A very simplistic and skewed article. As per its usual modus operandi, China is pursuing all options simultaneously. Which means that in addition to building hi

A very simplistic and skewed article. As per its usual modus operandi, China is pursuing all options simultaneously. Which means that in addition to building hideous sprawling automotive-dependent suburbs, they're building the largest and most sophisticated urban and regional rail system in the world, and pursuing initiatives such as the Chengdu car-free city (http://weburbanist.com/2013/02/11/car-free-city-china-builds-dense-metropolis-from-scratch/ http://weburbanist.com/2013/02/11/car-free-city-china-builds...) which are vastly more progressive than anything the rest of the world has attempted. Portland is a great city by American standards, but its public transit mode-share for all trips in the metropolitan region still hovers around 4% -- with an additional ~2% coming from cycles -- making Portland ~94% dependent on private cars. (Note: you'll see statistics claiming a much higher mode share for Portland; this is done by excluding the other municipalities which account for >70% of the population in the metropolitan region, as well as by excluding the >60% of trips that are non-commuting trips). China is already doing much better than that, so it would be a shame if Portland were its target.