>> building a megacity in the Pearl River Delta that it hopes will one day rival New York and Tokyo
Construction is 50% of their GDP (fact-check me here) and this feels like business as usual to keep the gravy train rolling.
Construction is 50% of their GDP (fact-check me here) and this feels like business as usual to keep the gravy train rolling.
I wouldnt try holding construction groups and Chinese central planning to a higher standard
Yes but none of them were funded or overseen at the state or national level. The source of the funds, the people doing the constructing and the people with the stake in the results was a fairly tight loop. The extra overhead of state/national projects seems to provide enough inefficiency/friction that just turns the whole thing into a money pit.
Most of the interstate was built 50+yr ago when the administrative overhead of such projects was far, far lower. The states basically said "here's where it's going" and did it without much local input, environmental assessment, etc, etc. Government also was far less risk averse in those days (so more stuff was done in house at cost).
The interstate is actually a great example of how costs have increased over time since it was mostly built over a 30yr period.
> Reply: Tries to hold constructions groups and Chinese central planning to a higher standard
But you dont have to go that big (here in Germany). They just recently opened a road (700m long, across an empty field) - after 8 years of planning, 2 years of construction plus additional 1 year of delay - only at a cost of 12 million Euros.