they will close it down one of these days. It is not handicapped accessible and probably cannot be made so. There just is not enough room for ramps and making it wider would cost millions. In our quest for perfect solutions that satisfy every interest group, we have sacrificed the good of serving most people at reasonable cost.

You hit the nail on the head with your adjective “private”. Just as you and I can make faster and more effective decisions about our own back yard than can our HOA, private firms can be quicker than the cumbersome collective decision making by government.

We are often NOT talking about the true environmental problems in these disputes. There are groups waging “lawfare” to further their particular interests. We have all sorts of racial set-asides and special programs. If your pipes break, you can choose a plumber (if you can find one) based on how good a job he/she will do for the money. Government has to consider local racial make-up, women-owned firms, various types of registrations and regulations and all this has to be run through a large bureaucracy where lots of people can say “no” and hardly anybody can say “yes”.

Anyway, no matter what the reasons, it is clear that many large public project either don’t work at all or cost so much that we cannot afford them. I would like to return to a heroic age of infrastructure. How can we get there?

“Government has to consider local racial make-up, women-owned firms, various types of registrations and regulations and all this has to be run through a large bureaucracy where lots of people can say “no” and hardly anybody can say “yes”.”

This is because of a failure of the market Christine. We must remember who it is that actually designs and builds the projects,it is not the government it is the market. Because Contractors have resorted to monopolizing and excluding minorities and women in the past the government has had to step in to address the problem.
Because Contractors have cheated and defrauded owners and workers as well as other contractors rules have been put into place to deal with it because the market can’t or won’t. Because developers are concerned with their own profit, at the expense of others their development will impact, government must step in or chaos would result as the two sides duel it out in the courts or in the streets. It is the market shortcomings that cause this regulation.
As far as costs you must remember the costs of materials have skyrocketed as well as other incidentals such as insurance,cost of land, etc. .
To blame all of this on the government is short sighted and only serves to obfuscate the issue which is conservatives want the EPA done away with.

J&C,

Interesting article and fascinating topic.

400 million Americans in the next 40 years. Hmmm, while some may see that as a positive, there are some really huge downsides to these kind of growing population numbers, as well.

Government grows with the population. Those Tea Party folks wanting smaller government are ignorant of the correlation between population growth and the size of government. They love to quote the Constitution which they don’t understand in many ways, evidenced by their ignorance of the Census as the Constitutional prescription for the growth in the size of government commensurate with population growth.

In fact, the very design of our Constitution contemplated and anticipated the growth of both population and government together, providing for it in its very design, along with provisions for revising the Constitution itself as demographics and history unfolded.

I concur with your views on skilled vs. unskilled labor. But, would add that America will reap vastly greater dividends investing in the educational uplift of its own citizens rather than importing students from other nations to receive our education and then bribe them into keeping their educational accomplishments here in America rather than return to their homeland.

I disagree with your comment about technical vs. college education emphasis. The broad survey courses in history, economics, government, social sciences, and language make for more capable citizens and voters, with far reaching consequences throughout our society both today and in perpetuity, as parental education is for the most part transferred to some degree to progeny. In part, a parent’s educational advancement is in fact, education provided for at least two or more persons for the price of one, the parent and their offspring. It is compounding asset very much like interest on a long term loan. I therefore, believe it is a mistake of the highest order for America to invest in vocational schools which cut out the survey courses of the first 2 years of college.

That is not to say those survey courses can’t be reduced and compacted in scope for vocational schools and even individualized to some extent depending upon the literacy of the student. But, to train a person in circuit board drafting without also training them in history, government, and language arts, is to undermine democracy and the nation’s integrity going forward. As Adam Smith rightly points out, democracy depends directly for its success upon the breadth of education that promotes individuals making decisions according to ‘enlightened self-interest’ measures, as opposed to selfish or self-centered measures.

Also, the principles of Gandhi’s fight for independence, are as valid in America today, as they were in India under British rule. The concept of ‘untouchable’ for the upper classes breeds a dependence upon the lower classes which creates insecurity and promotes measures by the upper classes to enslave the lower classes so as to prevent revolt or insurrection, mostly likely imagined rather than a real potential. But, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy for revolt and insurrection, those upper class measures to insure their security from the lower classes.

This is the primary danger in a democracy attending enormous disparity in wealth distribution, especially if the rule of law is weakened and undermined by other cultural and social conditions. (See 21st century growth in secessionist movement rhetoric and organizations.)

