How did such beautiful infrastructure get built from 1900-1950?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is the same for schools. Schools built before 1960 were beautiful. Modern schools look like strip malls.

I think in the 60s, so much had to be built so fast due to the baby boom that people just forgot about aesthetics, and never went back.

Who wants to pay more taxes or have the government issue more bonds? That's what it will take.

This.

[Anonymous]

This thread is too polite and nice. Matt?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's costs more and what was ugly didn't survive.

As the PP above mentioned with regards to Hoover Dam - people died. Workers rights, OSHA, minimum wage, unions, labor laws, didn't exist or weren't enforced back then. Hoover Dam was a 24/7 construction job in horrible conditions.

Read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle

ok, fine. why is building metro in NYC so much more expensive than in paris?

[Anonymous]

If this is you or your outside lobbyists are reading this, take care of the hometown throughfare. It is the right thing to do. If this is a national threat, prioritize it, monetize it, and give it a public per user price.

You can't stick those Upstaters with this price tag and you know it. It is a Tristate issue at a minimum. This seems odd to see this thread in light of recent days conversations.

[Anonymous]

The post, from 2011, reported that the Toei Oedo Line in Japan cost $560 million per mile. The Berlin U55 cost $400 million per mile. The Paris Metro Line 14 cost $368 million per mile.

New York’s construction costs blew all of that away, the study found.

The Second Avenue Subway is coming in at $2.7 billion per mile. The 7 train extension to the far West Side? $2.1 billion per mile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Profit margins have greatly expanded at the expense of wages, cost of materials, etc. Land cost was a much smaller percentage of the building cost back in 1900. In other words, all the efficiency gains in real estate are going to capital.

A "ho hum" building back then was built of steel, brick, masonry, and took many skilled craftsmen to custom design and create every ornamental feature.

Now? Land is expensive and developers want to build as cheap as possible. As much as possible is mass produced and standardized offsite. Buildings now are also much less maintenance intensive compared to the gorgeous buildings of 1900.

Capital demands its outsized returns.

Yes, this. Or in other words, the concentration of wealth in the hands of the 1%. No more good masonry jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's costs more and what was ugly didn't survive.

As the PP above mentioned with regards to Hoover Dam - people died. Workers rights, OSHA, minimum wage, unions, labor laws, didn't exist or weren't enforced back then. Hoover Dam was a 24/7 construction job in horrible conditions.

Read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle

ok, fine. why is building metro in NYC so much more expensive than in paris?

Wait, my tea is brewing...

[Anonymous]

I like the painted concrete in the metro at Union Station but many object. My objection is cost. How much and why was it done?

I grew up in a mid century modern house and hated it.

[Anonymous]

Reagan Building is pretty good design for types who like stone. The US Peace Institute is for those who like contemporary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine anything like Union Station or Grand Central in NYC ever getting built again. So depressing.

Did they just not care about costs back then? It wasn't all FDR's New Deal.

It would take a decade to even start to built it today with all the state and federal environmental/noise/skyline impact studies, bureaucratic govt planning and permits you'd have to satisfy today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine anything like Union Station or Grand Central in NYC ever getting built again. So depressing.

Did they just not care about costs back then? It wasn't all FDR's New Deal.

It would take a decade to even start to built it today with all the state and federal environmental/noise/skyline impact studies, bureaucratic govt planning and permits you'd have to satisfy today.

That makes no sense. An ugly building faces just the same regulations as an attractive one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We spend more on infrastructure now than we ever have. Costs are just so much higher than ever before, for many reasons. The Inter-county connector cost almost 2.6 billion dollars.

For another example the Hoover dam cost an inflation adjusted $825 million dollars.

The golden gate bridge cost an inflation adjusted 1.5 billion dollars, yet rebuilding just the east span of the Bay Bridge in San Francisco has already cost over 6.3 billion.

Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine anything like Union Station or Grand Central in NYC ever getting built again. So depressing.

Did they just not care about costs back then? It wasn't all FDR's New Deal.

It would take a decade to even start to built it today with all the state and federal environmental/noise/skyline impact studies, bureaucratic govt planning and permits you'd have to satisfy today.

That makes no sense. An ugly building faces just the same regulations as an attractive one.

+1000