Shock of the Old

Belle Waring returns to the United States from Singapore where she lives:

Boy, but America's infrastructure looks baaad, people. And everything is dirty! The girls were like, what's wrong with this bridge? (a metal bridge in Jersey leading from the Newark airport to the Holland Tunnel, I don't know what it's called). Old metal that's just black with soot! And graffiti! Man, if I fully acclimatize to the level of cleanliness, safety, and well-built massive public investment projects of Singapore I'll never be able to move home.

I believe it's the Pulaski Skyway (pictured above). In part, a country like the United States just isn't going to be able to compete infrastructure-wise with a newly-prosperous country like Singapore -- we have a lot of stuff that's oldish, but still usable, and shutting it down to fix or replace it would be extremely inconvenient. But it's also the case that Singapore's not spending 1 percent of GDP a year on a misguided effort to control Iraq. So, yes, we badly need a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank.

Photo by Flickr user Doc Searls used under a Creative Commons license

Comments

in filming the movie "The Machinist" which is supposed to take place in something like LA or Detroit, the crew had decided to film in Spain to cut costs. the only problem was, nowhere in Spain is there anything that looks like LA or Detroit. so, they had to find the dirtiest, dingiest part of all of Spain and *still* they had to dirty the place up to make it look authentic.

Posted by Cody | June 25, 2008 6:27 PM

I've never been to Spain, but even the nice parts of Paris and Rome have levels of graffiti way beyond what you'd see in most American cities.

Posted by too many steves | June 25, 2008 6:31 PM

There sometimes a correlation between authoritarian tendencies and extremely well functioning societies. The downside is you need a prescription to chew gum.

Posted by Damir | June 25, 2008 6:35 PM

There's sometimes a correlation between authoritarian tendencies and extremely well functioning societies. The downside is you need a prescription to chew gum.

Posted by Damir | June 25, 2008 6:35 PM

The Pulaski Skyway is structurally unsound. If it weren't made of corroding metal, the best way to renovate it would be to set it on fire.

Posted by phil | June 25, 2008 6:35 PM

And it's not like Europe, China and India don't have their share of old stuff, including stuff way older than anything the US offers.

Posted by JonF | June 25, 2008 6:42 PM

The East Coast is dirty and old. Come west, Ms. Waring, come west.

Posted by ben | June 25, 2008 6:44 PM

I'm not sure that Singapore is a great example here - don't they cane taggers or something?

Posted by steve | June 25, 2008 6:46 PM

I think the reason the Pulaski Skyway is the way it is, is because it's included in the National Register of Historic Places. It takes a lot to changes those places so designated.

Posted by Pan | June 25, 2008 6:47 PM

"In part, a country like the United States just isn't going to be able to compete infrastructure-wise with a newly-prosperous country like Singapore -- we have a lot of stuff that's oldish, but still usable, and shutting it down to fix or replace it would be extremely inconvenient."

Yes, economies, societies and states that first develop an innovation in infrasturuce, industrial plant, or institutions frequently have the most outdated version of it. So when Singapore finally adopts a full democracy (if they ever do--even the Americans who live there are pretty impressed already with their non-sooty bridges and trains running on time), they'll have this cool state-of-the art presidential-parliamentary hybrid, whereas we're still chugging along with the electoral college. And Britian will have their feudal constitution retrofitted with modern rights and protections.

Part of it may be what Cody is talking about--a certain American tolerance for bad taste in infrastructure and urban design. Mencken called it the "libido for ugly".

Posted by Colatina | June 25, 2008 6:47 PM

I'm not sure that Singapore is a great example here - don't they cane taggers or something?

Singapore is also an island city-state with a big high-tech economic base. I'm not sure it's comparable to any other country in the world.

Posted by ben | June 25, 2008 6:50 PM

Singapore has 4.5 million people crammed into an area of 270 square miles. Gee, do you think that might have something to do with their ability to update their infrastructure frequently?

If Belle Waring wants to live in Singapore, she's welcome to it. I found it a sterile, authoritarian, soulless place, enlivened slightly by some interesting history and multiculturalism, but basically not a place I'd want to spend more than a few days in. Is chewing gum in public still a crime there?

Posted by Mixner | June 25, 2008 6:52 PM

Also consider this:
America is very large. It needs a lot of infrastructure, in a lot of different places. No matter the size of the Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank, the bridges in Eastern Tennessee will not be shiny and new. And if they are, well I would have to say that's a waste of money.
Singapore (as I understand it) is very small and compact. Their wealth and population is all located into one place. It is relatively easy for them to make sure everything is nice. If they were the size of America, they would not be newly prosperous (no way all of America can become prosperous at once), nor even if they were would they be able to afford nice infrastructure everywhere.
This isn't a reason to stand still on infrastructure investment-only a caution.

Posted by jamie | June 25, 2008 6:53 PM

I have nothing substantive to add, but here are some pretty cool pictures of bridges.

Posted by southpaw | June 25, 2008 7:01 PM

Having just spent several weeks in Italy, I'd say there's a hell of a lot graffiti. Of course, there's a proud tradition of graffiti dating from Roman times. I really liked some of the old Soviet graffiti, though the taggings along the lines of "KOSOVO IS OURS MOTHERFUCKERS! LOVE, SERBIA" were a bit disturbing.