Black and White, either / or, mode thinking will not get America where she needs to go. America needs to promote vastly greater self-sufficiency while at the same time investing in, and promoting, export technologies and products, if its labor force is not to devolve into a service economy in servitude to the top 2 or 3 percent of the wealthiest in America, which would be a recreation of the conditions of our own Revolutionary War prior to 1754. This is in part, happening today as citizens become animated about the transfer of their taxes to the wealthiest in the financial banking sector. A unifying sentiment amongst Tea Party followers.

Sarah Palin’s speech before the Tea Party convention in Tenn. however, is an example of the kind of either / or, thinking that can destroy America. She said: “We need a commander in chief not a professor of law standing at the lectern.”

What an idiotic statement. We have a person educated in the law in the White House as President, which requires an education in the law to administer faithfully, in a nation governed by the Rule of Law, and who also happens to BE the Commander in Chief elected by democratic and fair elections, and NOT at the cheap seat lectern which Palin stood at. Palin’s comment completely ignores the reality that Obama’s foreign policy has been assented to by those on the Right and Left; a remarkable accomplishment given the partisan vitriol in Congress today.

America needs complex, phased, and prioritized solutions to the mounting diversity and complexity of challenges facing our nation today, and moreso into the future. If however, as a people, we subscribe to the Black and White, either / or, divisionist and falsely premised rhetoric and solutions proffered by the likes of Sarah Palin, our nation will surely fall upon this sword fabricated by the ignorance and lack of educational investment of our own making.

For better or worse, our nation has evolved into a democratic nation while holding onto its Republic structure. Our entire private sector commercial markets are driven by polling and market research studies, and our politics driven by polling, public and private. That is by definition, a nation run by democracy, a polling of public sentiment and consumer choices. The people will not permit that democracy to be taken away from them without a civil war.

Therefore, it is absolutely essential that America invest in the best and broadest education possible for its citizenry so that that education can become part and parcel of a “more informed” public sentiment polled, which lies at the heart of Adam Smith’s definition of “enlightened self-interest”.

j2t2

When they started these programs forty or fifty years ago, some this made sense. But in the intervening time all sorts of special interests have grown up that just know how to milk the system.

We should hire those who can do the job best, regardless of race, gender or national origin. Or if you must to use race, gender etc, at least make the process more transparent.

The bottom line is that everybody know that a large project funded by the Feds will take a lot longer and cost a lot more than you could do on your own with similar goals and budgets.

I would love to see some large infrastructure projects or at least I would like to see the stuff we have already maintained.

I have noticed, BTW, that states often do a better job than the Feds and that some states do better than others in achieving goals and staying in budget. We might want to figure out what the good ones do and learn from them. In fact, there must be some kind of ratings published already.

David

What we care about is the size of government relative to the rest of the economy/nation.

But I do think that we will not be able to maintain a higher degree of centralized power. This is actually okay with me, but not all agree.

Re education - we can both import smart people and educate some of our own.

Re broad education - there is only so much that a person can take in. We are limited by the time in the day and by our own cognitive boundaries. Even really smart people like us cannot know everything and we also tend to have the human curse of forgetting.

For example, I used to know a lot about Gandhi and the situation in British India (as you mention). I still have some of the books, but I could no longer pass the written test. On the other hand, I know lots of new things that are more urgent and important in my life.

You know that our information rich society has created a poverty of attention and there is really nothing we can do about that.

I know that you are interested in Plato and I can see Plato in some of your comments. As you recall, Plato complained that at the assembly the ancient Athenians deferred to people with technical skills on technical matters but didn’t give the proper respect (in his opinion) to the proper education of the philosophers (I suppose today we would call them generalists). I think Plato was wrong about this. It is an elitist perspective that assumes a particular type of skill for the citizen.

I like the idea of a general education and insisted that my kids get well rounded before they could specialize. But I recognize that this is just not appropriate for everybody. Some people are just not interested and some are just not smart enough to keep the facts straight. Still others have other skills.

One size doesn’t fit all. We all have a variety of skills, which put together form a society. Our larger and more complex society will call for more diversity and decentralization. The government can guide and determine general directions, but it cannot micro-mange or determine outcomes in any detail.

I agree with decentralization and the sooner we can make the government decentralize the economy the sooner we can decentralize the government.

I have also changed my attitude in reguards to population growth. More people means more poverty, hunger and suffering, that is just a fact of life. But, fewer workers means less production, less growth and that would be disastrous for capitalism.

Christine said: “What we care about is the size of government relative to the rest of the economy/nation. “

Why? What has size of government got to do with anything, unless it be the size required to meet the needs of the people of the nation?

Those concerned with size reminds me that our government is dominated by men who have a preoccupation with size.

