U.S. should focus more on infrastructure rather than warmongering

[beijingwalker]

U.S. should focus more on infrastructure rather than warmongering
Having world-class infrastructure is why China will not lose its manufacturing dominance in the near future despite the U.S.-China trade war. It would be great if the U.S. could learn from China and focus on infrastructure innovation instead of on spending efforts on wars.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

U.S. should focus more on infrastructure rather than warmongering
Having world-class infrastructure is why China will not lose its manufacturing dominance in the near future despite the U.S.-China trade war. It would be great if the U.S. could learn from China and focus on infrastructure innovation instead of on spending efforts on wars.

Yet another person ignorant of the realities of what high speed rail entails.

This works well in a developing country where there is not much developed infrastructure to tear down.

It doesn't work well in a developed country with $Billions in developed land between 2 straight line points.

Even 70 years ago back in the 1950's when we put the Federal Interstate highway system in it was incredibly expensive to buy out the land. Some places couldn't be done because it was far too expensive.

Case in point:

Interstate 95 in Massachusetts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The 1957 Federal Interstate Highway 95 was stopped COLD by expensive developed land between Peabody and Quincy. To join the two ends they had to use an existing curved state road built 50 years before in 1927!! In 2020 that expensive area has mushroomed to take up the ENTIRE state.

1927 Massachusetts Highway Route 128

It is simply impossible to buy the land needed for a straight high speed rail line.

 

[beijingwalker]

Yet another person ignorant of the realities of what high speed rail entails.

This works well in a developing country where there is not much developed infrastructure to tear down.

It doesn't work well in a developed country with $billions in developed land between 2 points.

Even 70 years ago back in the 1950's when we put the highway system in it was incredibly expensive to buy out the land and some places couldn't be done because it was too expensive.

Interstate 95 in Massachusetts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 667874
1957 Highway had to detour around expensive developed areas of Boston and suburbs. In 2020 that expensive area has mushroomed FAR outside the red area.

China didn't have an inch of highway in early 1990's, and now boasts the world longest by a big margin.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

China didn't have an inch of highway in early 1990's, and now boasts the world longest by a big margin.

Yeah because you could easily pave over paddy fields worked by poor farmers. It hasn't been like that in the US for over 100 years. Try and put in the same number of new routes in the year 2120 and see how hard that will be. You going to knock down 1000's of miles of high rise buildings? That's a lot different than farmland.

 

[beijingwalker]

Yeah because you could easily pave over paddy fields worked by poor farmers. It hasn't been like that in the US for over 100 years. Try and put in the same number of new routes in the year 2120 and see how hard that will be. You going to knock down 1000's of miles of high rise buildings? That's a lot different than farmland.

China now is even constructing more highways than before, even infrastructure level here is already the top of the world, beating everyone esle hands down. Development level is no excuse for stagnation.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

China now is even constructing more highways than before, even infrastructure level here is already the top of the world, beating everyone esle hands down. Development level is no excuse for stagnation.

You knocking down modern high rise buildings to do it?

Remember your new stuff is in new modern cities built since 1980 and old stuff outside of cities.

In the US it is the opposite. Our old stuff is in the cities and the new stuff built outside the cities since the 1950's.

 

[beijingwalker]

You knocking down modern high rise buildings to do it?

Remember your new stuff is in new modern cities and old stuff outside of cities.
In the US it is the opposite. Our old stuff is in the cities and the new stuff is outside the cities.

If you can't rebuild them, at least repair them. China had many old roads, building, subways, railways rebuilt or remodelled.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

If you can't rebuild them, at least repair them. China had many old roads, building, subways, railways rebuilt or remodelled.

Everything is about supply and demand. If you tear down an old housing building and put up a shiny new housing building you need people to buy it. If people were flocking to buy it you'd have an incentive to knock another one down and do the same thing. If nobody is interested in buying it then you have no incentive to knock down any more unless you want a ghost city. Currently New York City has over 1000 vacant lots where a multi-unit building was demolished but nobody is interested in putting a new building there. They can knock down another 1000 easily.

So with demand outside cities not much is going to happen inside cities.

This stat keeps cities like NYC from redeveloping...which is probably the opposite of the preferred living of Chinese:

https://www.builderonline.com/money/economics/80-percent-of-americans-prefer-single-family-homeownership_o

80 Percent of Americans prefer single-family Homeownership

However if you asked people back in the year 1900 80% probably would say they preferred to live in new multi-level housing with an elevator in new developing cities...just like people in 2000 China. You are 100 years behind us in housing mentality.

Now with the vast majority not interested in living in dense cities there is no incentive to fix subways or build new high rises. With mult-unit living being undesirable the ones who actually end up living there tend to be the disadvantaged. Thus you can't even raise the subway fares to cover rebuilding costs or you'll alienate the user base.

In Boston the bus/subway fare is a little more than the cost of a candybar. The city's median household income is around $8,000 LESS than the Massachusetts median income. This is probably the opposite of China where the median income in a major city is higher than those who live outside it.

Same holds true in other major cities.
The New York City median income is $17,000 less than New York State's median income.
LA's median income is $13,000 less than California's median income.
Chicago's median income is $8000 less than the Illinois median income.