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."
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.
Offer free vasectomies and tubal ligations, maybe sweeten the pot with some cash. You will start to see results within the year.
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.
I believe they already did this when moving various non-critical services to a new city near Beijing (mentioned in the article). In the US at least we have the same thing, called 'eminent domain'. In China you just lease the land from the government for 70 years, which is at least a more honest representation of the relationship.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
Who's this "you". Unless you or the company you work for has ties to the CCP, *you* don't get to decide shit. China is run like a giant game of Sim City with often epic results in failure - please see Ghost Cities.
In addition, the school you're allowed to attend in China is largely based on birthplace. Even in post Communist cultural revolution, the Hukou (caste based) system still exists in legal form even if not socially recognized.
Life is not for the lazy.
It's already over 25 million...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Chinese citizens don't own land.
Could have stopped right there. No one owns land in China, the best you can get is a 70 year lease on the land. You may own your apartment, but the land underneath? That's a lease.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Someone's never been to China...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Hong Kong was leased to the British in 1898. Land could not be sold - because it wasn't owned by the British in the first place.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
RE: Public Transit suggestion ...
It is hard for me to imagine a more pervasive set of public transit systems than I encountered in China, from the undergrounds (in place and still being build in multiple urban areas), high speed trains, maglev, trams, buses, etc. Nonetheless, in the first tier city I was in (Shanghai) the streets and highways are in heavy use despite the options. And being a pedestrian can be a dangerous option where Mopeds drivers think (and act) as if they own the pavement where they crush any incursion by bipedals with impunity ... that includes a subset of the bicyclists acting in like fashion. Moreover, the level of risk taking and incompetence seen on the urban highways was breath taking. I soon lost the illusion I could successfully drive on the limited access highways and I knew immediately I could never meet the requirements to navigate the surface streets.
So what I have seen the options are there, but during high usage periods one travels on public transit packed as tight as a sardine in its final trip. I did that only once and it was just too much to repeat despite it not even being a rush hour. Instead it was during the end of Summer national holiday week. Regarding other forms of travel were either very nice, e.g. high speed trains (including maglev - but less than 15 miles in the entire country), domestic air competent (on worse in the States on longer trips), etc. were all passable or much better than I have been on elsewhere. But for some it does not suffice when the illusion here [States] the myth of the "Open Road" carries too great a weight. It also might be perceived status of having one's own vehicle despite the astronomical fees and other limitations that makes driving the choice of many that just can no matter what the costs are.
So your solution seems to be missing too many factors to be the entire fix needed.
Controversial social experiments: The cultural revolution? Red guards? Ghost cities? Currency pegs?
We've tried them all but the ghost cities, you could have asked how they had worked out for us, or just studied the history. No need to repeat mistakes.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You know plenty of places have school zones. And lots of people in those places buy houses in the area just to qualify for the school. It's not that controversial.
Are you still living in the 60's? how do you think the cities got so big if no one was allowed to move there? You still think people can't choose what jobs they want etc.?
The ghost cities were a failure but I don't know if I'd call them an "epic" failure. They weren't primarily built to house people. They were primarily built to stimulate the construction industry (and thus the economy,) and to that extent they were moderately successful even if they've become a bit of an embarrassment after the fact.
The Chinese system goes way beyond school zones. Like to the point where you (meaning the poor classes of course) can't legally even live in an area not designated by your Hukou. This is of course because of ancient laws meant to keep peasants actually on the land doing their job (enriching the landowners..)
The CCP is actually in the process of changing things a bit because those rules are starting to cause them problems as farming becomes more and more mechanized and they need workers in the cities & factories rather than in the fields.. but they're likely only going to replace them with new rules that sound just as ridiculous to those of us who are used to having things like freedom.
Many cities in China will let you move to them and transfer your Huko. Some will even pay you money to do so, say if you are a graduate and come to live in their city. Others like Shanghai mentioned above are more restrictive.
Welfare in China is paid for by the local government and not the central government. So if just anyone could move there it would be a massive burden on the city.
Usually you can transfer there if you get a job, pay taxes or buy a house.
They have been changing them for decades, and will no doubt continue to do so.
broken window fallacy.
Life is not for the lazy.