6 ms·

I'm struck by China's ability to attempt large, ambitious projects like this, compared to America's inability to do, well, anything really. The largest infrast

I'm struck by China's ability to attempt large, ambitious projects like this, compared to America's inability to do, well, anything really. The largest infrastructure project I'm aware of in the USA is California's High Speed Rail (~$60B+), was approved a decade ago and is barely making any progress. The federal government is in complete gridlock. The most ambitious legislation passed in the last decade, the ACA, caused endless partisan warfare. Meanwhile, obvious policy wins like allowing more immigration [1] are not even discussed. I've been following US politics for the last 2-3 presidents (going back to George W Bush), and it makes me very pessimistic. I don't see how a country can expected to be exceptional, or even above average, with politics that are so dysfunctional. Perhaps, though, I'd have a different view if I could see things from inside, within China? [1] http://paulgraham.com/95.html http://paulgraham.com/95.html

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
prodmerc 9y ago
I reckon it's really easy when there's one party in power that controls pretty much everything in the country - you just say it's in the nation's interest, most of the party is similar minded and will agree, and billions are immediately available for the project. Very different than the US and EU, sadly...
taway_1212 9y ago
Aren't the projects in China executed at complete disregard to the rights of individual citizens? I.e. if your house is in the way, sorry, we'll give you some laughable amount of money and send police over to brutalize you until you leave. Under such conditions, it's easy to make lots of change quickly (in such spirit, Stalin was even more efficient - he essentially enslaved a part of his nation via Gulags and used the free slave labor to get done quickly various massively ambitious projects around the country). Another aspect is environment protection - it's much easier to build infrastructure if you don't mind wrecking the natural environment around it.
- jon_richards 9y ago
  I haven't looked it up, but I've heard from a local that if you are displaced by a government project you will "be rich". In his eyes it was similar to winning the lottery, if less extreme.
  - cheapsteak 9y ago
    It does depend on the area I remember coming across a few blocks of old densely packed single-family brick buildings in Shanghai that were about to be torn down. Each building had a large hand written banner above their entrance, half of them praising the communist party for its compassion or saying long live Chairman Mao (my interpretation was that they were hoping for mercy for being such loyal party members), the other half cussing out the party and local officials
    - pcr0 9y ago
      I think the idea was that hanging pictures of Chairman Mao all over their building would make the government look bad if they knocked it down.
- yadongwen 9y ago
  People are not stupid..nowadays some villagers in China get ~10M USD to move away for real estate construction.. this is the average number for an entire village in Shenzhen.. you call this laughable money?
- epynonymous 9y ago
  false, the chinese government cannot directly use police or government agents to force people out of their homes during what's called (cai fang/house demolition). instead i've heard the use of 3rd party mercenaries to clear the way, but dont quote me on that. for the record, the government does reimburse the individuals which is quite significant, but usually the amount pales in comparison to the land rental price. typically the reimbursement is some stipend per person living under the domicile plus the right to pruchase, at a significant discount, a new home farther away. for example, say you lived in san francisco and the government was re-zoning for a highway, you'd get cash plus the right to buy something in a suburb of sacremento at a pretty nice discount. agree with some comment about it being the equivalent of a lottery.
malandrew 9y ago
Blame the fragmenting US population identity-wise, which has been accelerated by rhetoric on the left. Fewer and fewer people identify as an "American" with each passing year meaning that it is harder and harder to push policies that benefit "Americans". I lived in China for 1.5 years in 2005 to 2006 and culturally, once you pull back the facade of language and food, it wasn't terribly different than how America felt in the 80s (earliest decade I can remember and the last decade where there was still a semblance of cultural uniformity and support for pro-America policies)
- maxerickson 9y ago
  Examples of pro "American" policies that leftist rhetoric has blocked?
- bairrd 9y ago
  Wouldn't the more right wing desire to slash funding for government handouts be a more likely cause of stalled programs? Neoliberalism's weird incestuous desire to have 20 different planning committees write papers on the viability of public works makes things take forever, but also, constant arbitrary slashing of budgets every 4 to 8 years by those on the right puts a bullet in the head of these projects. Blaming the left misses at least 50% of the problem. Also, the left is far more into the concept of redistribution of wealth through public works, even if the centrist democrats filter that through moronic means-testing and bloated committees. Framing this as some lack-of-patriotism issue is completely missing the issues both sides cause in this situation, that would be solved by a party to the left of the useless neoliberal democrats.
- igk 9y ago
  I kind of doubt that a lack of nationalism brought by "left" rhetoric is the problem if "small government" is a rallying cry of those that have "not left"as part of their identity. To pay for large projects, you need taxes.
johansch 9y ago
Dictatorship does make it easier to get things done. It seems like you americans are getting there, though.
- myrandomcomment 9y ago
  Right, because all of Trumps excetive orders have been followed. The courts did not shoot them down or anything......
pdonis 9y ago
China's ability to do this is just an example of Cheops' Law: You can do anything you want to if you have a sufficient supply of expendable labor.
dominotw 9y ago
China doesn't have to deal with hostile entities like Iran and Wahabi arabs. I bet Chinese are proud to be Chinese, I am a naturalised US citizen and being proud of being American is seen as racist.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  I am a naturalised US citizen and being proud of being American is seen as racist. This certainly isn't a universally held belief. I think it probably isn't a widely held belief.
- throwaway053 9y ago
  Lol most of the Chinese is under the Chinese government brainwash via state propaganda and censored internet. You obviously don't know anyone who is from Hong Kong. Ask them how they feel about being Chinese. They will spit in your face
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- nradov 9y ago
  China has to deal with India and Vietnam, which are hostile entities in at least some ways. There are many Uigurs who don't seem proud of being Chinese.
agumonkey 9y ago
Maybe because Asia has recently entered this phase while USA (and Europe) did their explosive growth long ago and now have to deal with maintenance and migration rather than exciting new developments ?
nitwit005 9y ago
The Republican party has been ambivalent or against new spending on infrastructure in recent history. Trump had some genuine appeal for being in favor of it. He even threw out the same $1T number: http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/306490-gop-braces-for-trumps-1t-infrastructure-push http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/306490-gop-braces-for... Not that I actually expect that money to materialize.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

prodmerc 9y ago

I reckon it's really easy when there's one party in power that controls pretty much everything in the country - you just say it's in the nation's interest, most of the party is similar minded and will agree, and billions are immediately available for the project. Very different than the US and EU, sadly...