Consider cutting the size of government in half, tomorrow. That would of necessity make paupers of a hundred million Americans withing months. What would happen to our economy if 100 million consumers were removed from the consuming economy? It would collapse, and deficits would climb and our debt would be defaulted upon.

Conservatives mantra about the size of government is an ideological view accepted without question. Question IT ! What would be cut which would not impair the viability of the future?

There are certainly aspects of the federal government’s services which can be cut, but every such cut will engender opportunity costs. Cut NASA. It provides few benefits to the American people directly. However, should an asteroid heading for earth go undetected due to cutting NASA from the federal budget, the human race might well wish in their last breath they hadn’t allowed the NASA agency to be cut. That is but one of myriad examples of the consequences to be addressed and debated over downsizing the government.

There is so much consensus amongst public interest groups about cutting the size of government. But, when you query these same people about what to cut, that consensus drops away dramatically, like the woman who famously said, I don’t want this socialized Health Care reform bill and I don’t want you touching my Medicare.

Every one, including Democrats, especially Democrats now in control, understand the absolute necessity of driving down the future costs incurred by current law of our government. Our nation bankrupts otherwise. Finding consensus about which group of Americans will have to suffer those cuts, however, is the challenge.

Republicans co-signed a bill to establish a commission to address this very specific issue. When it came to a vote however, after Obama said he approved of it, 7 Republicans who originally co-authored the bill, refused to vote for it. As clear a case of putting partisan politics ahead of the needs of the nation and the people, as I have ever witnessed. The bill failed to pass, by the same number of votes as the Republicans who voted no on it.

Republicans, NOT Democrats, are preventing this country from reducing the size and cost of this government going forward. Democrats are for it, which causes Republicans to vote against it. It just doesn’t get any plainer or more obvious than this.

Christine,

You did not offend me. What bothered me was the ignorance of your post, and the apparent belief, on your part, that there is some magic solution.

This magical thinking is part and parcel of Republican and Conservative group think that is bent on destroying America. The theme of ignorance superceding thoughtful process is horrific.

Not having to deal with “special interests” like pollution and the handicapped in a large complex democratic republic such as ours is simply wishful thinking and boorish. These additional “costs” are minimal with long term benefits to our society. This is the same stupidity that thinks not dealing with healthcare costs will solve our economic woes. It is a belief that this amounts to give-aways to some special group rather than the well thought out idea that it benefits us all, as people, and financially.

Yes. Government deals with large issues and takes more time than a small development company to act. Much like a large corporation takes longer than a mom and pop operation. It isn’t magic or some mysterious evil. Only poor analytical skills could lead one to such a conclusion, or a perverse interest in advancing a political theme.

BTW the people that “milk” the system are large outfits that set up phony “minority” operations to attempt to game the system. But you know what? This usually leads to real opportunity for minorities anyway.

jlw,

But, fewer workers means less production, less growth and that would be disastrous for capitalism.

Not necessarily. For years there were predictions about world hunger, but advancements in crop production has outpaced population growth. Sure there are still problems with distribution, but not a problem of underproduction.

I am with you that increased population is generally not a good thing.

jlw, your comment alludes to a belief that perpetual economic growth is both possible and desirable. Have you considered the possibility that a balanced economy on average, which neither grows nor shrinks but is self-sustaining, accompanied by a population which neither grows nor shrinks on average, over decades and even centuries, may be the objective sought after?

In economic Ph.D. circles, as well as political circles, this idea is considered heresy, not to be mentioned, let alone debated. Why? I ask. No answer. It is not to be debated or discussed.

I will continue to ask and be the heretic.

gergle said: “Sure there are still problems with distribution, but not a problem of underproduction.”

That may not remain the case with global climate change. The amount of arid land in the world is increasing, and the amount of arable land decreasing. If that trend continues, there will be a tipping point at which productive innovation will become too expensive to maintain and perpetuate over the arable soil based food production. Which will dramatically exacerbate the distribution problems as a result of driving food costs beyond consumers’ reach.

BTW,

Over-engineering, is a common complaint made by those who don’t know what they are talking about.

As someone who works in engineering, most civil engineering standards are rather plain and easy to understand for those that work with them.

They involve safety issues and durability issues that are usually well understood.

Under-engineering is an invitation to lawsuits, bankruptcy and even jail, if someone is killed due to such a stupid mistake…like a pedestrian bridge that failed in a hotel in Kansas that killed several people during a party.