As far as comparisons with Singapore, aside from the staggering difference in scale of the two countries, as noted above the authoritarian nature of the regime there will have something to do with it. Our freeways and bridges would likely be less graffiti-filled if we cut your dick off, Larry, for tagging.

I doubt Americans will get too animated about fixing up infrastructure to deal with graffiti and soot, but I'd bet they'll get a hell of a lot more interested if any more bridges end up in rivers or the ocean.

Posted by TheF79 | June 25, 2008 7:15 PM

A colleague of mine once described the US as a nation of private affluence and public squalor.

Posted by SLC | June 25, 2008 7:16 PM

in filming the movie "The Machinist" which is supposed to take place in something like LA or Detroit, the crew had decided to film in Spain to cut costs. the only problem was, nowhere in Spain is there anything that looks like LA or Detroit.

Given the craptacular value of the dollar versus the euro, plus the fact that Michigan is desperate for jobs, why is Spain cheaper than Detroit?

Posted by Walker | June 25, 2008 7:16 PM

Godwin's law for Singapore is to mention chewing gum. Then (optionally) mention it has a great airport.

Great level of international debate.

The space argument is a bit undermined by major cities in USA in a federal system and large autonomy being filthy.

Posted by James | June 25, 2008 7:17 PM

Godwin's law for Singapore is to mention chewing gum. Then (optionally) mention it has a great airport.

Great level of international debate.

The space argument is a bit undermined by major cities in USA in a federal system and large autonomy being filthy.

Posted by James | June 25, 2008 7:17 PM

OK, fuck the gum, but they will execute you for having pot there.

Posted by elevating the debate | June 25, 2008 7:27 PM

basically not a place I'd want to spend more than a few days in.

i.e. too many icky people within the precious glibertarian boy's comfort zone.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | June 25, 2008 7:32 PM

The Skyway has been dark brown for as long as I remember. What's wrong with it being brown?

Posted by Adirondacker | June 25, 2008 7:36 PM

Or he finds the country too authoritarian for his liking.

Posted by mad6798 | June 25, 2008 7:37 PM

Rather than finance any maintenance we'll just call it a Victory bridge.

Posted by jg | June 25, 2008 7:49 PM

to the guy who referenced his colleague describing american as one of private affluence and public squalor: your colleague is an idiot. spain may be a great place to live, and all the time i spent there i was shocked at how clean it is, but private affluence is impossible in spain because you pay 70% in taxes. singapore has the same problem. i would much rather give my children a happy, safe, enjoyable life than spend my money cleaning the side of a bridge so its 2 million daily commuters can feel better about their lame ass jobs.

infrastructure in this country is paid for, like everything else, when we panick about it, unless you're eisenhower and choose not live a life as a reactionary politician.

Posted by whatever | June 25, 2008 8:11 PM

"But it's also the case that Singapore's not spending 1 percent of GDP a year on a misguided effort to control Iraq..."

Iraq is an incredible waste of lives and $$$, but delayed infrastructure maintenance long predates the war. Seen for what it is, it's just another way of doing what America does best: borrowing against tomorrow so it can live beyond its means today.

When I hear stuff like "National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank" I think of Alice Rivlin's famous "display device" remark.

Posted by kafka | June 25, 2008 8:12 PM

Singapore is the wrong example for the reasons mentioned above.

It's hard to find a good comparison. Even if you compare with Europe there are places where the roads and bridges look straight out of a sci-fi movie and places that look pretty depressed.

We fund our roads with the gas tax mostly. Ours is very low in comparison with European countries so that probably has something to do with it.

But why compare? It gets harder and harder to go from one place to another. At least here in MN. And the roads and bridges are falling apart.

I think, too, it's harder to build a new road - takes longer, is more expensive, because of our property rights. Not sure I want to give that up. Plus, I think, we pay more than we have to per mile on construction.

Anyway, it's all just musing.

Posted by jammu | June 25, 2008 8:44 PM

Extending Bush's regressive tax cuts and a gas tax holiday ought to do the trick.

Posted by ed | June 25, 2008 8:49 PM

to the guy who referenced his colleague describing american as one of private affluence and public squalor: your colleague is an idiot.

His colleague must be named John Kenneth Galbraith.

Posted by Delicious Pundit | June 25, 2008 8:50 PM

Forget Singapore and the graffiti comparison. Lots of other countries are building stuff. The US isn't. Look at London, which is a good comparator because it also has a lot of very old infrastructure and very high cost of replacement. In the next few years, they'll get Crossrail, a completely revamped Heathrow, all the Olympic facilities -- added to the Eurostar. In the US, we'll get some ugly facility named after George W. Bush.

Posted by P O'Neill | June 25, 2008 9:14 PM

The first thing I notice when returning to the U.S. from Asia is how fat everyone is.

Posted by blah | June 25, 2008 9:21 PM

Forget Singapore and the graffiti comparison. Lots of other countries are building stuff. The US isn't. Look at London, which is a good comparator because it also has a lot of very old infrastructure and very high cost of replacement. In the next few years, they'll get Crossrail, a completely revamped Heathrow, all the Olympic facilities -- added to the Eurostar.