taway_1212 9y ago

Aren't the projects in China executed at complete disregard to the rights of individual citizens? I.e. if your house is in the way, sorry, we'll give you some laughable amount of money and send police over to brutalize you until you leave. Under such conditions, it's easy to make lots of change quickly (in such spirit, Stalin was even more efficient - he essentially enslaved a part of his nation via Gulags and used the free slave labor to get done quickly various massively ambitious projects around the country). Another aspect is environment protection - it's much easier to build infrastructure if you don't mind wrecking the natural environment around it.

jon_richards 9y ago
I haven't looked it up, but I've heard from a local that if you are displaced by a government project you will "be rich". In his eyes it was similar to winning the lottery, if less extreme.
- cheapsteak 9y ago
  It does depend on the area I remember coming across a few blocks of old densely packed single-family brick buildings in Shanghai that were about to be torn down. Each building had a large hand written banner above their entrance, half of them praising the communist party for its compassion or saying long live Chairman Mao (my interpretation was that they were hoping for mercy for being such loyal party members), the other half cussing out the party and local officials
  - pcr0 9y ago
    I think the idea was that hanging pictures of Chairman Mao all over their building would make the government look bad if they knocked it down.
yadongwen 9y ago
People are not stupid..nowadays some villagers in China get ~10M USD to move away for real estate construction.. this is the average number for an entire village in Shenzhen.. you call this laughable money?
epynonymous 9y ago
false, the chinese government cannot directly use police or government agents to force people out of their homes during what's called (cai fang/house demolition). instead i've heard the use of 3rd party mercenaries to clear the way, but dont quote me on that. for the record, the government does reimburse the individuals which is quite significant, but usually the amount pales in comparison to the land rental price. typically the reimbursement is some stipend per person living under the domicile plus the right to pruchase, at a significant discount, a new home farther away. for example, say you lived in san francisco and the government was re-zoning for a highway, you'd get cash plus the right to buy something in a suburb of sacremento at a pretty nice discount. agree with some comment about it being the equivalent of a lottery.

malandrew 9y ago

Blame the fragmenting US population identity-wise, which has been accelerated by rhetoric on the left. Fewer and fewer people identify as an "American" with each passing year meaning that it is harder and harder to push policies that benefit "Americans". I lived in China for 1.5 years in 2005 to 2006 and culturally, once you pull back the facade of language and food, it wasn't terribly different than how America felt in the 80s (earliest decade I can remember and the last decade where there was still a semblance of cultural uniformity and support for pro-America policies)

maxerickson 9y ago
Examples of pro "American" policies that leftist rhetoric has blocked?
bairrd 9y ago
Wouldn't the more right wing desire to slash funding for government handouts be a more likely cause of stalled programs? Neoliberalism's weird incestuous desire to have 20 different planning committees write papers on the viability of public works makes things take forever, but also, constant arbitrary slashing of budgets every 4 to 8 years by those on the right puts a bullet in the head of these projects. Blaming the left misses at least 50% of the problem. Also, the left is far more into the concept of redistribution of wealth through public works, even if the centrist democrats filter that through moronic means-testing and bloated committees. Framing this as some lack-of-patriotism issue is completely missing the issues both sides cause in this situation, that would be solved by a party to the left of the useless neoliberal democrats.
igk 9y ago
I kind of doubt that a lack of nationalism brought by "left" rhetoric is the problem if "small government" is a rallying cry of those that have "not left"as part of their identity. To pay for large projects, you need taxes.

johansch 9y ago

Dictatorship does make it easier to get things done. It seems like you americans are getting there, though.

myrandomcomment 9y ago
Right, because all of Trumps excetive orders have been followed. The courts did not shoot them down or anything......

pdonis 9y ago

China's ability to do this is just an example of Cheops' Law: You can do anything you want to if you have a sufficient supply of expendable labor.

dominotw 9y ago

China doesn't have to deal with hostile entities like Iran and Wahabi arabs. I bet Chinese are proud to be Chinese, I am a naturalised US citizen and being proud of being American is seen as racist.

maxerickson 9y ago
I am a naturalised US citizen and being proud of being American is seen as racist. This certainly isn't a universally held belief. I think it probably isn't a widely held belief.
throwaway053 9y ago
Lol most of the Chinese is under the Chinese government brainwash via state propaganda and censored internet. You obviously don't know anyone who is from Hong Kong. Ask them how they feel about being Chinese. They will spit in your face
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
nradov 9y ago
China has to deal with India and Vietnam, which are hostile entities in at least some ways. There are many Uigurs who don't seem proud of being Chinese.

agumonkey 9y ago

Maybe because Asia has recently entered this phase while USA (and Europe) did their explosive growth long ago and now have to deal with maintenance and migration rather than exciting new developments ?

nitwit005 9y ago

The Republican party has been ambivalent or against new spending on infrastructure in recent history. Trump had some genuine appeal for being in favor of it. He even threw out the same $1T number: http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/306490-gop-braces-for-trumps-1t-infrastructure-push http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/306490-gop-braces-for... Not that I actually expect that money to materialize.