The American Jobs Plan Will Make Our Infrastructure Crisis Worse
April 12, 2021 by admin
Federal, Policy/Legislative
This article is the first in a five-part series that Strong Towns founder and president, Charles Marohn, will be sharing this week in response to the American Jobs Plan.
This article does not necessarily reflect the attitudes or opinions of APAUT or the APAUT Executive Committee.
A decade ago, in the wake of the housing crisis, there was one of those news cycles where seemingly every major outlet ran a story about Chinese “ghost cities”: places that had been fully built only there was nobody living there. I’ll admit being fascinated by these cities full of skyscrapers, parks, transit systems, and all the elements of place, often with pretty good design, that had a surreal vibe because of the lack of humans.
Part of the narrative was the gross inefficiency of China’s autocratic system. Only in a country without market feedback mechanisms, one where party bosses and their cronies controlled and directed the country’s capital, would resources be wasted so spectacularly. Or so the story went. From ABC News:
Dinny McMahon, author of China’s Great Wall of Debt, explained the driving force behind the new construction projects, seemingly built for no-one.
“The phenomenon very much has been driven by the debt splurge that really kicked into gear after the global financial crisis,” Mr McMahon said.
“Local governments around the country tried to juice and stimulate their economies by building more infrastructure and stimulating the property market.”
This seemingly wasteful construction is carried out by both state-owned firms and private companies.
I think this analysis was largely accurate, although missing some critical insights. Autocratic systems do lack the type of direct feedback and local empowerment that makes good use of resources, but this is true of all centralized systems, not merely autocratic ones. When the well-connected direct a country’s capital, it should surprise nobody when the projects they prioritize also make them and their friends personally wealthy, within China and elsewhere.
And is there anyone here in the United States who can honestly evaluate the waste of a Chinese ghost town—a vacant yet fully functional city in a country that nets 8 million new people a year—and suggest that somehow the American approach makes more productive use of resources? Surely no one who has been to places like these:
I read the Fact Sheet for the American Jobs Plan recently released by the White House and found it difficult not to feel depressed by the approach. As advertised, it is bold, but when it comes to spending on infrastructure that boldness lies in its size, not its vision. It reflects the Washington consensus that more roads with more lanes are good, that when we fix bridges we should also expand them, that transit investments should primarily serve auto-based development patterns, and that simply building more is the path to making us richer.
In other words: no difficult choices. No meaningful reform. Nothing that is going to substantively change the trajectory of the North American development pattern.
My friends, none of that is a criticism but merely an observation. I wasn’t expecting anything different and neither should you have. This approach would be no different (and potentially worse) with a Republican Senate or even a different president. This is the moment we are in and the approach we were always going to take, it was just a matter of degrees. We’re going to run this experiment until we no longer can, fulfilling Churchill’s observation that America will always do the right thing but only after we have exhausted every other option.
The American Jobs Plan posits a dichotomy between the United States approach to infrastructure and that of the Chinese, setting up our approach as rivalrous to theirs. According to the plan, it will “position the United States to out-compete China.” It will prevent us from “falling behind countries like China.” I find these assertions bizarre.
Today, ABC News focuses on the political battle between Democrats and Republicans when discussing the American Jobs Plan, but here is how soberly and clearly they reported on Chinese Ghost Cities:
Mr McMahon said he believed ghost cities were a “symptom of the problem” of how the Chinese economy worked, where growth was driven by debt.
“We’re now in a position in the Chinese economy where so much debt has been accumulated in the interest of building an incredible amount of waste, whether it be empty housing, empty factories, infrastructure in cities where the local authorities can never repay it…that sort of model of economic growth cannot continue,” he said.
“Everybody knows it. The officials in Beijing know it and have been trying very aggressively to both wean the economy off debt and try and come up with a new driver of growth.”
If true, perhaps that is the most glaring difference between the two approaches. Chinese leaders are trying to “wean the economy off debt” and “come up with a new driver of growth.” Meanwhile, our leaders are embracing debt throughout all of society—for governments, for corporations, and for families and small businesses—and the idea that the most important thing we can do right now is to go big on building infrastructure, ignoring how we got to such a massive infrastructure backlog in the first place.
I agree that we should be thinking big, and I agree that we are going to have to spend significantly more on infrastructure, but we first need to come to grips with what infrastructure spending is supposed to do.
Create jobs? Yes. Grow the economy? Yes. Add to our overall capacity? Yes. These are the things that economists cite and they are all important, but they are easy. Too easy. So easy that an autocratic government can do it by building ghost cities. So easy that a democratic government can put people to work short-term building frontage roads, interchanges, commuter trains, and big box stores and see gross domestic product increase. None of this is hard.
What is difficult, but what is essential that we do, is make sure these investments are productive. Our investments in infrastructure must be more than a transaction. More than a GDP blip. They actually have to make us better off, creating far more long-term wealth than they create in future obligations.
The first threshold for a productive investment is that it needs to pay for itself. The revenue the government receives as a result of the investment must cover the cost of the investment, otherwise it’s not an investment. It’s just consumption. That is the first threshold, and the easiest one, yet we rarely meet it.
