TheTigerMaster
Superstar
How does this continuity policy work? Maybe there's something to be learned from them.
Of course, not being a democracy probably helps.
|
|
|
China could build high speed rail through Canada to the USA
- Thread starter newearthling
- Start date
How does this continuity policy work? Maybe there's something to be learned from them.
Of course, not being a democracy probably helps.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
having only a single political party "helps".
MrsNesbitt
Active Member
As does a dictatorial system of government and virtually no environmental or labour regulations.
I stop checking this forum for a few days and this is what comes up?
In all seriousness this is so far-fetched it's hilarious. We in the West love hearing stories about the almost fantastically grandiose infrastructure projects built in China in record times but let's see how long those railways and subways and bridges and highways last. Not only that, but how many hugely fatal crashes they'll suffer over a lifespan of operation.
I stop checking this forum for a few days and this is what comes up?
In all seriousness this is so far-fetched it's hilarious. We in the West love hearing stories about the almost fantastically grandiose infrastructure projects built in China in record times but let's see how long those railways and subways and bridges and highways last. Not only that, but how many hugely fatal crashes they'll suffer over a lifespan of operation.rbt
Senior Member
While it is a single party, power struggles within the party are just as real and can be as grass-root driven (no restrictions on membership) as power struggles between parties here.
diminutive
Active Member
There's also reason to believe competitive electoral systems induce a greater degree of stability and continuity than one would see in a single-party system.
In a democracy, at least notionally, policies tend to be recognized as inherently legitimate since, in an abstract sense, they represent the 'will of the people.' There's evidence that democracies tend to be able to convince their populations that potentially unpopular programs are necessary in a way which authoritarians cannot.
Obviously that doesn't always happen, and transit/infrastructure in Canada could be a good example of that. I'd respond first that this isn't typical for Canadian politics, where we tend to see very high rates of policy continuity and convergence between govts, and second that it's not necessarily typical of democracies either. Look at Switzerland for how democracies can engender long term infrastructure planning.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
As does a dictatorial system of government and virtually no environmental or labour regulations.
I stop checking this forum for a few days and this is what comes up?
I was reading about China's housing infrastructure last week. In China it's not uncommon to rent your home on a 70 year lease. When one of the people renting the homes were asked what their family plans to do at the end of the lease, he said something along the lines of , "it doesn't matter; none of these buildings are designed to last more than 40 years". Apparently this is a common thing over there.
MrsNesbitt
Active Member
Oh absolutely, and there's really little reason to think their transit infrastructure will fare much better. I apologize in advance if I sound a little stereotyping, but look at the abysmal quality of a lot of Chinese-manufactured consumer goods that we buy. It's awful. China's infrastructure boom is similarly built on the backs of cheap labour and lax standards.
Xiaohaha
New Member
I'm no apologist for Chinese state, but I've been nothing but impressed by their infrastructure development, especially in mass transit. I find it more than slightly annoying when everything the Chinese does is judged and dismissed through the perspective of them having no democracy and human rights, especially in non-political areas such as public transit and such. Are their bridges more unsafe and their environment more polluted simply because they are a communist single-party state? Comparing them to other democratic developing nations I don't see any such correlation. For what it's worth people also do the same thing with Arab countries. Many things that happen there do not have anything to do with Islam, but freedom-having commentators are always ready to dismiss all their achievements and blame all their problems on their God that you don't like. I hope we're not drinking our own kool-aid a little too much.
Anyway, before you speculate on how shoddy and unsafe the Chinese infrastructure is, I suggest going there and see it for yourself first. Seeing how they've developed in the past 30 years, I think Toronto can learn a few things from them. We have our free speech and clean air, and they have their 8% growth, 400 km subway networks and high speed rail to every major city. So there's some things they can learn from us, but also some things we can learn from them.
The biggest factor is that cities in China have more political power. Most of their big cities are 'sub-provincial cities', which means they have power nearly equivalent to a province, so they can raise their own funds and build their transit systems without waiting for Queen's Park to give them hand-outs. Also, China practices state capitalism, and this sort of planning is exactly what they mean by that. In almost every major city in China you will find a museum of city planning, with scale model of what the city is to look like in 2020. Their city planning is done by number-crunching bureaucrats and technocrats with computer models, they don't have to listen to voters, and the whole process is de-politicized. One last point is Chinese cities can acquire capital very easily by borrowing against land acquisition sales.
