The fiasco that is the Oakland Bay Bridge Span just keeps on getting better.

[Humpy]

In this case, that might have been a better option.

Agreed. There is really no excuse for the screw ups. It wasn't (or didn't need to be) a particularly large or complex project.

 

[werepossum]

He's trying to cherrypick an argument and doing a lousy job of it so I helped him out some. The problem is that many others who are more competent have already gone over the data and concluded that despite a wiggle here and a niggle there, those wiggles and niggles don't add up to enough money to change the overall conclusion: in general blue states contribute more to the feds than red states (net).

Not every blue state is a giver and not every red state is a taker. These are generalities.

Specifically, though, CA has been a giver for many, MANY years and that's why cabri's implying that CA asks for "handouts" was so insulting. Hey, as a CA resident I don't mind helping out those in other states, but those people need to stop saying misleading shit about how CA is a taker state. It's not. You'd think common sense would tell you so (hello Silicon Valley, the GLOBAL-scale wealth generation machine.. and CA has other industries too like movies/music/TV, aerospace defense, tourism; it's also an international trade hub thanks to its location along the Pacific Rim and its large ports and airports).




Cabri posted clarification of what he meant, while I was posting the above... but even with his clarification, it's not like CA is the only state that gets FEMA funding. Where do you think money comes from after big hurricanes in the south for instance? And do you think that CA is the only state that wastes money on infrastructure projects (regardless of funding source)?

I'll accept that it's possible CA wastes more money that other states on an absolute numbers basis (we make more money and waste more money due to being the most populous state). If you look at per-capita waste, though, I wouldn't be surprised if there are many other states that waste just as much or more money per resident on infrastructure or other projects. You just don't hear about them as much because they are smaller-scale: not as many zeroes at the end of the bill.

Also let's not look at only the projects gone wrong. There are projects that go right, too (note that this was CA money, contradicting your narrative that when CA money is used, work does not get done): http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/A-MAZE-ING-His-reputation-on-the-line-2592154.php

Finally, although you say that money transfers between states was not what you were talking about, it's very related. CA pays way more into the feds than many other states. So complaining whenever CA gets FEMA or other federal funds to build infrastructure, is kind of petty when a lot of that money came from CA in the first place. Think of it as CA taking back some of its overpayment to Uncle Sam. And remember that other states ALSO take federal funds after disasters, too.

Just to clarify Cabri's clarification, I think his point is simply that California needs adult supervision. When the federal government drives the project, it gets done in an acceptable manner within an acceptable time frame. Left to its own devices, California either doesn't get the job done in an acceptable manner or doesn't get the job done within an acceptable time frame, or both. That's not an argument for or against California getting federal money, it's just an observation that California political leadership has maybe too many clowns stuffed into too few clown cars, all of which can only turn left.

 

[blastingcap]

Just to clarify Cabri's clarification, I think his point is simply that California needs adult supervision. When the federal government drives the project, it gets done in an acceptable manner within an acceptable time frame. Left to its own devices, California either doesn't get the job done in an acceptable manner or doesn't get the job done within an acceptable time frame, or both. That's not an argument for or against California getting federal money, it's just an observation that California political leadership has maybe too many clowns stuffed into too few clown cars, all of which can only turn left.

I'm more worried about CA's ridiculous water rights, frankly. I also suspect that CA isn't particularly bad compared to other states when it comes to building and contracting incompetence, but I'm open to stats proving otherwise.

 

[Drako]

"Wasting" money is better than wasting human potential.

Not wasting money is better than wasting money.

 

[rudeguy]

I'm more worried about CA's ridiculous water rights, frankly. I also suspect that CA isn't particularly bad compared to other states when it comes to building and contracting incompetence, but I'm open to stats proving otherwise.

I dont disagree but I do think that it's likely their projects have a higher cost than other states. A bridge here in Michigan isn't going to need to support the amount of traffic a bridge in California does, same with a highway or a sidewalk.

However we structure projects so the contractor gets paid more for being under budget and ahead of schedule. The companies that did a major project here not long ago came out with HUGE bonuses because of that. Even a stupid contractor would take 100% profit bonus.

 

[blastingcap]

I dont disagree but I do think that it's likely their projects have a higher cost than other states. A bridge here in Michigan isn't going to need to support the amount of traffic a bridge in California does, same with a highway or a sidewalk.

However we structure projects so the contractor gets paid more for being under budget and ahead of schedule. The companies that did a major project here not long ago came out with HUGE bonuses because of that. Even a stupid contractor would take 100% profit bonus.

Yeah I think CalTrans moved to that system too; for instance that news story I linked to above had incentives for earlier completion. That news article wasn't the greatest summary so here's the wikipedia summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacArthur_Maze#Rebuilding

A contractor with a proven track record of rebuilding damaged freeways (most notably the Santa Monica Freeway after the 1994 Northridge Earthquake) well ahead of schedule, C. C. Myers, Inc., submitted a winning bid of $876,075 to repair the damage to the I-580 connector. The bid was estimated to cover only one-third of the cost of the work, but the firm counted on making up the shortfall with an incentive of $200,000 per day if the work was completed before June 27, 2007.[17]

On the evening of Thursday, May 24, the I-580 connector re-opened, just before the busy Memorial Day weekend. The deadline to finish the project was beaten by over a month, with the contractor earning the $5 million bonus for early completion.[18] The entire reconstruction project was completed only 26 days after the original accident.