Exterior pedestrian bridges now have to have large scale fencing to prevent idiots from jumping or throwing things at people below them, in many urban settings. They may have to account for morons with tall loads from collapsing them on top of freeways full of cars.

There are always lots of geniuses shouting comments about construction that I find fascinating. One guy once told me that we should build roads like railroads. I asked if he meant that we should jack up the pavement and place ballast or timbers under them. He looked confused.

I guess it’s something that looks easier than it is.

David,

True, but costs have a way of shifting priorities.

BTW, I agree steady state population and economies make a great deal of sense.

gergle, engineering of the tried and true, will still fail if prescribed maintenance is not followed through on. That is the problem America faces now with its infrastructure.

Engineering new techniques and designs however, always presents an element of risk, since, all the variables that may affect the integrity of the design cannot be guaranteed to be taken into account. The Hyatt’s balcony collapse in K.C. Mo, for example at the Tea Party which saw the balcony filled to capacity with human bodies all swaying and tamping feet to the beat of the music below.

The concept of over-engineering is primarily and accountants term. Ideally, and engineer will design against all possible events and variables, even remote ones. The Accountant however, will nix the project if it becomes too expensive, so the first thing to go, is design elements addressing remote contingencies, like a Tsunami which hasn’t occurred in 100 years, or massive earthquakes or vulcanism which haven’t been recorded in a very long time.

One of the most recent events where we see this accounting concept of over-engineering imposed was the levees in New Orleans. The eventuality of such an event as Katrina was a mathematical certainty to occur some day. When could not be answered, and costs being what they were, that contingency was excluded from the engineering designs.

Under-engineering is one of the primary causes of engineering failures. Which raises the question of whether Engineers have an ethical obligation to inform the public or oversight organizations if their design will fail to meet the known needs of all potential contingencies regardless of how small the probability.

Building codes and regulations go a very long way to insure the integrity of the designs of the commonplace types of construction. But, with them, comes a loss of choice and freedom of the buyer of engineered plans to assume the risk of a lesser design. Insurance of course, is the primary driver of such loss of freedom by the purchaser of engineered designs, not government as many posit.

gergle said: “BTW, I agree steady state population and economies make a great deal of sense.”

You should run for office. No one else in government thinks it does.

If Republican happy-talk about the economy was correct, we’d be celebrating the one year anniversary of the McCain Presidency. Truth of the matter is, Republicans always say that the market can take care of itself.

But it can’t. The market is more than just a bunch of people buying and selling, it’s people buying and selling within a set of rules that keep those transactions fair, honest, and within the bounds of human decency. Sometimes the market does regulate itself, and government doesn’t need to step in. Unfortunately, the Republicans have gotten radically dead set against the idea of government policing business, and the results should be obvious.

I mean, we have to ask the question: if not even the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression merits the intervention of government in business affairs, then what does merit it? The Republicans seem to be blithely intent on maintaining the status quo, even as the damage it’s done over the decade clearly shows that substantial modifications are in order.

I would tell you folks right here and now that Republicans are still making the same mistakes they were making before they got kicked out, and if they think that the American people can be talked out of kicking them out again, they’re taking the kind of gamble with their party’s future that I wouldn’t have the taste for risking self-destruction to make myself.

Gergle

You are right that I am not an engineer. Maybe I misused the term “over engineered.” What I mean to say is that we keep on adding requirements to address low probability events and to solve problems that rarely happen.

There is a cost and benefit. Let me take my bridge example. When I lived in Europe, they had lots of pedestrian bridges. Few would live up to current American standards. Most had stairs and/or steep ramps. They were narrow etc. Our new bridge is better. But we don’t have many. Yet there are many streets that are dangerous. I have seen the aftermath of several pedestrian accidents on a busy road near my house. Maybe the new bridge allows the occasional handicapped pedestrian easier access. The lack of such a bridge has created several more handicapped folks.

We should do the things that are appropriate. That doesn’t always have to mean the top of the line or appealing to everybody. Unfortunately, that is what government demands, at least in theory.

Government is a binary system. It cannot allow for the variations and nuances. That is the weakness of government.

Gergle

I don’t think there are magic solutions to anything. I think we have to set up systems that over time produce results we like and sometimes when we go at things in what seems a direct fashion it ends up doing something we don’t want.

Re minority set-asides – those were perhaps a good idea, but we have to be careful with anything that is based on racial categories. They tend to allow people to game the system and set up permanent interest groups. (My second cousin “became” a Native American after he figured out a way to make it stick. He says our great grandmother was part Native American. We never thought that was true and had no obvious connections. On the other hand, my brother in law (C’s sister’s husband) who traces his ancestry back to the Spanish who settled New Mexico refuses to call himself “Hispanic”. ) The end may sometimes justify the means, but some processes are so corrupt that they so compromise the end that they are counterproductive. Using racism to fight racism may be one of those instances.