Good grief, what an awful comparison. True, London does have some showcase modern buildings and structures and public facilities. And of course a wealth of historical ones. But in general, outside of the touristy and historical areas, London is a run-down, dirty, drab, decaying city full of ugly 50s- and 60s-era concrete monstrosities and rusting infrastructure. The public housing "tower blocks" that festoon the outskirts of the city are particularly repulsive.

Posted by Mixner | June 25, 2008 9:26 PM

Part of it may be what Cody is talking about--a certain American tolerance for bad taste in infrastructure and urban design. Mencken called it the "libido for ugly".

Gee, is that bridge really ugly? Not to my eye; I frankly see it as a wonderful bit of industrial-age design--much nicer than its surroundings. This one may not be well kept up, but lots of places regard those old steel bridges with real affection, spending tons of money to refurbish them as pedestrian bridges. If Singaporeans think them icky because they're old, that's their problem.

Posted by David in Nashville | June 25, 2008 9:28 PM

Given the craptacular value of the dollar versus the euro, plus the fact that Michigan is desperate for jobs, why is Spain cheaper than Detroit?

The movie was shot about three years ago, so the economics were a bit different at the time.

Posted by Just Dropping By | June 25, 2008 9:29 PM

Re: Given the craptacular value of the dollar versus the euro, plus the fact that Michigan is desperate for jobs, why is Spain cheaper than Detroit?

Non-unionized labor in Spain maybe? Or maybe they just wanted Spanish weather, not Michigan's. For sure they chose a bizarre country, one that looks nothing like the Rust Belt. Eastern Europe, or post-industrialized Britain, might have been a closer match.

Posted by JonF | June 25, 2008 9:31 PM

in general, outside of the touristy and historical areas, London is a run-down, dirty, drab, decaying city full of ugly 50s- and 60s-era concrete monstrosities

While this may be true, it's really the fault of the Germans that so much of Britain has horrific architecture. They had to rebuild, it was the 50's and 60's and the prevailing aesthetic was one of ugly.

I spent a lot of time driving in the greater Seattle area, full of all kinds of new roads and construction. It was very sad to return to the East Coast and drive into NYC on the decrepit Bruckner.

Yes, we will always be more run down than the rich authoritarian paradise, but we do need to start spending a little more money so we don't go totally third world here. I mean, a major bridge fell down! In freaking Minnesota! If it were Texas or NJ or Louisiana, you could spin yourself into believing it was an aberration (those are very corrupt and screwy states), but when freaking MINNESOTA can't get its act together, you officially have a national problem.

Posted by anonymous | June 25, 2008 9:59 PM

The Pulaski is nothing compared to its parallel truck route that runs to i 280. It has two bridges. Both are too narrow to allow a tractor trailer and a car to cross beside one another. So we stagger. One is actually a draw bridge. Everytime I cross both of those bridges, I look up at the Pulaski and wish I could use it to get where I needed to go. NYC's infrastructure is a complete joke, and anyone who defends it is completely misguided. Like the cranes, so much up here gets a pass until it falls down. On a funnier note, my hometown of Jersey City installed a light rail, which runs on a car driven street for some of its way. The cars have to turn right and the light rail goes on a its a way at certain point. Last night I found an old man, who missed the tiny TURN RIGHT. NO ENTRY sign they put up to divert cars (sadly the actual road surface continues another 100 ft. until it becomes just tracks). His car was stuck 200 ft. beyond the actual road surface on the gravel. The cop who showed up, looked at all of us in amazement and remarked "this is not the first time". 3 hour shut down all north bound lines (cutting off a city beyond jersey city and the two park and ride lots). Matt, if you ever wonder why some us still insist on driving cars, here is your answer. Every week something like this happens with Amtrak, the Subway, or the Light Rail. During my first year here, I commuted everywhere on the trains, but I just kept getting stuck. Maybe it was bad luck, but between the drunks in front of Amtrak cars, cars on the light rail, and flooding subways, I would rather just suffer the tolls and the parking fees so that I atleast know I can get home from the Island.

Posted by Nate | June 25, 2008 10:01 PM

George W. Bush and the neocons just shrug their shoulders at the war expenditure -- "4% for Freedom" as Heritage calls it. But 4% of GDP is a lot of money. If you're spending that on airbases in the desert, you're not spending it on new bridges. So some of them fall down.

Posted by P O'Neill | June 25, 2008 10:25 PM

But it's also the case that Singapore's not spending 1 percent of GDP a year on a misguided effort to control Iraq.

Seriously? US government at all levels spends something like 35% of GDP. In Singapore it's about half that. You really think that 1% is what makes the difference?

Posted by Brandon Berg | June 25, 2008 10:35 PM

Until money is allocated to modernizing the aging infrastructure where necessary... I recommend that society begin educating kids that painting graffiti is a crime. Unfortunately, graffiti is currently being promoted as an art form:

http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=3352

Posted by S. P. Gass | June 25, 2008 11:18 PM

Remember, the evidence in the Minnesota bridge collapse thus far points to a design error. Infrastructure spending had nothing to do with its failure.

Posted by Tom T. | June 25, 2008 11:49 PM

London is a run-down, dirty, drab, decaying city full of ugly 50s- and 60s-era concrete monstrosities and rusting infrastructure.

