Skip to main content

Deferred Maintenance

I once worked at a public university that had a huge 'deferred maintenance' problem. Their major equipment was often 35 years old with an expected lifetime of 30 years. As a result, they were constantly doing repairs and paying overtime, but had little time to do preventive maintenance and little money to make pro-active investments in new equipment. In one dorm, water from bad showers on the upper floors started leaking into the main lobby, and the 'fix' was to drag out garbage cans to catch the water. I was told that repairing the plumbing itself was expensive so it was being figured into the "five-year budget plan." The garbage can fix went on for at least a year.


A two-page spread in The Atlantic Monthly (March 2008, p 38-39) calls out our nation's growing infrastructure problem. This is a real 'tragedy of the commons' situation: individuals are not willing to give up more tax money if they don't see a real-time, personal benefit. At the same time, the costs of poor infrastructure are growing. As we fall behind the curve, more money will go to waste and repair and less to investment, a dangerous spiral.
Infrastructure would be a great question for a Presidential debate. How will we compete with foreign countries where transportation is relatively cheap and easy? As the Atlantic article states, "Arriving at Shanghai's modern Pudong airport, you can hop aboard a maglev train that gets you downtown in eight minutes, at speeds approaching 300 miles an hour. When you land at JFK, on the other hand, you'll have to take a train to Queens, walk over an indoor bridge, and then transfer to the antiquated Long Island Rail Road; from there, downtown Manhattan is another 35 minutes away."

America's expansiveness has always been one of our strengths, and has enhanced our lifestyles, productivity growth, and security. That expansiveness can become a burden if the cost of moving people and goods across it is restrictive. The interstate highway system was a phenomenal investment that turned the problem of vast space into an advantage. We now need a modern national cargo rail system, as well as dramatically improved urban transit, or the American expanse will become a burden.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

New Yorker letter to editor

(In The New Yorker, 2/4/08, p5) Jeanne Guillemin, a senior fellor in MIT's Security Studies Program, wrote an excellent letter to the editor regarding how Americans talk about casualties. I'm unable to find a link to a full-text example, but here is an excerpt: "In wars since 1945, American combat mortality figures have sharply declined, while the exclusivity of the American claim on memorialization has intensified, as if U.S. soldiers were the only casualties in Korea or Vietnam or, more recently, Iraq, and the deaths of many thousands of civilians killed in those distant conflicts merited no acknowledgment and carried no meaning. Whose deaths matter and whose do not always tells a great deal about American politics and culture."
1 comment
Read more

Real Estate in America

We sold our house this summer and bought a new home. The experience has led me to reflect on homes and home-buying in America. As in any industry, there are good and bad incentives at work in real estate. A home seller would like to get the highest price for their house and sell it in a reasonable period of time. The industry operates on a commission system so that the agent seeks to sell the house at a higher price. This incentive works, but only to a point. Consider the impact of $5000 on the seller vs. the agent. Six percent of $5000 is $300. After the realty company and purchasing agent take their cut, the agent isn't left with much. A $5000 difference in the price of the house means little to the agent, but a lot to the home owner. Does an agent become successful by getting the highest price or by turning over lots of houses? The answer is obvious. An agent's ideal world is not one where people get exactly the right price for their homes, it is a world where everyone is wi
2 comments
Read more

Welfare for the wealthy

I was struck by today's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. Not literally, but in the Crossroads section, on opposite sides of the spread, were two articles that reflect our nation's "welfare for the rich." On 2J, a local economics instructor's article "Tax for Miller Park didn't help economy." He criticized a previous article which had suggested the opposite. The previous article was based almost entirely on reports by Major League Baseball, which clearly has a huge bias. This week's article takes an objective look, and summarizes that taxpayer's don't get much in return, but the fat cat players and executives of MLB walk away with huge paychecks. The drive to fund new ballparks almost never starts with taxpayers--it starts with the deep pockets of baseball executives, PR campaigns and connections with political power. On 3J, George Will was taking on the Fed ("What the Fed should never do"), rightly criticizing it for bailing out Bear
Post a Comment
Read more