China to create largest mega city in the world

[Digital_Islandboy]

Article: China to create largest mega city in the world with 42 million people
Date: 24 Jan 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk - The Telegraph, United Kingdom
Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...on-people.html


SNIP
China is planning to create the world's biggest mega city by merging nine cities to create a metropolis twice the size of Wales with a population of 42 million.
END SNIP

What do you think? How about a Boston-New York-Baltimore-Washington D.C.-opolus. With the Acela as the first part of the "metro" central high speed transit system? :-)) It will still not have enough people but it would be a work in progress.

[Mayor Menino's Crohn's]

I bess be building my bomb sheleter for the inevitable

[czsz]

According to the 2000 census, there were 49.6m people in the Northeast megalopolis, and that's surely grown, so the Boston-Washington corridor would certainly top this as a single city.

BTW, the headlines about this are somewhat misleading. See http://www.urbanphoto.net/blog/2011/...r-megalopolis/

[BostonUrbEx]

Need to expand and improve on the Acela network to compete with China. I mean, come one, China had one of the fastest trains (if not THE) in the world recently, and all we have is Acela in it's present state! It's BULLSHIT. If the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act wants to achieve something rather than being a piece of shit, it should have gone into infrastructure, particularly things like this. Jobs, better trains, more private jobs opening up with new opportunities, etc.

[Mayor Menino's Crohn's]

Originally Posted by BostonUrbEx

Need to expand and improve on the Acela network to compete with China. I mean, come one, China had one of the fastest trains (if not THE) in the world recently, and all we have is Acela in it's present state! It's BULLSHIT. If the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act wants to achieve something rather than being a piece of shit, it should have gone into infrastructure, particularly things like this. Jobs, better trains, more private jobs opening up with new opportunities, etc.

I hate to say it, but instead of trying to compete with China, how about we focus all of our energy on fixing the existing rail and transit that we have already. We're never going to beat certain countries, and China is one of those countries. They will break us, and it'll be painful for our economy, not for theirs. So the best thing to do is to stop focusing on what they do with their high-speed rail, and just focus on improving ours. Because the more that we try and compete with them, the further that they'll be ahead in every way.

[found5dollar]

Originally Posted by Mayor Menino's Crohn's

I hate to say it, but instead of trying to compete with China, how about we focus all of our energy on fixing the existing rail and transit that we have already. We're never going to beat certain countries, and China is one of those countries. They will break us, and it'll be painful for our economy, not for theirs. So the best thing to do is to stop focusing on what they do with their high-speed rail, and just focus on improving ours. Because the more that we try and compete with them, the further that they'll be ahead in every way.

Here here!

now if only boston could realize the same thing....

[ant8904]

^^^What does that even mean?

"China's going to beat us?" Let's not try. Improving infrastructure and building stuff that can compete with what China is doing can go hand and hand. There's no reason we cannot fix our system while trying to compete with them. If our system can be made to run efficiently and well, wouldn't it help make the US more competitive anyway?

[Mayor Menino's Crohn's]

Originally Posted by ant8904

^^^What does that even mean?

"China's going to beat us?" Let's not try. Improving infrastructure and building stuff that can compete with what China is doing can go hand and hand. There's no reason we cannot fix our system while trying to compete with them. If our system can be made to run efficiently and well, wouldn't it help make the US more competitive anyway?

I take it back. China has already beaten us.

Nope take it back. We've beaten ourselves when we outsource our jobs to China. Another issue for another board.

We talk about all of these Grandiose, Pie-In-The-Sky plans for rail, while China just builds it no questions asked. Obviously we can come to a compromise but still, we can't put anything together because all of our pols fight and bicker. China doesn't. They build. Game. Set. Match. China.

I didn't say that we shouldn't fix our bridges and rail. But let's not try and be something that we're not.

[BostonUrbEx]

I don't understand... why shouldn't we compete? Competing stands to our own benefit. If China can have a 250MPH (random speed for example) train, then why don't we strive for one more step above, say... 275MPH? Not so we can tell China to suck our locomotive, but because we can for our own betterment because the technology exists for 250MPH, so we should strive for 275! If China can successfully link up a megalopolis, shouldn't we try to improve the method in which one does so?

I don't know, I just don't understand why we should halt everything and say "Okay China, you 'win', we will just stop existing now".

[Digital_Islandboy]

Originally Posted by czsz

According to the 2000 census, there were 49.6m people in the Northeast megalopolis, and that's surely grown, so the Boston-Washington corridor would certainly top this as a single city.