"It is, because I say so."

If the silly glibertarian boy got flustered by the terrible ickiness of public transport and ended up in Dalston, that's really his problem.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | June 25, 2008 11:50 PM

@Brandon Berg:

Does the figure includes all those Government linked corporations?

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

"At the time of this report, the various Temasek holdings held one-third of Singapore's stock market capitalization between them."

Personally, if the current president have his father as Mentor President like Singapore's Mentor Minister, we may be much better off. But I am not sure about Laura Bush in charge of Treasury/Federal Reserve, etc.

Posted by kanchou | June 26, 2008 12:18 AM

If Belle Waring wants to live in Singapore, she's welcome to it. I found it a sterile, authoritarian, soulless place, enlivened slightly by some interesting history and multiculturalism, but basically not a place I'd want to spend more than a few days in. Is chewing gum in public still a crime there?

I do, in fact, live in Singapore and I really love it. this is in part because, as an expatriate, I enjoy all the benefits of Singapore's 'soft authoritarianism' while not actually being a citizen of a polity that lacks the robust free speech protections of the US. it really is hard to convey how clean and nice it is vs New York. I say this as a former New Yorker who would be happy to move back once I have a few million more dollars than I do now.

Posted by belle waring | June 26, 2008 12:47 AM

Singapore has 4.5 million people crammed into an area of 270 square miles. Gee, do you think that might have something to do with their ability to update their infrastructure frequently?

New York city has three times that number crammed into an even smaller area. So that's no excuse. Try again.

Posted by BP | June 26, 2008 1:13 AM

Belle,

Fair warning: Mixner is definitely a member of the class of trolls that inhabit this blog that you so recently deplored.

A quick and by no means exhaustive compilation of Mixner's recent "contributions" (i.e. detractions) to this blog:

People who oppose torture are objectively pro-terrorist;

Jihad on any suggestion that the car centered suburban American lifestyle is ecologically/energetically unsound;

Things in Iraq are better now than they were before we invaded.

This odious content is packaged with a rhetorical style marked by:

Outright refusal to entertain arguments that challenge his premises;

A breathtakingly shameless (and we're comparing him to other right wing trolls here, so that's saying something) reliance on straw men;

Insistence upon a standard of evidence for others than he fails to uphold himself;

Conflation of distinctions that are central to the point that his interlocutors are making;

Endless pursuit of red herrings that serve to enlarge and obfuscate the original boundaries of the debate.

And that's just the last couple of days! This is some serious trolling that goes above and beyond. It's versatility, depth, breadth and doggedness are truly impressive. I'm thinking that the phrase "all Mixnered up" may be a useful shorthand description for such heroic trollery. I only wish that there were some symbol/signal at the end of each post that could indicate that the ensuing comment thread has been all Mixnered up. Of course, recently that's been most threads so perhaps a "Mixner-inverse" symbol would be more efficient.

Posted by DMonteith | June 26, 2008 1:29 AM

BP,

New York city has three times that number crammed into an even smaller area. So that's no excuse. Try again.

Apparently you don't know this, but the residents of New York City pay state taxes that are used to fund infrastructure throughout the state of New York, not just in New York City, and federal taxes that are used to fund infrastructure throughout the huge, sprawling nation of the United States. The residents of Singapore have no remotely comparable infrastructure burden, so your attempted rebuttal of my "excuse" makes no sense whatsoever. Try again.

Posted by Mixner | June 26, 2008 1:29 AM

DMonteith,

You really need to get over your obsession with me. It's now gotten to the point where you're following me around from thread to thread, entering posts that have nothing to do with the subject under discussion, but are devoted solely to attacking me. Get a life, for God's sake. Get a girlfriend. A dog. Anything.

The only item on your list of my "contributions" that is accurate is "Things in Iraq are better now than they were before we invaded." The rest are lies and misrepresentations.

Posted by Mixner | June 26, 2008 1:39 AM

(I'm sorry, everyone, I can't resist. I'm just in a troll-feeding mood tonight, I guess.)

Apparently you don't know this, but the residents of New York City pay state taxes that are used to fund infrastructure throughout the state of New York, not just in New York City, and federal taxes that are used to fund infrastructure throughout the huge, sprawling nation of the United States.

But. But. I thought bridges and highways were completely paid for by user fees?

Say it ain't so, Mixner.

Posted by jack lecou | June 26, 2008 1:45 AM

The Casimir Pulaski Skyway was a filthy, rusting wreck twenty years ago when I would ride on it with my Grandpa. This just isn't news, as has already been pointed out.
We are talking about north Jersey, after all.

I personally found this portion of the linked post more interesting:
"I made it at [sic] my hotel, which is a suite with a little kitchenette, useful for stabbing myself in the eye with a fork when my children won't go to sleep for the night and it is 8am."
Staying up all night and then stabbing oneself with a fork? Talk about freedom! I bet they wouldn't let you do that in Singapore.
And then topping that off with a trip to a store that's in every run-down mall in America, Britain or a heap of other countries, but not in Singapore? New York City, yo!

