4 ms·

I love that they talk about 40k people, possibly growing to 400k, and the only transportation improvements they mention are effectively that "most people who li

I love that they talk about 40k people, possibly growing to 400k, and the only transportation improvements they mention are effectively that "most people who live there will work there" and that they'll upgrade some local roads. Feels like a big miss for a "forever" kinda plan.

anon291 3y ago
Centralized planning doesn't work even if the people doing the planning achieved the centralization via otherwise free market means. This is obviously true of communist countries that have never shown compelling evidence that centralized planning is beneficial. It's also true of large multinational corporations that slowly fossilize with bureaucracy, paralysis, and lack of innovation as they become ever larger and concentrated the management of ever larger amounts of capital. Society works best when small, individual property owners make good decisions regarding their properties and come together organically for the sake of organizing the meta structure of society.
- avmich 3y ago
  > This is obviously true of communist countries that have never shown compelling evidence that centralized planning is beneficial. USSR evacuated the large chunk of industry East during first months of Germany invasion in 1941 in a centralized manner, and that industry quickly started to work for the army. NASA solved the problem of sending men on the Moon in 8 years in a centralized fashion. Centralized planning does have its strengths.
  - textfiles 3y ago
    You chose two pretty out-there examples to prove the point; I'll leave it to the class to determine why.
  - foofie 3y ago
    Your first example is a rosy picture of a military strategy whose only metric is "have we lost the war"? Your second example is a project with a very clear and fixed and time-bounded outcome which has no externality or had any requirement to serve as infrastructure. It makes as much sense to claim your examples as proof central planning works as it would be to claim the bulk of the automotive industry is capitalist and everyone drives cars. It might be true, but ignores all the negative externalities of the existing transportation network.
    - textfiles 3y ago
      high-five
- malermeister 3y ago
  China has the worlds largest high speed rail network. Europe is full of (lower quality, but still good) rail, mostly built during the time of centralized monarchies. The US barely has any passenger rail because that would need large scale centralized planning. Small, individual property owners can only make small, individual changes. It optimizes for local maxima. To get past those, you need centralized planning.
  - unusualmonkey 3y ago
    IIRC large portions of China's high speed rail might be a boondoggle... so not sure that's the best example.
    - malermeister 3y ago
      I can't speak for all of it, obviously, but I've taken some of it and it seemed... pretty good? What's wrong with it?
      - unusualmonkey 3y ago
        It's losing billions of dollars. It's easy to make something people like... if you're willing to burn money.
        malermeister 3y ago
        Infrastructure is a public service that shouldn't need to make money, which is another reason why central planning is necessary for some things.
        seanmcdirmid 3y ago
        It was funded privately, not publicly.
        marssaxman 3y ago
        The US federal highway system loses tens of billions of dollars a year, doesn't it? Perhaps that is a boondoggle, too.
PaulHoule 3y ago
One of the greatest successes in US urban planning in my lifetime is that they extended the DC metro intro areas that were not developed so when they did develop they became transit friendly neighborhoods. One time when we were going to a family party in Maryland we stayed at a hotel right near the end of the metro line (Shady Grove) and then rode into DC to see the National Mall and get lunch around Dupont Circle. Shady Grove had some major apartment developments as well as great shopping and dining and riding in on the metro I could see many other developments around stations that seemed to be equally successful. This is being built in Kansas City https://cpkcstadium.com/ https://cpkcstadium.com/ and people are saying "there is nothing there" but there is transit so quite possibly this could become a nucleus for further development. It would be great to see more of this in California

anon291 3y ago

Centralized planning doesn't work even if the people doing the planning achieved the centralization via otherwise free market means. This is obviously true of communist countries that have never shown compelling evidence that centralized planning is beneficial. It's also true of large multinational corporations that slowly fossilize with bureaucracy, paralysis, and lack of innovation as they become ever larger and concentrated the management of ever larger amounts of capital. Society works best when small, individual property owners make good decisions regarding their properties and come together organically for the sake of organizing the meta structure of society.

avmich 3y ago
> This is obviously true of communist countries that have never shown compelling evidence that centralized planning is beneficial. USSR evacuated the large chunk of industry East during first months of Germany invasion in 1941 in a centralized manner, and that industry quickly started to work for the army. NASA solved the problem of sending men on the Moon in 8 years in a centralized fashion. Centralized planning does have its strengths.
- textfiles 3y ago
  You chose two pretty out-there examples to prove the point; I'll leave it to the class to determine why.
- foofie 3y ago
  Your first example is a rosy picture of a military strategy whose only metric is "have we lost the war"? Your second example is a project with a very clear and fixed and time-bounded outcome which has no externality or had any requirement to serve as infrastructure. It makes as much sense to claim your examples as proof central planning works as it would be to claim the bulk of the automotive industry is capitalist and everyone drives cars. It might be true, but ignores all the negative externalities of the existing transportation network.
  - textfiles 3y ago
    high-five
malermeister 3y ago
China has the worlds largest high speed rail network. Europe is full of (lower quality, but still good) rail, mostly built during the time of centralized monarchies. The US barely has any passenger rail because that would need large scale centralized planning. Small, individual property owners can only make small, individual changes. It optimizes for local maxima. To get past those, you need centralized planning.
- unusualmonkey 3y ago
  IIRC large portions of China's high speed rail might be a boondoggle... so not sure that's the best example.
  - malermeister 3y ago
    I can't speak for all of it, obviously, but I've taken some of it and it seemed... pretty good? What's wrong with it?
    - unusualmonkey 3y ago
      It's losing billions of dollars. It's easy to make something people like... if you're willing to burn money.
      - malermeister 3y ago
        Infrastructure is a public service that shouldn't need to make money, which is another reason why central planning is necessary for some things.
        seanmcdirmid 3y ago
        It was funded privately, not publicly.
      - marssaxman 3y ago
        The US federal highway system loses tens of billions of dollars a year, doesn't it? Perhaps that is a boondoggle, too.

PaulHoule 3y ago

One of the greatest successes in US urban planning in my lifetime is that they extended the DC metro intro areas that were not developed so when they did develop they became transit friendly neighborhoods. One time when we were going to a family party in Maryland we stayed at a hotel right near the end of the metro line (Shady Grove) and then rode into DC to see the National Mall and get lunch around Dupont Circle. Shady Grove had some major apartment developments as well as great shopping and dining and riding in on the metro I could see many other developments around stations that seemed to be equally successful. This is being built in Kansas City https://cpkcstadium.com/ https://cpkcstadium.com/ and people are saying "there is nothing there" but there is transit so quite possibly this could become a nucleus for further development. It would be great to see more of this in California