Slashdot Mirror
China's Shanghai Sets Population at 25 Million To Avoid 'Big City Disease' (theguardian.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: China's financial hub of Shanghai will limit its population to 25 million people by 2035 as part of a quest to manage "big city disease," authorities have said. The State Council said on its website late on Monday the goal to control the size of the city was part of Shanghai's masterplan for 2017-2035, which the government body had approved. "By 2035, the resident population in Shanghai will be controlled at around 25 million and the total amount of land made available for construction will not exceed 3,200 square kilometres," it said. State media has defined "big city disease" as arising when a megacity becomes plagued with environmental pollution, traffic congestion and a shortage of public services, including education and medical care. But some experts doubt the feasibility of the plans, with one researcher at a Chinese government thinktank describing the scheme as "unpractical and against the social development trend."
Yes but what about the Small City Disease? Where the small city is envious of the big city's size, and girth?
If 25 Million isn't a big city.... What the heck is? Seriously though, why 25 Million? Is it just because they have already burned past 20 million and are all, "Well, guess we can't kick people out now, so let's just call it at 25"? What "Big City diseases" can they avoid at 25 million that aren't happening at 30? And further, is this just Shanghi proper, or is this going to limit the Shanghi region which is already pushing 35 million people.
So all that will happen is there will be another city right across the street, which is managed separately. This already exists to a point in the way the separate districts are managed. But it is unclear why they think this would reverse the overall social and economic trends which are pushing growth in Shanghai.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
Up up and away $$$$ Fucking like London or HK. If the value of the land wasn't already expensive, it could go through the roof should a civil bidding war loom on who gets to live in Shanghai.
Chinese citizens don't own land to nearly the extent that westerns assume land rights. I wouldn't be surprised to see an almost uninhabited agricultural belt being installed, deliberately razing towns around the designated zone to create this.
My real fear is the instability that will be caused by the unpeople who are denied to be living there.
Offer free vasectomies and tubal ligations, maybe sweeten the pot with some cash. You will start to see results within the year.
China must be run by EA/Maxis. Hopefully someone can release a mod that allows infinite expansion. Drumpf would never stand for these regulations.
Let's face it. Those who think China can replace the USA as the next superpower don't realize China has two issues they have to deal with:
1. Feeding, clothing and sheltering around 1.7 billion people--around 20% of Earth's human population.
2. A massive air and water pollution problem that is already affecting the health of many Chinese.
It's these issues that could result in health issues so gigantic that it could bankrupt that country within 20-25 years. This article is symptomatic of what will soon happen to China down the road.
Putting a cap on population growth is essentially what the certain areas of California have done, although at a much smaller endpoint.
Under typical historical circumstances, the concentration of economic activity would have led to high-density buildings and eventually skyscrapers and such, followed by construction of the systems to handle the higher density, such as subways. However, restrictions on construction in and around the Bay Area have locked most areas into low-density development. This restricts the resident population to either incumbent residents that bought in the past, or higher-earning newcomers who can afford the exorbitant housing costs. Infrastructure limitations also limit the size of the non-resident worker population that can migrate in/out on a daily basis.
Either way, it's an interesting social experiment in squeezing city-like economic activity into a suburb-like layout.
It's already over 25 million...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
It is not "big city disease" that is the problem, it is vehicularism.
when a megacity becomes plagued with environmental pollution, traffic congestion and a shortage of public services, including education and medical care.
This is because you insist on a majority of the population moving to and fro every single damn day for no reason, and the layout of the city to support such a stupid scheme. It's great for the auto industry, the insurance industry, the human patch-em-up industry, but terrible for society.
We have had the internet for decades. It allows us to conduct business as if we were physically there. Now can we finally stop wastingso many tarajoules of energy to move back and forth every day!?!?!
to build a better mass transit system. And charge people who insist on driving.
Here's a brief synopsis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George_theorem
Most cities put a limit on the space around them that can be built out into, the green belt idea, and just force the city to keep growing vertically. This does nothing to limit the population growth and certainly, from all the examples I've seen, drives the price of housing up.
That this is unusual in the societal sense is true as well. The current trend if to pack as many people into a few urban centres as possible in order to return more of the green belt area and beyond to the wild. And, of course, the concentration of as many people into as few centres as possible would make it easier for the coming engineered pandemic to reduce our surplus population.
So, if their are 25M people, and then suddenly a baby is born, what will they do to correct the resulting overpopulation?
If nothing, then the limit is all bark and no bite.
52 comments and no sign of Shanghai Bill. I'm highly disappointed.
You said it three times in this post alone!
And kept on arguing with anyone who told you the truth for about 10 more comments.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
people were not allowed to travel around without the permission of gov. Country and city residents were isolated, those who lived in cities had relatively better education, health care, job opportunities...certain privileges; those who lived in countries, they were exposed to starvation and much brutal bureaucrats.
After the opening of China at about 1990s, the restriction of migration was partially abandoned. Country residents swarmed into cities, greatly decreased the price of labor, they worked harder, and readily to take the jobs city dwellers did not want...this is the force (or at least one of the forces) that boosted the rapid development of Chinese cities. Even nowadays, the trend still exists, though people from countries are still officially discriminated, they are not allowed to share the benefits as the city residents.
Back to the topic, now at least two largest cities in China, Beijing and Shanghai, want to expel part of the population, the people who do not have residency, and in some situation might refer to the "lower-end population". Hope this will not be the beginning of reestablishing the barrier of migration.