Posted by Dan | June 26, 2008 1:46 AM

Apparently you don't know this, but the residents of New York City pay state taxes that are used to fund infrastructure throughout the state of New York, not just in New York City, and federal taxes that are used to fund infrastructure throughout the huge, sprawling nation of the United States.

The residents of other towns in the state of New York, and indeed in other states in the huge sprawling nation of the United States, also pay state and federal taxes, some of which actually flow back to fund infrastructure in New York City itself.

The residents of Singapore have no remotely comparable infrastructure burden

Stop wasting my time. New York City does not pay for every single piece of infrastructure in the entire United States, not even remotely. If this is a serious argument you're offering it's pathetic; if you are merely trolling it's too weak to hold my interest.

Posted by BP | June 26, 2008 1:47 AM

BP

You have completely missed the point. The residents of New York City provide a substantial share of the funding for the infrastructure of the United States that lies outside New York City. The residents of Singapore provide no funding for infrastructure that lies outside Singapore, because it is a single city-state. That is why your attempt to equate NYC and Singapore in this regard makes no sense whatsoever.

Posted by Mixner | June 26, 2008 2:24 AM

Whatever said "private affluence is impossible in spain because you pay 70% in taxes. singapore has the same problem"

The total tax take in Spain is about 35% of GDP vs 25% in the US - http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/18/23/35471773.pdf

According to the Heritage Foundation the total tax take in Singapore is about 13% of GDP. But employees typically pay 20 percent of their wages into the Central Provident Fund (CPF) - a compulsory savings scheme to cover health care and retirement - while employers pay 13 percent. Since these are individual accounts they are not counted as part of tax revenue.

Posted by disinterested observer | June 26, 2008 2:27 AM

After further reflection. Singapore government have so many fingers in its economy that "tax" is a very ambiguous concept.

After all, majority of Singaporeans lives in government build HDB flats with 99 years lease. Whether you call it mortgage, rent or tax is not that important as long as PAP regime collect enough revenue to spend on their programs.

Posted by kanchou | June 26, 2008 3:40 AM

The only item on your list of my "contributions" that is accurate is "Things in Iraq are better now than they were before we invaded."

Well, that's enough for me. Advantage DMonteith!

Posted by not DMontieth | June 26, 2008 4:14 AM

Mixner: I found it a sterile, authoritarian, soulless place, enlivened slightly by some interesting history and multiculturalism, but basically not a place I'd want to spend more than a few days in. Is chewing gum in public still a crime there?

This reminds me of Chris Rock's (I think) routine about serial killers. "Black people are scary - they'll kill you just so they can steal your sneakers. But these white people will kill you for no reason at all!"

Similarly, Singapore does indeed imprison you for chewing gum in public. But America, as has become abundantly obvious over the last seven years, will imprison you for no reason at all!
Mixner, bubu, you're an American, which means you no longer have the right to criticise anyone else for being authoritarian, with the possible exception of Burma and North Korea.

Posted by ajay | June 26, 2008 4:52 AM

I like the Pulaski Skyway - It has a hard to explain appeal.

The Brooklyn Bridge or the Golden Gate is as good as anything around the world.

Singapore is a bad example - But Spain is not - As recently as 1978 Time magazine wrote condescendingly of Spain being poor and backward. Now Spain has better infrastructure than we do.

What happened?

Why has Spain gained ground when we have lost ground?

Thirty years ago - Spain and Ireland and Portugal (received a 7 million dollar aide package from Nixon - 7 million!) we all so poor that mainstream pubs used to speculate on the inherent reasons for their backwardness.

Posted by Comment | June 26, 2008 5:18 AM

Singapore and Dubai may serve, along with the Scandanavian countries to confirm that there is a size limit, as Plato suggested, beyond which a Republic or City-State cannot be run as well. Especially if "diversity" or Multi-Culti is present as a complication.

We do have some record of well-run larger countries - Japan, the USA until recent times. But their success rested on strong social norms and having nearly all power and control in the hands of the dominant ethnicity.

I went to Singapore in the early 90s to check on shipping operations, also to competing Indonesian shipping areas on the other side of the Straights of Malacca - which turned out to be cheaper, but sloppy, corrupt shitholes compared to the Singapore model.

It was right when Giuliani took over as mayor of NYC and when NYC was as big a craphole full of barbarians as Philly, Detroit, the black areas of DC remain today.
The cleanliness, civility, and order of Singapore was tremendously impressive. Though I heard from more than one shipping biz expat that the authoritarianism and creepiness over minor things wore thin. (One expat had cops come to his house because neighbors noticed that the shrubbery outside his place had not been watered daily, as was required by housing regs - so the cops came to ensure he would comply properly).
But none would trade the safe, pleasant life in a beautiful, clean city for Dinkin's NYC or Marion Barry's DC - especially those raising kids.

My biggest impression was after Singapore caught the edge of a big cyclone the day before my visit ended, I noticed hundreds of office-workers, housewives, and kids cleaning up litter and trash that had blown into a Park. Not government employees. I asked a few, people of several ethnicities, as I was also chucking trash near me as I walked to the shipping company across the Park, into a bag - why they were doing it. The matter-of-fact response was that people spontaneously felt a responsibility to keep things neat so they could be enjoyed by themselves and others.