You may recall that the first American quotas in universities were aimed at limiting the number of Jews, since they were “disproportionately represented” and current affirmative action programs tend to be de-facto aimed as Asians.

David & Gergle

Re engineering. It is a matter of choices. We cannot account for all theoretical permutations. And we certainly cannot afford all of them. I might prefer a brand new BMW. I can afford a used Honda. It is appropriate to most of my needs, but if somebody else was paying for it would I demand a BMW.

We don’t have limitless resources. Things will never be good enough by abstract standards. The old but true cliché is that the perfect is the enemy of the good.

Most people who have been to Paris or Vienna like them. They like the little restaurants and the winding streets. None of the pleasant European central cities would pass American building codes. The set-backs, for example require our streets to be wide. They don’t allow us to build those little coffee shops in cellars. Yes, we are much better off not having the kinds of things we can only find in Vienna or Paris, but not in a modern American city.

Let me get into the Katrina levees – some of them should never have been built at all. Much of that below grade land should have been left in its semi-natural or natural state. Cypress swamp is better than rebuilding the 9th Ward.

David

I simply mean that the size of the government matters in the size of nation. Obviously, a nation of 3 million cannot have a government of three million and a country of 300 million might need something bigger. I don’t understand how you view this sensible generalization as ideology.

I don’t even argue about cutting the size of our government. I want it to work on its core functions and not grow into things it cannot reasonably or efficiently handle.

Re NASA – I have always liked NASA. Didn’t I hear that Obama has cut the manned space program?

Stephen

One of the things I find unappealing about liberals is their evident need to find terrible things to worry about. The fact is that you are always right. Nothing lasts forever. Everything fails. All of our human arrangements are temporary fixes. Some people understand the dynamic and learn to create the best possible outcomes. Others just think it is terrible not to have a perfect outcome. They try to create utopias on earth. They have yet to succeed and the harder they try the more people get hurt.

David,

Engineering new techniques and designs however, always presents an element of risk, since, all the variables that may affect the integrity of the design cannot be guaranteed to be taken into account. The Hyatt’s balcony collapse in K.C. Mo, for example at the Tea Party which saw the balcony filled to capacity with human bodies all swaying and tamping feet to the beat of the music below.

Umm, yes they can. That’s what engineer’s were paid to do. There was a problem with the design capacities used, the design of some welded and bolted connections, and also field changes made by the contractor. These errors combined to kill some people. That’s why fines, and license revocations were meted out. I thought there was also criminal negligence, but wikipedia does not mention it.

As someone who does inspections, I am always aware of the consequence of failing to build something to code, or plans. It is very common for issues to arise. It is imperative that the design engineer be involved in any design changes. A common saying is you don’t get too worried about structures on the ground. The worst that can happen is it cracks and looks ugly. When you are dealing with something over someone’s head, you get very cautious.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_walkway_collapse

Granted sometimes new technologies are based on bad data, such as the famous Tacoma Narrows bridge.

J&C said “We should hire those who can do the job best, regardless of race, gender or national origin. Or if you must to use race, gender etc, at least make the process more transparent.”

Define “best job” guys. Doe sit mean at the lowest cost, at the highest quality, for the largest profit, or some combination of the above? This “there can be only one” attitude actually costs money when their is only one contractor left standing that is qualified to do the job. Most times government jobs are low bid jobs and upfront they qualify the % of minority/women owned contractor involvement prior to bid. How much more transparency do you think is necessary? Many times the Contractor and subcontractors must be pre-qualified to be able to bid the job, so the best job can be done by more than one contractor but not all of them always get the chance to prove it.

“The bottom line is that everybody know that a large project funded by the Feds will take a lot longer and cost a lot more than you could do on your own with similar goals and budgets.”

You guys are comparing apples and oranges. The projects I was involved with were primarily 50 years buildings. The private sector doesn’t have that need and have many options not available to the public sector when it comes to hiring contractors to get the work done. The quality level usually shows. As an example would your local Wal Mart be required to be used as an emergency shelter perhaps the cost would rise. Wal Mart can also hire contractors without a bid process do you really want the government to do the same?

J&C after dealing with the feds, as well as state and local governments the past 20 plus years I have to disagree with your blanket statement that government is the problem.

gergle said: “Umm, yes they can. That’s what engineer’s were paid to do.”

