Some jobs have daily productivity caps, usually the ones that require intellectual engagement. I think the truth is that we aren't losing a lot. I have a bit of a social theory as to what these things are. Society is not, in fact, desperately losing dollars because these things don't exist. These are all not economically desperate. I think the truth is we're having trouble accounting for the real economic gain that comes from these projects. So now comes the real question: do we have a real value proposition? I think not.
And given the right incentive, we know how to solve the problem. So given a clear value proposition, we know how to construct the right kind of incentive. The interchange was up, it lasted, and it did the trick. Final payout: $5.9 million, $900k for the job, $5m for finishing fast. How fast does it get done? Half the time, 25 days of bonus.
They always know they can beat the timelines. That's how you know you've done it right, every contractor in the room knows they can do it faster. Caltrans is good at the paperwork (you gotta be in California) so they do it: $5.2 million is what it's gonna take, and it's gonna take all the days until June 27.įirst bid opens: $1.1 million. Usually what you do when you get bids is you don't want any fakers who bid low and then hold you to ransom. My friend's a contractor so I asked him for some details.
For each day after June 27 that it hasn't come up yet, the contractor loses $200k. For each day before June 27 that that interchange is fully functioning, the contractor gets $200k. How would it set the incentives if it was operating optimally? It would set up a speedy completion prize, a guarantee prize. If you live here, as I assume you do, you know this is a monstrous clusterfuck.Įconomic loss? $6 million / day. Look at that, I-580 collapsed onto I-880. Then I decided to see if any projects got done really fast. Like the institutional knowledge is entirely gone. Once upon a time I used to think it was because Americans just don't know how to build any more. I think they stopped doing that after a while, thankfully. As in any other city, motorists complained about the loss of lanes, so to “fix” things, the local authorities started letting private automobiles use the BRT lanes when the car lanes were too congested, defeating the whole point of building BRT. They wound up delaying construction to the point where the government dropped the maglev idea and went with conventional high-speed rail, which did not exist in China when the Shanghai maglev opened, but did exist elsewhere in the country by the time construction on the Shanghai-Hangzhou HSR started, thanks in part to the delays caused by the anti-maglev opposition.Īnother example of the authorities bowing to public pressure that comes to mind is Guangzhou’s BRT (which is much better than our Van Ness BRT, both in terms of size and quality). However, there was opposition from residents living near the proposed line, who were concerned about the maglev causing cancer (or something like that). The Shanghai airport maglev is essentially a proof-of-concept that goes nowhere, but there were plans at one stage to extend the line to the city of Hangzhou. While it’s true that when push comes to shove, the government has its way, they do listen to public concerns at times.