Posted by chris ford | June 26, 2008 6:07 AM

1) The money being spent in Iraq/Afghanistan if borrowed. Bush is leaving this country with a debt level that will prevent us from repairing the infrastructure.

2) We have aging infrastructure on all levels of government -- local, state and federal. Repairing and upgrading roads, bridges, transit systems, etc. would required huge amount of funding.

3) Based on the stated preferences of the American public for tax cuts, I doubt that any level of government would be able to raise the money needed for that infrastructure work. People don't want to pay it taxes.

4) Therefore, our economy is going to go downhill in the future because of the failing instructure.

Posted by rmk | June 26, 2008 7:03 AM

The U.S. today looks more and more like the Soviet Union in the 1980s... read Orlov's Reinventing Collapse.

Posted by Nils | June 26, 2008 7:32 AM

"Why has Spain gained ground when we have lost ground?

Thirty years ago - Spain and Ireland and Portugal (received a 7 million dollar aide package from Nixon - 7 million!) we all so poor that mainstream pubs used to speculate on the inherent reasons for their backwardness."

EU equilization aid. Throw in Greece, and you've just named its biggest recipients from their entry until the entry of the formerly communist member states in 2004.

Posted by ERM | June 26, 2008 8:48 AM

Sure doesn't take much around here to set off the 'America is disintegrating' meme, does it?

But it certainly doesn't look that way in the American cities I've know best and longest. I grew up in Chicago, and if you could somehow step back into the Chicago of the 1970s, you'd be shocked at the differences. To take one prominent example, Navy Pier was a decrepit eyesore. The city as a whole wasn't in terrible shape then, but it was nothing compared what it is now. Downtown, was not a tourist destination. When I was a kid, the 'skyscraper' with the observation deck that we went up in was the 40-story Prudential building. Now? Here's the list of the tallest buildings in the city:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Chicago#Tallest_buildings

The average year of construction of the 30 tallest buildings is 1988, and 10 of the 30 have been built since 2000. And it's not just downtown -- gentrification has been spreading steadily northward from Lincoln Park up through previously run-down neighborhoods, with some interesting results:

http://echomagonline.com/2007/09/01/is-andersonville-becoming-mandersonville/

Once Rogers Park is gentrified, that's it -- there's no more Chicago going north.

To describe present-day Chicago as a case of "private affluence and public squalor" would be absurd.

I've known Ann Arbor for about 30 years also. Similar story on a much smaller scale -- revitalized downtown, gentrification/yuppification, lots of new construction. Even now:

http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2008/06/um_leading_building_boom_that.html

Of course, a lot of it is university-driven. But that's public infrastructure investment.

And, oddly enough, even the city of Detroit is arguably in somewhat better shape than 20 years ago, at least with respect to public and private investment:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/business/19detroit.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Posted by Slocum | June 26, 2008 9:01 AM

The residents of other towns in the state of New York, and indeed in other states in the huge sprawling nation of the United States, also pay state and federal taxes, some of which actually flow back to fund infrastructure in New York City itself.

You do realize that tax payers in New York State (and especially the city) are net payers into the tax system rather than recipients. I believe NY state only gets $0.90 of benefit for every dollar of federal taxes they spend and it's probably worse for NYC resident (especially when you look at state taxes outside the city). So while New Yorkers don't pay for everything, they pay for a lot more than they get back.

Posted by Mo | June 26, 2008 9:23 AM

Of course, graffiti is a sign of our modern degeneracy:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ecormany/134902540/

Posted by rea | June 26, 2008 9:23 AM

"the residents of New York City pay state taxes that are used to fund infrastructure throughout the state of New York, not just in New York City, and federal taxes that are used to fund infrastructure throughout the huge, sprawling nation of the United States."

So cities pay for sprawl? I thought you said that "Sprawl does not have significant social costs or economic productivity costs." Which is it? Does NYC subsidize sprawl? You say both yes and no at the same time. I'm starting to think you are multiple people posting with that username and trolling here at the behest of Toll Brothers. Is that where you work?

Posted by freddiemac | June 26, 2008 9:44 AM

"Until money is allocated to modernizing the aging infrastructure where necessary... I recommend that society begin educating kids that painting graffiti is a crime."

Bridges falling down is a crime.
Graffiti never killed anyone.

Posted by Lyle | June 26, 2008 10:00 AM

You really need to get over your obsession with me. It's now gotten to the point where you're following me around from thread to thread, entering posts that have nothing to do with the subject under discussion, but are devoted solely to attacking me.

What can I say, my tolerance for dishonest argumentation is low. It seems to me that you're the one flitting from thread to thread, spreading bullshit as you go, mucking up what might otherwise be useful discussions.

I have never detected in any of your posts any willingness to concede, on even the most trivial minutia, that anyone's argument has any merit whatsoever. If I were to read something authored by you to the effect of "your point along those lines is well taken...", I think I'd fall out of my chair in surprise.

Why, in short, do you waste your (and our) time here?

Everybody already knows by now that in Mixner's world all arguments in favor of density are inadequate, that electric cars will solve our energy problems, that the Iraq war is super awesome, that it's too hard to figure out what torture is so why bother, and that the arguments, facts or expertise that people who disagree with you bring to the discussion are invariably undersourced and pitifully inadequate responses to your intuitive understanding of how things are.