That may be what they are paid to do by non-engineer architects and designers, but, engineers KNOW that they can’t anticipate all variables that may eventually affect their constructed design. Are you not familiar with the Hyatt skywalk collapse back in the 1980’s I think it was. What engineer could anticipate future Tea Dances (not Party, as I mistakenly referred to it before) rhythmically moving an overloaded skywalk, designed not as a dance floor but as pedestrian thoroughfare. Bottom line, they couldn’t and didn’t. The fact that they didn’t was found to be cause for legal suits in large sums. But, the reality remains, future uses and circumstances cannot always be anticipated, and future violations of design limitations cannot be affordably designed against, as the accountant will attest.

That requires being able to see into the future, and engineers (and accountants for that matter) are only trained to make educated guesses about the future, not guarantee it. If the latter were the case, I assure you most would be stock market investors and brokers, and not engineers and accountants.

That is in the Engineering 001 Physics manual. All variables can never be known. Are you not familiar chaos theory or the “butterfly effect”?

If you are in engineering, you should be familiar with these.

j2t2

The best job would be defined by the priorities and criteria. Ideally, you would choose the contractor w/o knowing anything about the race or gender of the owners or mangers.

You have more particular experience in contracting than I do. But I can see that the costs are higher and the time spent has been growing.

Let me be clear that government has definite roles. But the government record is not very good in the area of actually providing services - instead of creating conditions where others can provide them.

We always point at the other guy. I know Democrats like to point to Katrina. But you may recall that firms like Home Depot and Walmart managed to get good to the affected regions faster and better.

There was a big snow storm in Washington on Friday. The Government already announced that it is closed tomorrow. Private businesses are mostly open today.

David

I agree that we cannot figure out all the permutations. In fact, I was writing a post about that very thing.

David,

Umm, guess you didn’t read the wiki.

Please read the link.

This is why you engineer safety factors to include being loaded with way too many people stomping in a dynamic matter.

Their original design mistakenly only carried 60% of the code requirements.

The field change reduced that further to 30%.

Typically, safety factors of 3 or higher are used, but if you don’t calculate the loads correctly, that doesn’t do much good.

The new design they approved, was a classic shearing design mistake.(It actually overloaded the nut) The reason you always refer changes to the design engineer is that they are supposed to be familiar with the loads involved. Somebody got lazy here.

>Although many people were on the walkway when it collapsed, the actual load was still much less than the code mandated capacity for the system (Levy and Salvadori, 1992

>Also, the high number of fatalities resulting from the walkway’s collapse raises the questions of whether the factor of safety required for a building should be proportional to the possible consequences of it collapse (Kaminetzky, 1991).

maybe a better link:

http://matdl.org/failurecases/Building%20Cases/Hyatt.htm

gergle said: “This is why you engineer safety factors to include being loaded with way too many people stomping in a dynamic matter.”

Nonsense. Engineers add safety factors for unusual loading they can anticipate and are aware of. The future always holds variables which ARE NOT evident in the present. Again, read up on chaos theory and the “butterfly effect”.

I rest my case.

Christine,

I agree that we cannot figure out all the permutations. In fact, I was writing a post about that very thing.

Nonsense, again.

This is engineering not theoretical physics.

The Hyatt Regency was a DESIGN FAILURE coupled with construction issues. It did not meet building code standards.

No design can withstand ANYTHING. There is always a trade-off for reasonable circumstances. The issue of the WTC is such a case. A sustained high intensity jet fuel fire in those buildings was not accounted for in the design.

Your statement is the same kind of wonderment expressed as proof that intelligent design exists.
oooh, it’s so pretty and complicated! Proof that God exists!

This kind of fuzzy thinking makes me nuts.

Engineering is a defined science, with defined parameters. It can be very complex, but it is not beyond comprehension. They actually can figure ALL the permutations. That is their job.

Again, this doesn’t mean you design everything to withstand a nuclear blast.

Christine-
One of the things I find unappealing about Republicans is their continued unwillingness to confront terrible things that should be worried about.

At the end of the Bush Administration, we had two wars that the Bush Administration had turned interminable. A little something to worry about, no?

At the end of the Bush Administration, we had, with the cost of those two wars factored in as a budget item, well over a trillion dollars overdrafted on the budget. Something to worry about, you’d agree, since you’ve been bashing Obama about it?

At the end of the Bush Administration, we had one of the worst economic collapses in modern American history, even worse than that of the Seventies and eighties, by which all others are measured by most alive.

We have a clear and present danger to our climate being pointed to by our best climate scientists, which the Bush Administration chose to ignore.