A state projection concluded that the connector collapse had cost $90 million, based on a $6 million per day economic impact estimate. This includes a $491,000 loss in toll revenue for the Oakland Bay Bridge.[19]

As an aside, I forgot about CA's CEQA/environmental regulations; I bet those add to project complexity too. They wouldn't by themselves make a project go bad, but the more complex something is, the more things can slip through the cracks or get miscalculated.

The Bay Bridge was a giant mess, no doubt about that, I am definitely not saying CalTrans is infallible. I'm just skeptical that waste doesn't go on in other states, either. Maybe CA is less efficient; I don't know. I am open to seeing statistics about which states waste the least money on construction boondoggles.

 

[Sonikku]

See our Hot Deals thread on $18 watches for an idea of how made in China holds up.

 

[rudeguy]

Yeah I think CalTrans moved to that system too; for instance that news story I linked to above had incentives for earlier completion. That news article wasn't the greatest summary so here's the wikipedia summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacArthur_Maze#Rebuilding

A contractor with a proven track record of rebuilding damaged freeways (most notably the Santa Monica Freeway after the 1994 Northridge Earthquake) well ahead of schedule, C. C. Myers, Inc., submitted a winning bid of $876,075 to repair the damage to the I-580 connector. The bid was estimated to cover only one-third of the cost of the work, but the firm counted on making up the shortfall with an incentive of $200,000 per day if the work was completed before June 27, 2007.[17]

On the evening of Thursday, May 24, the I-580 connector re-opened, just before the busy Memorial Day weekend. The deadline to finish the project was beaten by over a month, with the contractor earning the $5 million bonus for early completion.[18] The entire reconstruction project was completed only 26 days after the original accident.

A state projection concluded that the connector collapse had cost $90 million, based on a $6 million per day economic impact estimate. This includes a $491,000 loss in toll revenue for the Oakland Bay Bridge.[19]

As an aside, I forgot about CA's CEQA/environmental regulations; I bet those add to project complexity too. They wouldn't by themselves make a project go bad, but the more complex something is, the more things can slip through the cracks or get miscalculated.

The Bay Bridge was a giant mess, no doubt about that, I am definitely not saying CalTrans is infallible. I'm just skeptical that waste doesn't go on in other states, either. Maybe CA is less efficient; I don't know. I am open to seeing statistics about which states waste the least money on construction boondoggles.

Thanks for that link. I never thought of underbidding and using the bonus to fund part of the project. That's awesome.

And I bet you're right about the red tape costs. But you'd think those wouldn't vary much? Or I wouldn't but I'm also probably wrong.

 

[DCal430]

You are beyond ridiculous, I EXPLICITLY talked about SS being a factor, I even talked medicare and pensions, along with the farm subsidies, DOT expenses, and many other expenses.

The problem is that you implied the entire discrepancy was due to social security.

Don't you dare pretend like you talked about people moving from north to south, you didn't say anything about that till *I* brought it up, not you.

No, *you* tried to argue that it was due to SS taxes being lower in higher-income areas. In other words, payroll tax, NOT the disbursement of socials security payments. The problem with that is that higher-income areas also pay higher INCOME tax, not just taxes towards SS, but you're too clueless to realize that.

And no, SS is NOT enough to account for the entire discrepancy. Only a complete idiot would think that there is some super-high concentration of old poor people in the red states; given the numbers we're talking about, there would have to be a migration of Biblical proportions. There is not. I even gave you a goddamned LIST of the top 10 taker states' largest expenditures for crissake and you still pull this shit? Do you think you are fooling ANYBODY?

You realize that even the conservative wonks don't try to argue what you just did? They know better. Instead, they try to argue that some red states should not count as red states, or how some blue states are purple, and they argue *at most* that there is *some* transfer due to retirees and federal employee placement. But they know better than to pretend like there is some hugely disproportionate number of them in red states, unlike your clueless ass.

We've seen that you have no citations and are just trolling. You are now on my ignore list for trolling, sheer stupidity, and illiteracy.

You are just way too much. You make up shit and cherry pick. I said SS was the biggest factor and it is. I never said it was the only factor. You states that SS was a top factor, when your link clearly states it is. You own link of top 10 shows you are an idiot. I never stated high income areas pay less into SS taxes. You are a liar.

You need yo actually study the budget before you speak, you make shit up because you know nothing about the budget. SS and Medicare accounts for over 50% of state or people specific spanding (Spending that benefits specific people or states only). But you are too dumb to know that.

The fact that you claimed DOT and Ag account for more shows how dumb you are. At and DOT budget in total is less than 150 billion. SS budget is almost 1 trillion a year. SS and Medicare are almost 1.5 trillion almost 40% of the total Budget.