These things are all givens and can at this point be left unsaid. Your constant rejoinder "try again" is just like teasing the retarded kids. There's no honor in that. Just leave all of us inadequate losers alone. Your sincere efforts to enlighten by sharing your expertise, insight and wisdom here has just been the scattering of so many pearls before swine.

Seriously, I am sure that many here will be happy to have confirmed your assumption that you can lead a liberal to water but you just can't make him drink if you would just stop trying to make us drink your fucking water.

Posted by DMonteith | June 26, 2008 10:07 AM

The public housing "tower blocks" that festoon the outskirts of the city are particularly repulsive.

Guess you haven't visited some of the public housing slums in our big cities, have you, like say Bronx River Towers? Though to our credit, we are blowing up some of them. (a la Cabrini Green, Robert Taylor)

I've been to Singapore. It's a nice place, but as someone else said, kind of soulless, like a big gigantic shopping mall with a few ethnic neighborhoods thrown in. The saddest was the neighborhood of the original inhabitants, Malay, IIRC. Do love the airport and the night zoo.

But what really got me about Singapore was all the cool technology. Their Metro was state of the art.

I also noticed that in Spain -- 8 years ago. They already had the credit cards you could wave at things, the bullet trains, and god knows what it's like now.

Another note on infrastructure: The American Society of Civil Engineers has been consistently rating US infrastructure with a big fat D and it's only going to get worse.

Posted by lou | June 26, 2008 10:25 AM

Re DMonteith

On a previous thread, Mr. Mixner denied that waterboarding was torture. That should tell us everything we might want to know about Mr. Mixner.

Posted by SLC | June 26, 2008 10:28 AM

Another note on infrastructure: The American Society of Civil Engineers has been consistently rating US infrastructure with a big fat D and it's only going to get worse.

Do you think the American Society of Civil Engineers might have just a tiny little bit of a vested interest in spending large sums of money on public infrastructure?

Posted by Slocum | June 26, 2008 10:32 AM

Although I wholeheartedly endorse increasing infrastructure spending and development significantly, I agree the solution is not to try and rebuild "ugly" bridges and such but focus on places where true repair is needed and creating a multi-modal, big picture transit heavy system

That said, I just have to add a laugh about the graffiti part. It's unfortunate that too little graffiti exists, what with all the wasteful spending on ridding of graffiti that could be spent on more important things. Sure Singapore does not have graffiti, they flog all wrongdoers.

To Slocum:

Yes, maybe the ASCE has a motive, but so what. Their reports have been the most substantive and well-documented reports on American infrastructure. They are absolutely right about the failures of our infrastructure. That does not mean we choose their route of rectification. But you'd be surprised they are pretty much in the progressive camp on these issues--maybe sans highway development--but all in all, quite good. Read the work.

Posted by jeff | June 26, 2008 11:06 AM

No graffiti in Singapore? Maybe because they cut of their hands as punishment, or something roughly equivalent that makes the risk/reward ratio not worth it.

Posted by adam | June 26, 2008 11:54 AM

They are absolutely right about the failures of our infrastructure. That does not mean we choose their route of rectification. But you'd be surprised they are pretty much in the progressive camp on these issues--maybe sans highway development--but all in all, quite good.

Yes, well, of course ASCE is going to be in favor of infrastructure construction and be agnostic on highways vs mass-transit.

But the issue of being in the 'progressive camp' is central. In Ann Arbor where I live, one transport infrastructure improvement we really need is another lane on the expressway going north. But progressives are strongly opposed -- they demand a light rail system instead. I'm with the group who thinks people's preferences and the development patterns in the area mean that a light rail system would be badly underutilized and have a negligible effect on congestion at a very high cost. As far as I'm concerned, if you want to do mass transit in that corridor, fine, make the new lane an HOV lane and run express buses down it. But that approach is not anti-automobile enough for local progressives. They don't want a system flexible enough to accommodate driving or mass transit, because they're afraid if people are given the option, they'll continue to make the 'wrong' choices.

So one of the reasons we don't get more infrastructure investments than we do is a lack of agreement on what investments should be made. Progressives, it seems, want to use such investments to transform society. And there are a lot of people who aren't interested in that progressive transformation.

Posted by Slocum | June 26, 2008 12:37 PM

Improvements in infrastructure are not always limited by lack of funds. Case in point, the replacement of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge between Alexandria, Va. and Maryland on the Capitol Beltway. The arguments from the NIMBYs delayed this project for at least 2 decades, even though the old bridge was clearly deficient, both from a capacity and structural standpoint. About 10 years ago, I had occasion to drive over the old bridge, now thankfully gone, and it was scary. Even in a car, one could feel the bridge shaking underneath due to truck traffic.

Posted by SLC | June 26, 2008 1:05 PM

The Pulaski Skyway is one of those hideous eyesores that has nevertheless developed a dedicated following from historical preservation gadflies, perhaps because of its special uniqueness in being such an eyesore. It fascinates me how some people are unwilling to accept that some architectural eras are worse than others, and instead attempt to glorify the catastrophes that were perpetrated after the good years ended.