After generating enough revenue to cover its own cost, an infrastructure investment must then create enough financial productivity to pay for its ongoing operations and maintenance. That is a cost generally born by local communities, so the burden here is even more urgent. If the infrastructure investment does not cross this threshold, it’s a bad investment, and it will make the community poorer, regardless of what it does for GDP and unemployment in the next quarter.
The third threshold is that the infrastructure investment must create enough wealth that can be taxed so as to pay for the eventual rehabilitation or replacement of that infrastructure. In the 2010 stimulus package, my community received millions for a new road. Guess what? That gave us some short-term construction jobs, but now my community has a new overengineered, overbuilt road to maintain. Forever. This is what infrastructure is: a forever obligation.
If an infrastructure investment can meet all three of these thresholds, it still can’t be called an “investment” unless it meets a fourth: It has to create enough wealth—enough ongoing revenue—to make our communities more prosperous than they are now. There has to be a real financial payoff, something that justifies taking on the risk and making a forever commitment. If that isn’t there, then we’re just building infrastructure to build infrastructure, which is the kind of thing ABC News scoffs at China for doing (and rightly so).
This is what it means to make a productive investment in infrastructure. With the financial returns from the investment, we:
-
cover the costs of the infrastructure investment,
-
pay for the ongoing operations and maintenance of that infrastructure,
-
create enough wealth to ultimately pay for the rehabilitation and replacement of that infrastructure, and
-
provide a return so that our communities can increase their consumption (i.e., improve their quality of life).
We need to be obsessive about this, particularly at the local level, because we need to improve our quality of life. Many things that are in the American Jobs Plan are not infrastructure, but rather consumption. Still, they are worthy of our spending. If we want the resources to do them, not just in a one-time blowout but in an ongoing manner, then we need a real financial return on our infrastructure investments.
If we want to spend $10 billion establishing a Civilian Climate Corps, we have to make our investments in infrastructure financially productive.
If we want to spend $100 billion on public schools and $12 billion on community colleges, we need our infrastructure investments to have a positive return on investment.
If we want to spend $25 billion on child care, $400 billion on care for the aging and people with disabilities, and expand long-term care under Medicaid, we can’t make infrastructure investments that make our cities poorer.
If we want to spend $15 billion eliminating racial and gender inequities, $40 billion on job training, and $48 billion on workforce development and worker protection, then we can’t allow our federal infrastructure investments to continue to induce, everywhere across this continent, the American version of the Chinese Ghost City.
Tomorrow I’m going to explain how the plan misdiagnoses the underlying cause of why we struggle to maintain our infrastructure (hint: it’s not a lack of spending) and, in doing so, sets the stage for further American decline. Later this week I will detail what we should be doing instead and, in the absence of reform, how local leaders can position themselves to succeed regardless of what happens in Washington D.C.
None of what I’ve written here will surprise those who have been here a while. You likely had the same reaction to the details of this plan that I did. If you’re new to Strong Towns and find any of this confusing, you might want to check out the free Strong Towns 101 course we put together or buy our book, Strong Towns: A Bottom-Up Revolution to Rebuild American Prosperity, which goes into great detail on how America has used infrastructure spending to grow itself into decline.
Article image: Ghost city in the Chenggong district, Kunming, Yunnan. Image via Wiki Commons.
Recent News
- Art as Daily Experience in Ogden’s Nine Rails Creative District
- Award Spotlight: Salt Lake City Reimagines Nature
- LET’S TALK! AND TALK. AND TALK SOME MORE…
- A Minnesota Judge Throws the Book at Immoral Tax Assessments
- The Great Rebalance
- To Fully Observe, We Need to Walk
- Study reveals that Utah housing prices have increased 200% in two decades
- DOUBLE WHAMMY
- The Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman
- Gov. Cox hails ‘generational’ effort in Utah’s water law history
- Clamor is King
- Utah Is Building a ’15-Minute City’ From Scratch
- Quality of Life – A Dishonest Approach to Change in Neighborhood Character
- Changing the Rules of Zoning
- Growth & Change In the West: 2022 RMLUI Conference Recap
- Vernacular Is Beautiful—If We Would Just Allow It
- APAUT Spring Conference Follow-up and Pictures
- To Airbnb or Not to Airbnb
- The Costs of Wide Streets in the U.S.
- APAUT President’s Message – March 2022
- How should we decide the fate of Utah Lake?