We are still dealing with the aftermath of Katrina, and now other disasters as well.

The question is not why Democrats worry so much, it’s why your people choose to be so damn oblivious to all this!

You wonder what got you kicked out?

America, regardless of the party, wants people to start getting down to business and taking care of it, so that the last lost decade’s worth of failures do not continue, or repeat with their terrible frequency. If the Republicans are not up to that, if people like you fail to push them to move past the obsessively dogmatic policies of your party towards a responsible kind of governance, then your party is going to continue to slide downhill as it takes the wrong side of the issues Americans want resolved.

For my part, my people are fighting tooth and nail to drag their people to responsibly handle their duties. Democrats are not just sitting around waiting for some utopia in the future to appear. As bad as the Senate bill is in many’s eyes, Democrats across the spectrum are pushing for it to be passed.

Screw utopia. Most Democrats I know want better government, a nation that’s not falling apart at the seems while Washington does your beloved political manuevering. And let me tell you: until the folks in Washington start heeding America’s cries for help, it’s exhortations to action, nobody’s job will be secure.

BTW, did the engineers anticipate the snow loads about to hit portions of the NE as the second snow storm moves through Tuesday and Wednesday? Obviously not! The collapse of roofs have already begun.

Whether it be the accountant or the engineer, all future variables cannot be known, and even if they could be, they all cannot be afforded. Economics is the study of allocation of limited resources amidst infinite demand for them. Ergo, engineers will of necessity of economics, not design projects to withstand all possible future events.

Sorry, now I rest my case. :-)

Christine-
Maybe I can put it more succinctly for you: Americans are tired of government by excuse. They are tired of seeing special interests get whatever they want, while they go hungry, lose their health, their retirement savings, their jobs and so much more.

Americans don’t want another explanation of why government can’t or shouldn’t intervene. Whether its big or small, America wants the government to govern, and govern well. If it’s not going to govern well small, Americans are not going to settle for small government anymore.

And let me tell you, Americans are not going to wait until the political situation is to your party’s liking to start asking more from it’s government. If I were the Republicans, I would let the Democrats clean up all the messes, get everything squared away, and then turn around and try to sell people on smaller government, because at that point you’re running far smaller of a risk of having some responsbility you actually have to take care of, which Americans won’t accept an excuse for.

David,

No, wrong again. They design to meet building codes.

Building codes are based on historical events and agreed reasonable standards.

Apparently, you can’t read that the Hyatt Design did not meet code. It wasn’t about an unanticipated Tea Party load.

You may rest your case, but the judge ruled against you. You are confusing infinity with finite quantities.

David,

In Sweden they do. In the Netherlands they build levees to withstand storms bigger than Katrina.

Not everything is built to withstand everything.

That would be over designing.

My house wouldn’t withstand large snow storms or large storm surges, but I don’t live in Maine or on the coast.

If a tornado turns my house into sticks, it isn’t a design fault. It isn’t designed to withstand such a thing.

So, I object and find the witness hostile:)

Now the saints winning is an unanticipated event!! Who dat?

Stephen

Well stated and back at you - And let me tell you, Americans are not going to wait until the political situation is to your party’s liking to start asking more from it’s government.

You guys are in charge. Do something.

Gergle

I believe in evolution. That explains a lot. I think you are going for the intelligent design. I understand that no human intelligence can anticipate all future changes and even when they can, they have to make trade-offs.

Would you add costly design features to your house that would let it resist a 100 year flood? I depends on how much it costs.

Re Katrina - it is stupid to build levees to protect below sea level areas at the cost of environmental health. Just because we can doesn’t mean we should. Isn’t it a bit smarter just to move up the hill?

The Netherlands has fewer options, so they build polders in back of dikes because they have no place else to go. But even they are abandoning some of these.

IMO much of this levee building is an example of human arrogance in the face of nature. We should rethink that one. It doesn’t make much sense to spend a million dollars to save a piece of property that is worth 100K with a house on it and would be better off supporting only trees and alligators.

