[donmaq]

> We stopped repairing stuff because stuff is cheap

However, OP's main example is the NYC metro system, which is decidedly not cheap. A similar problem occurred in SF: BART cars are being replaced with multi-$M cars full of electronics & are now having numerous breakdowns.

BART drivers used to reboot the old trains by flipping 4 sets of switches. Now the reset process has hundreds of steps, so most drivers just take the car offline & call for a mechanic. And there's far more failure modes to the new cars as well. Thus: the new cars are more expensive, more fragile, & harder to maintain. BART scored a perfect 'Reverse Better-Faster-Cheaper'.

How did this happen? Politics & payola. The new proposed cars were barely shown to the public, & only for UX/design feedback.

The tie-in's to capitalism that OP describes are apt too: very big companies tendered their bids for these new cars. Maintainability wasn't a key design feature. It's not just our economic system (capitalism) that isn't interested in maintainability- our political system isn't either. Decision makers who won't be in power to see the need for their shiny new acquisitions to be maintained, never seen to care that they will.

[Animats]

How do you build modern electronics for a 30-50 year lifespan? What parts do you use?

I happen to know that the Ford EEC-IV engine control module of the 1980s was designed for a 30-year lifespan. Which it delivered; many 1980s vehicles are still running with it. But newer electronics won't last that long. Line sizes are too small, and minor effects such as electromigration cause wear-out.

[Karrot_Kream]

American metro system problems have nothing to do with Capitalism (TM), in fact several other capitalist countries, like Japan, manage robust metro systems just fine. America hasn't built metro en masse since the '40s and so local expertise on building and maintaining metro isn't there, increasing maintenance cost. In most countries with robust metro systems, cars and rail are standardized, leading to a robust market within the country for parts and a large pool of specialized labor able to debug and maintain these metro systems. In the US, every metro system is a one-off. This is exacerbated by the fractal-nature of local politics in the US which means that there's no general American standard for building rail/metros as each local government comes up with their own bespoke requirements.

BART is a perfect example of this. BART went with non-standard rail gauge and very long trains and stations. This makes it difficult and expensive for BART to buy new cars and fix problems.

[midoridensha]

Great post. Another point is that the DC metro system also uses a non-standard rail gauge: it's 1/4 inch smaller than standard US gauge for some dumb reason, so of course this makes it more expensive to buy cars. Getting new cars made only happens once a decade or so, and involves getting a big juicy contract, and a whole new assembly plant built in the US somewhere.

Here in Japan, the metro system is great. Trains are always on time, they don't break down (because they actually do maintenance!), there's constantly new construction too. On top of this, the train systems are all privately owned: different companies own the different lines. Even so, they all use the same payment method: a simple contactless debit card (suica or pasmo) that works at every station across the country (as well as in vending machines, restaurants, taxis, and countless other places). It's really amazing just how horrible metro systems in the US are compared to this; it's like going to another planet.

[coldacid]

Generally, you'll find that these non-standard gauges for urban/light rail have good reasons, at least good for the time the decisions about them were made. The history of the TTC gauge used here in Toronto is a great example of that.