@Alon @ddayen i’m not sure how fruitful it is to argue over what the everything bagel story *really* is. they’ve complained about permitting, but also a great deal about what are really naggings (not requirements) in eg the CHIPS act, to consider childcare, DEI-style equity in hiring, provisioning by small and minority owned businesses, etc. it’s easy to mock that stuff! but these naggings are not a source of the hold-up costs that require budgets be tripled. 1/

@Alon @ddayen i think maybe a way to reconcile the good part of the everything-bagel critique and @ddayen’s rejoinder might be to follow the money: who is on the other side of those tripled budgets, in whose hands does the cash end up? 2/

@Alon @ddayen when it ends up in the hands of lawyers and outside consultants, or as payouts to property owners or other stakeholders that purchase acquiescence, we should score that as inefficiency and agree with the antieverything bagelists. 3/

@Alon @ddayen but requirements that lead to better pay and conditions for a workforce, or naggings that may gesture at social goals and build political support, that seem annoying but don’t actually cost much, can remain on the bagel. (then there are “buy american” requirements, which are kind of a mix but probably politically nonnegotiable, although hopefully sometimes waivable.) /fin