BTW, the headlines about this are somewhat misleading. See http://www.urbanphoto.net/blog/2011/...r-megalopolis/

Okay, I stand corrected in terms of numbers. That just seemed high to me. (No?) Boston proper I thought had ~ 5-6 million, New York City 8 million etc.

[Digital_Islandboy]

Originally Posted by BostonUrbEx

Need to expand and improve on the Acela network to compete with China. I mean, come one, China had one of the fastest trains (if not THE) in the world recently, and all we have is Acela in it's present state! It's BULLSHIT. If the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act wants to achieve something rather than being a piece of shit, it should have gone into infrastructure, particularly things like this. Jobs, better trains, more private jobs opening up with new opportunities, etc.

The USA needs to take the European approach. Divorce high speed passenger rail lines from slow moving freight lines. High speed passenger lines need things like banked curves and few at grade crossings so as to keep the trains from having to slow down... Freight has to moves slower anyway so it may not be as big a deal. However, when you put both uses on the same track you create the need for a lot of signals for track switching and the like. Also IMHO when I took Acela I felt like Connecticut was trying to use it as a local train in some ways. It stopped like (I think) 5 times in a small state like CT? I felt it shouldn't stop that much. Maybe twice in a state CT's size. And no more than 2-3 times in MA if the Downeaster was integrated.

[Mayor Menino's Crohn's]

Originally Posted by BostonUrbEx

I don't understand... why shouldn't we compete? Competing stands to our own benefit. If China can have a 250MPH (random speed for example) train, then why don't we strive for one more step above, say... 275MPH? Not so we can tell China to suck our locomotive, but because we can for our own betterment because the technology exists for 250MPH, so we should strive for 275! If China can successfully link up a megalopolis, shouldn't we try to improve the method in which one does so?

I don't know, I just don't understand why we should halt everything and say "Okay China, you 'win', we will just stop existing now".

Because if we don't call a spade a spade now, China will do it for us.


Look, if we we're able to come up with a plan to defeat them, trust me, our government would've done so decades ago. Their "tiger mom" parenting skills, while cruel and unusual (and the author of this new book is a c**t), gets their kids into the schools of higher learning. The Yales, Harvard cliches are true. And they took our jobs long before we outsourced all of them to Beijing. Why? Because even then our officials looked at China and said, we we can't compete with this. It really is Globetrotters and Generals. We're the Generals.

In all likelyhood, we won't exist in seventy-five years. In fact, I predict that China and Israel will be the last two NATIONS left standing. Why? Because those countries are beligerent. They have strong defense systems. Strong nuclear programs. Plus they have savy tech people who have our number.

We can't even fill a hole in DTX, find a new way to get our citizens off oil thanks to lobbyists, and it took three months to clean up an oil spill. Our government is killing living people, but will do anything to appease the right-to-life nuts. Wisconsin is in limbo over the use of stimulus funds for high speed rail between Green Bay and Madison because residents argue that 70 mph train speeds are too noisy. Yeah sure, we're going to show China.

[czsz]

Good god, take a step back. It's not as if China has no problems. There are costs associated with building the world's fastest train in a still developing country with low GDP per capita. The high speed trains were given priority that virtually eliminated a lot of slower, but more affordable services, making transportation for common people much more difficult. And that's just one example of what's lurking behind the scary China headlines. You have to ask how they're "beating us". Is it in terms of "wonders of the world", or access to decent quality services and a high standard of living for large number of people? And which of these is the better choice?

[ant8904]

So let's say we call a spade a spade... then what?

I can agree that the US in the long run, at least without dramatic change, will keep up. Still, does that mean we shouldn't continue to at least try to improve stuff? Current conditions does say that attempt to rebuild bridges end up late and overbudget, but it doesn't mean we should just let things crumble. Even if it for only our own self-interest to have a safe bridge and working transportation, the act of doing that itself means upholding a standard that indirectly competes with China. Does that we will win? No. But, does China winning that you don't want us to build a decent high-speed rail line or fix that bridge before it collapses?

BTW, that does mean we should keep planning to building high-speed rail as long as it is good for the country. We can't beat China in the current shape, but if having a high-speed system is useful for the US, then the US should do it.

[GW2500]

Sooner or later social revolution will happen in China, when it does say good bye to exploiting its own work force. Currenty they only offer legitamte education to some, basically you take a test, pass get prepped for college, fail and work in a factory. It's only a matter of time before its people demand more social services and it will tax the hell out of 1.3 billion populted China. I'm sure behind close doors Chinese govt officials are scared shitless about that fact. So in so many ways they arn't even close to eye level with us. If we exploited our workforce, and neglected our poor (which is what the Republicans want) in the name of cheaper production we'd be building all this shit too. Also one day China will experience the joys of aging infrastructure.