Posted by Tyro | June 26, 2008 1:14 PM

It's a little unfair because Newark is one of the ugliest places in America. If you want to see a nice bridge, you can just go next door to Manhattan, where there are about seven that look pretty good.
Also, someone said that Texas is corrupt. It's not really, other than the gerrymandering, which is pretty ridiculous. The government is stupid, very stupid, but not corrupt.

Posted by J.D. | June 26, 2008 1:24 PM

It's a little unfair because Newark is one of the ugliest places in America. If you want to see a nice bridge, you can just go next door to Manhattan, where there are about seven that look pretty good.
Also, someone said that Texas is corrupt. It's not really, other than the gerrymandering, which is pretty ridiculous. The government is stupid, very stupid, but not corrupt.

Posted by J.D. | June 26, 2008 1:27 PM

The Pulaski Skyway was a marvel of engineering when it opened. Nobody ever attempted anything like it (usually wetlands were just filled in not bridged over). However, it is from FDRs works program and is dated and was never designed for modern cars and trucks. For instance, it does not have a shoulder which makes it dangerous when vehicles break down. It also freezes easily.

The Sopranos opening would not be the Sopranos opening if Tony drove on some beautiful Singaporean highway and not the Pulaski Skyway.

Tourist areas everywhere tend to be more clean and beautiful than non-tourist areas. There is no reason for a tourist to visit the PJP Landfill (under the Skyway and on fire for many years). However, high tourist areas of NYC (and lately even Newark) are clean and beautiful. If one is at Ellis Island looking at the Statue of Liberty, the bridge in the background is the beautiful and magnificent Verranzano Narrows Bridge, not the Pulaski Skyway.

Posted by Patrick | June 26, 2008 1:52 PM

The Pulaski Skyway was a marvel of engineering when it opened. Nobody ever attempted anything like it (usually wetlands were just filled in not bridged over). However, it is from FDRs works program and is dated and was never designed for modern cars and trucks. For instance, it does not have a shoulder which makes it dangerous when vehicles break down. It also freezes easily.

The Sopranos opening would not be the Sopranos opening if Tony drove on some beautiful Singaporean highway and not the Pulaski Skyway.

Tourist areas everywhere tend to be more clean and beautiful than non-tourist areas. There is no reason for a tourist to visit the PJP Landfill (under the Skyway and on fire for many years). However, high tourist areas of NYC (and lately even Newark) are clean and beautiful. If one is at Ellis Island looking at the Statue of Liberty, the bridge in the background is the beautiful and magnificent Verranzano Narrows Bridge, not the Pulaski Skyway.

Posted by Patrick | June 26, 2008 1:55 PM

This has been a problem for a long time. I still have vivid memories of returning to the US from four years in Europe, back in late 1959. I was about 9 years old and was shocked at how dirty NYC was, driving from the docks (probably somewhere in Brooklyn) out onto the fledgling I-95 in the Bronx. Everywhere I looked the streets and buildings were dirty and seemed on the verge of collapse. And the water at a water cooler on the docks was awful compared to my last drink in Europe as we departed Bremerhaven.

Part of the problem is that too many visitors get their first taste of the US arriving in NY and driving out somewhere, like New England or New Jersey. There just isn't anyway to dress that real estate up.

Posted by majun | June 26, 2008 2:01 PM

some architectural eras

Steel cantilevered through trusses don't vary by era. Form follows function or as the locals say... it is what it is.

Posted by PanAmerican | June 26, 2008 2:25 PM

The Sopranos opening would not be the Sopranos opening if Tony drove on some beautiful Singaporean highway and not the Pulaski Skyway.

Frankly, the first time I took the trip from Manhattan to Newark through Sopranos country, I thought it had a kind of blasted industrial charm. Then again, I grew up with a local skyline defined by cooling towers and chimneys.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | June 26, 2008 3:24 PM

To each his own, I guess. I really like the Pulaski. It's a great example of innovative engineering design, as Patrick noted, and a graceful one as well. Especially when viewed from afar (say, the Northeast Corridor rail line on the way to NYC at sunset), it gently curves, dips, and rises again with a powerful but elegant profile.

Sure, it wasn't designed for today's traffic, it hasn't been maintained particularly well, and the area it passes over may be gross. But the skyway is beautiful--certainly more beautiful than the Verrazano, which is just big and not particularly distinctive.

Posted by don anon | June 26, 2008 4:15 PM

Here's a nice pic of the skyway strutting its stuff.

http://blog.nj.com/hobokennow/skyway.jpg

Posted by don anon | June 26, 2008 4:21 PM

Here's a nice pic of the skyway strutting its stuff.

http://blog.nj.com/hobokennow/skyway.jpg

Posted by don anon | June 26, 2008 4:23 PM

"New York city has three times that number crammed into an even smaller area. So that's no excuse. Try again."

No it doesnt. There are less than twice that number (about 8.2 million people) crammed in to a space that is close to twice the size (about 467 square miles). In the future I recommend you run a quick internet search to avoid sounding like an idiot.

Posted by aimee | June 27, 2008 11:18 AM

Funny thing, as I read this I happen to be listening to "Sister Ray" by the Velvet Underground. New York. New York! Singapore can keep their stupid clean.

Posted by W. Kiernan | June 27, 2008 7:11 PM