- How the Utah Legislature continues to usurp power from city and county government
- What to know about residential care facilities in your neighborhood
- University of Utah Professor Named the 3rd Most Cited Planning Faculty in the World
- TWO BIG BILLS OUT
- Examining the Impact of London’s Mandatory Inclusionary Housing
- May We all Grow Together: Cultivating Support for Utah’s Emerging Planners
- A Commitment to Change
- Okay Boomer
- APAUT Book Discussion: Evicted by Matthew Desmond
- Economic Development After the Rise of Telework
- Follow the 2022 Legislative Session
- After the Bennett Freeze: Planning Within the Navajo Nation
- Flexible Zoning for the New Economy
- Lead and Inspire with Purpose: AICP Code of Ethics Update
- Janet Quinney Lawson – Institute for Land, Water & Air
- Emerging Planners Survey
- Plan to restore Utah Lake met with resistance from Utah County conservation groups
- New Murray projects and guidelines move forward as moratorium ends
- From the Office of Dodge, Wiggle, Hack, Shrug & DeCamp, LLC
- Land Use Training
- Paul Allred: Career Reflections & Valuable Advice – Part 3
- Cache Summit 2021
- WAVE HIKING PERMIT CHANGES ON THE WAY
- Paul Allred: Career Reflections & Valuable Advice (Part 2)
- Paul Allred: Career Reflections & Valuable Advice
- UDOT seeks public input on rural Utah transportation plans
- Electric Vehicles Are on the Rise. Is Your Community Ready?
- Call for Award Nominations
- Fifteen-Minute City
- Remember Olympia Hills?
- The Mountain Lions: these nine cities boomed in the COVID era
- AS PLANNERS, WHY DO WE DO WHAT WE DO, AND WHY ARE WE DOING IT?
- Andrea Garfinkel-Castro, doctoral candidate, “Unpacks” Latino Urbanism
- 11 Ways To Excel Ethically At Every Level
- Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD): core principles
- A Tale of Two Walks: Part 2
- Heat, Health & Equity: The Effects of High Temperatures on Health, and Ways to Mitigate Heat in Our City
- Help Shape Equity Planning Policy
- DO CITIES HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BAN FIREWORKS?
- Air Quality Is Better In Utah Today Than Ten Years Ago, But…
- Layton council adopts water-saving landscaping requirements for most new development
- CAREFUL WHOM YOU CALL A NIMBY
- Considering A National Infrastructure Bank
- HEALTHY UTAH COMMUNITY
- Breaking Down Silos: The Inception of the Utah Rural Coordinating Council
- MAG Transit Studies
- Effective Public Engagement Requires a Lot More Than a Public Hearing
- Is Remote Work Here to Stay?
- SENSITIVE LANDS PLANNING: PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE FOR GENERATIONS TO COME
- Bond Ratings are for Investors (Not Taxpayers)
- It’s Complicated (Ok, you’ve heard that before, but maybe not for this topic – billboards.)
- The Color of Law APAUT Online Book Discussion
- The American Jobs Plan Will Make Our Infrastructure Crisis Worse
- President’s Infrastructure Proposal Includes Addressing Housing Affordability
- We Cannot Plan from Our Desks
- Rep. Curtis, Sen. Romney introduce bill to advance the Bonneville Shoreline Trail
- Utah could lose out on billions in federal funding for passenger rail
- The Cure for the Wasatch Front’s Housing Crisis: More Affordable Homes Between North Salt Lake and Lehi
- Ambassador Program Update
- Local Needs Among Utah’s Multicultural Communities During the COVID-19 Pandemic
- Campus Mobility Hub Study – APAUT Award Winner
- Does Building New Housing Reduce Overall Housing Costs?
- Layton Forward – Layton City’s Comprehensive General Plan Update
- Spring Conference Postponed, Book Club, President’s Message
- Presidents Message
- Lehi Connectivity Standards – A Stronger Urban Fabric
- Housing First; Cars Last
- UDOT Bike Infrastructure Data Collection Project
- The Great Horizon Year of 2020
- Density is a Loaded Term
- New Study on Housing Affordability Focuses on Local Land Use Practices
- There is no such thing as ‘smart sprawl’
- Legislative Interim Committee – What You Need To Know
- A bipartisan opportunity to rebuild American infrastructure
- Zoning laws aren’t the only things hindering Utah’s housing market
- Congratulations to the APAUT 2020 Award Winners
- State and Local Governments Must Further Address Housing Affordability
- The Status of Women Leaders in Government – Utah Cities and Towns
- We have to do something about Utah’s housing crisis
- What the Wasatch Front needs is more basement apartments
- Cities Don’t Need High-Rises to Become Affordable
- Away from the bustle: Covid-19 and the end of commuterland
- The Color of Law: A Book Review
- (Contract) Zoning by Agreement in Utah
- Zoning Reform Is Not Leftism
- “The Great Localization” COVID-19 and Opportunities for Communities
- Missing Middle Housing: Thinking Big and Building Small to Respond to Today’s Housing Crisis
- Zoning Reform – English Style
- 3 Stories Show the Flip Side Of Zoning Reform
- APAUT Call to Action
- The Politics of Housing Affordability
- Zoning, Affordability, and COVID-19
- Where do we go NOW!? – President’s Message
- An Interview With Ashley Cleveland, MCMP
- The Importance of Sense of Place in our Communities
- An Answer to the Suburban Growth Dilemma
- Homeless to Housed Fall 2019
- A New Initiative: Children’s Walks
- Awards Spotlight: Water Quality Planning Toolkit for Utah Communities
- All About Storm Drain Utility Fees – Video