Passage Summary: Even though fixing things as you go is cheaper than waiting for a total collapse, people almost always choose the expensive total collapse route.

Reasoning: Continuous maintenance is cheaper and prevents the need for radical reconstruction, yet infrastructure managers almost always wait for failure and perform expensive reconstruction instead.

Analysis: This paradox asks us to explain why humans choose the objectively worse financial option. In social dynamics like this, the answer often lies in human psychology or political incentives. Look for an answer that explains why a manager would prefer a one-time massive expense over a steady, smaller one—perhaps because budgets are allocated yearly or because a 'ribbon-cutting' ceremony for a new bridge is more politically valuable than a quiet paint job. We need a reason why the 'logical' choice is practically ignored.