[KentXie]

Originally Posted by GW2500

Sooner or later social revolution will happen in China, when it does say good bye to exploiting its own work force. Currenty they only offer legitamte education to some, basically you take a test, pass get prepped for college, fail and work in a factory. It's only a matter of time before its people demand more social services and it will tax the hell out of 1.3 billion populted China. I'm sure behind close doors Chinese govt officials are scared shitless about that fact. So in so many ways they arn't even close to eye level with us. If we exploited our workforce, and neglected our poor (which is what the Republicans want) in the name of cheaper production we'd be building all this shit too. Also one day China will experience the joys of aging infrastructure.

Do you have first hand experience with the educational system in China. While yes it is offer to some, its more likely due to the fact that a large portion of the population are still rural. Literacy rate is in the 90s so I don't believe that the education system itself is lacking.

Also, exactly how efficient China will become in the future will determine its fate. If technological and capital growth catches up, China will remain competitive by flooding the market even more. As of now, China is labor heavy in production. Once China buys or creates more efficient equipments, each worker will produce even more, driving down prices of product and thus keeping China's growth rate afloat.

Also taxing the population won't be a problem. Europe currently does so and that's why they are able to improve and expand their infrastucture. For all the Americans complaining about taxes, they don't know anything until they lived in Europe. And when they are wondering why our infrastucture is so shitty, well, you reap what you sow.

[GW2500]

^^ I saw a front line where they showed China's "sats", if you didn't get a certain score, or if you wern't connected, you didn't go to the high schools that preped you for college. The rest went back to the farms or factories. The bottom line is they ignore and exploit their poor, and there is hundreds of millions of them. One day they will have to provide services for them and that will tax the govt not the people. Then we'll see how much building they will do, with construction workers getting 1st world wages. Right now they are building 1st world stuff, but at 3rd world wages. Must be nice from the govt/developer's perspective.

[KentXie]

Originally Posted by GW2500

^^ I saw a front line where they showed China's "sats", if you didn't get a certain score, or if you wern't connected, you didn't go to the high schools that preped you for college. The rest went back to the farms or factories. The bottom line is they ignore and exploit their poor, and there is hundreds of millions of them. One day they will have to provide services for them and that will tax the govt not the people. Then we'll see how much building they will do, with construction workers getting 1st world wages. Right now they are building 1st world stuff, but at 3rd world wages. Must be nice from the govt/developer's perspective.

I still don't see the problem. While of course, growth will slow down at one point (once they catch up), providing services should not be a problem. First, China will enjoy a higher localized economy than the US because it is much denser. This is the cause of the current growth. Also once wages increases, China will receive much more revenue from taxation to provide for services. In fact, if they follow the European tax rate, they would have more than enough to support public services. With the constant migration into the city, services can concentrate in one area instead of thinning themselve out by expanding into surburban cities and town. Again, growth rate will slow down and wage will increase. However that may prove to be more beneficial for the country as spending will increase. There is nothing that would cause a social revolution especially if the country is enjoying growth.

An easy way for China's firms to retain high profit even with job growth? Develop more efficient machine that can produce faster.

If anything, the only social unrest I see is workers demanded to be paid more, but nothing drastic that would cause a government change.

[GW2500]

Man wants to be free and that isn't entirely the case in China. They can get as cosmopolitian as they want. But freedom is a basic human desire that won't go away ever. And eventually they might also have to care about their poor, that slows down business. Look at us and unions. Granted w/ unions they also got corupt and power hungry, but fair pay and benefits increases cost of production greatly. It also makes it way less enticing for a company to manufactor goods in China. I'm not saying China wont experience great economic growth. I'm saying once they eventually have eqaulity and freedom, the cost of doing business becomes much more expensive. Which is a pain America experiences. It may take a century, but it will happen. There is no way w/ all the interaction the free world will have w/ China that its' people won't want the freedom and equality that they see in so many other places.

[NJBostonFan]

Originally Posted by BostonUrbEx

Need to expand and improve on the Acela network to compete with China. I mean, come one, China had one of the fastest trains (if not THE) in the world recently, and all we have is Acela in it's present state! It's BULLSHIT. If the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act wants to achieve something rather than being a piece of shit, it should have gone into infrastructure, particularly things like this. Jobs, better trains, more private jobs opening up with new opportunities, etc.

I am with you on that!