C&J
The Feds will work high speed rail constuction the same way we built the interstate highway system,you know ,that stimulus implimented by that arch socialist,Dwight Eisenhower.It is still paying huge economic dividends and opened up huge ares of the country to economic developement.
Back to the point. The Feds,in cooperation with state and local governments selected the routes. That process itself takes a lot of time, but needs to be done. Townhall meetings about whether the highway should go through town etc. The feds also set the specifications,a demanding but necessary process that has to not only take into account local physical conditions but also political desires and enviormental aspects. Contractors need to be qualified. You would not want a contractor working for you with a history of shoddy work unlawful behavior would you?Shouldn’t you be assured they have enough capital to complete the project? Takes time. Over-engineered? Unless one has a crystal ball that is a shaky statement. Because something “seems” overbuilt for every day use does not mean the structure will not face severe loads another time and that is what you must design for. I liked the Roman road standard, the highways should last forever.
The interstate system,after all that, was built by private companies. Had the whole thing been set up privately, there would be thousands of toll boothes we would have to stop at we would still have had to go through the original process and still have to employ a government agency to oversee maintenence.
There are times when things do get silly. I recall one job where we had to have a full time ecoligist on site to make sure we didn’t step on any red legged bullfrogs because they were endangered. Thing is they weren’t endangered,they were extinct,at least where the project was. Not one was spotted in the 8 months we were there. A private project BTW.
Another time,on a local agency job I was informed that I was now working for a company I had never heard of. For three weeks my paychecks came from this new company. Seems this mystery company was minority owned. Their whole business consisted of issuing paychecks to client contractor’s employees for the purpose of compliance. They didn’t build anything.

Bills

I don’t think the Feds can do it this time. Too much has changed. You know that they couldn’t even finish the Interstate when they began to run into opposition.

Some of the opposition made sense, BTW. The Interstates sometimes cut up cities and drained the vitality from cities. Every big thing comes with downsides.

I appreciate your stories, BTW.

Christine-
Let something be done. Stop standing as a party to make sure nothing gets done. Given the fact that you now officially have broken the sixty seat “filibuster proof” majority, that’s the only way anything will get done in the Senate worth speaking of.

One of you will have to stand up to your party in the Senate. One of you will have to be the filibuster breaker, or You’ll never truly be able to accuse the Democrats of sabotaging the legislative agenda all by themselves.

There’s a joke in the trailer for the movie Kick-Ass that plays off of the classic Spider-Man line: With No Power comes no responsibility.

The Republicans had a nice time blaming a lack of Democratic Party unity for our problems. But now they have at least one person between the Democrats and their ability to get anything done, the ball is back in your court.

This will be the God-forsaken, ****ed up way that the government gets run so long as Republicans insist on making everything come to a sixty vote threshold in order not to die in the Senate. Either one party gets blamed for not being unified enough to pass something, or the other party gets blamed for being an eternal roadblock.

Has it occured to you that NOBODY profits from this in the long run? It’s a cheap, irresponsible way to run a government.

Maybe you don’t think the Senate has something more important to do, but I think it does.

Stephen

Maybe if Democratic proposals were better they could get somebody else to go along. As I read it, they cannot even get 51 Democrats.

Here are some good proposals. Maybe Democrats can steal a few and pick up some more votes.

Christine
No thank you. I think we will leave sacking Social Security to the Republicans.I think we might pass on creating a huge direct federal subsidy for for health insurance companies also. Hmmm…I kind think we will have to pass on eliminating the home mortgage interest deduction and tax credits for charitable contributions. We will let you guys do that.

Bills

I read that President Obama proposes holding health care debates on C-Span (this is a NEW proposal, BTW. I am not making fun of his earlier transgression). If they really do this, we will have a chance to air all the best proposals and see what people think of them.

Christine
So long as its just talk and nobody actually does anything I guess we will be alright.Sorry,I am so cynical these days after a sensible but moderate plan was bushwhacked by lies and fear tactics.I am sure we will hear lots about tort reform even though the 9 states that limited amounts in malpractice awards show no cost savings in health care . Proven to not work, but we will hear it anyway.

Bills

It was not that moderate a plan. It didn’t do anything to limit the growth of cost it just moved around who pays.

Re lawsuits - if it doesn’t matter, maybe Democrats should just give this one, call the Republican bluff.

Christine-
You say we can’t get fifty-one votes on a measure, but I don’t think you can get fifty-one on that budget, EVER.

There was a reason that Republicans tried to use Medicare fears against the Democrats with the HCR controversy: touching Medicare is politically unpopular.

How could your leaders be so stupid as to pursue this, then? Their alternative is no alternative a majority of Americans would back. They’re just trying to look good to a bunch of people who think you can lower deficits by lowering taxes, and doing nothing about spending.

Stephen

When you can get 51 votes, then you can complain about Republicans. As it stands right now, Democrats cannot pass their bills. A Republican filibuster is not in the equation. Until Democrats agree, it is a kind of Democratic civil war.

President Obama has promised again to put the negotiations on C-span. I don’t believe him, but if he does it in good faith, maybe we can improve on that Democratic plan together.