if the goal is having high speed transportation while minimizing cost burden to the taxpayer, palmdale and other similar cities would have been skipped.
likewise, i'm not going to stop using LAX because it's in Inglewood and not koreatown; i'll figure out how to make the commute.
if CA really wanted to build this right without succumbing to the pork granted to all these towns, CA should have probably taken a more incremental approach (eg. first build the cheapest, shortest-distance, and most environmentally-friendly path. then, build secondary rail systems that go through areas with high population density.)
california regulations mandate prevailing wages for all public works projects [1]. it affects the total cost because, the government should be looking to save taxpayers money by offering the contract to whichever GC that can get the project done in the fastest + cheapest fashion.
prevailing wages essentially maps out to be the _highest negotiated union rate_ in the same geography so the mandate basically shoots, in the foot, the ability for the project to collectively bargain.
you're right that labor is only a part of it. but part of the reason why the CA project saw huge rises in costs is because of project planning and scope increases in the planning -- both of which are politically driven.
part of the politically driven issues stem from NIMBY-ism but the other (arguably more heinous) part is how the cities can force the plan to be re-routed [1]. not only do costs rise and opening dates delay, the hypothetical "high speed" nature no longer rings true.
not to make this political but this is more political than not. people vocally want certain things (eg. prevailing wages) more than they want efficient costs so there's little incentive to make things cheaper.
a good case is always california's railway vs. florida's brightline. the differences are stark:
My understanding is that Binance can step in as a potential savior because Binance is safe themselves and the company doesn't fear a liquidity crisis themselves. But, their whole premise of consumer confidence is based off of SAFU[1] which seems to hold quite a bit of their own BNB coin[2].
Maybe I'm missing something but isn't Binance just insuring funds... with their own coins? (ie. what Alameda basically did with FTT tokens)
1. Couldn't Binance be subject to the same rundown FTX just experienced? / How could Binance realistically rescue FTX at all?
I'd suggest that companies, individuals and interest groups file suggestions (similar to amicus curiae) if they want their voices heard. Congress shouldn't be influenced by outside money.
A while back, I read an article that discussed the differences in people and how, during the hunter & gatherer era, some humans evolved to be night owls and some humans evolved to be early birds. It determined which person would keep watch at night.
In college, I remembered only signing up for 11am classes as a freshman before changing to 9am classes in sophomore and senior year. I think a lot of this has to do with staying up late in college.
There's probably a time where students can function properly, earlier than 11am, if they were to sleep by 12am.
Do you think hardware IoT companies should eventually open source their hardware to solely focus on the software? (Based on the belief that if we can make it, there's always someone who can make it better for cheaper). How would we go about doing that in a way that does not greatly damage revenue streams?
likewise, i'm not going to stop using LAX because it's in Inglewood and not koreatown; i'll figure out how to make the commute.
if CA really wanted to build this right without succumbing to the pork granted to all these towns, CA should have probably taken a more incremental approach (eg. first build the cheapest, shortest-distance, and most environmentally-friendly path. then, build secondary rail systems that go through areas with high population density.)