Anyway, before you speculate on how shoddy and unsafe the Chinese infrastructure is, I suggest going there and see it for yourself first. Seeing how they've developed in the past 30 years, I think Toronto can learn a few things from them. We have our free speech and clean air, and they have their 8% growth, 400 km subway networks and high speed rail to every major city. So there's some things they can learn from us, but also some things we can learn from them.
The biggest factor is that cities in China have more political power. Most of their big cities are 'sub-provincial cities', which means they have power nearly equivalent to a province, so they can raise their own funds and build their transit systems without waiting for Queen's Park to give them hand-outs. Also, China practices state capitalism, and this sort of planning is exactly what they mean by that. In almost every major city in China you will find a museum of city planning, with scale model of what the city is to look like in 2020. Their city planning is done by number-crunching bureaucrats and technocrats with computer models, they don't have to listen to voters, and the whole process is de-politicized. One last point is Chinese cities can acquire capital very easily by borrowing against land acquisition sales.
Last edited:
howl
Active Member
I think the biggest difference between getting a major project built in China and getting it built in Canada is democracy. In Canada people have the right to challenge government plans and are often able to stall, change or kill the project with very little effort. As a result all infrastructure projects in Canada, particularly ones in settled areas (as opposed to remote areas projects, which often go unscrutinized) go through numerous studies and investigations so that any challenges can be deflected. On something like the Eglinton Crosstown there has already been almost ten years of studies, consultation and design work completed and they just started building the tunnels last year. If the ECLRT were being built in China the government would say where it is going and people would get out of the way. There would be one year of design and then shovels in the ground. For another example look at the mid-peninsula expressway which is planned to run from Fort Erie to Hamilton/Cambridge. It has been on the books for decades but continually faces challenges from the public so the QEW continues to be jammed. The Spadina expressway is an example of what happens if you don't get all your studies and consultation in place. I'm not making a judgement on which way is better - just stating what I see as the biggest factor in the difference between how long it takes to get something built in each country.
Last edited:
Conrad Black
Senior Member
Speed is not always the most important element to infrastructure. Doing it right is also important.
nfitz
Superstar
To hell with Godwin ... the German state in the late 1930's had very impressive infrastructure development as well.
That doesn't mean we should emulate their development techniques.
ksun
Senior Member
You said what I intend to say, only better. All this "because there is no democracy and lack of freedom therefore anything China does doesn't matter" kind of argument seem popular on many western forums.
Beijing had its first subway in 1969 (15 years later than the Yonge subway line) and it is still working just fine. While China does produce many shaddy low end products, the quality of their important infrastructure is usually quite high. There have been crashes and accidents, but so have Canada and US etc. The high speed train accident in Wenzhou give many plenty of Schadenfreud a few years ago questioning China's while high speed train industry. but only today two high-speed trains crashed in a rail yard in Berlin, do we apply the same standard to question German quality now? I doubt it.
Do we honestly think our ageing and increasingly unreliable TTC subways are superior to Shanghai's 12 lines? Those who think so probably never visited China once. Go there and actually take those lines yourself. "Sorry, we are currently experiencing a delay" doesn't happen nearly as often as in Toronto and I have never heard a single incidence where passengers got stuck in the subway for 45 minutes without being able to move an inch. (happened to the Yonge line at rush hour 2 or 3 years ago and my coworker joke he could have finished a move from Finch to Queen)
Like xiaohaha said, stop using politics as an excuse for something we were unable to achieve. There are a lot we can learn from China, and transit is definitely one of them. Do we really think the reason why we never built any good rapid transit since the 1990s is because we have a better political system and enjoy more freedom?
Criticize when appropriate, but give credits when it is deserved and always be humble. It shouldn't be that hard. Looking at everything with an ideologically biased view doesn't help and only shows our own ignorance.
Last edited:
ksun
Senior Member
fair assessment.
China is more about "I have decide and let's get to work tomorrow". Public consultation, einvironement study etc don't matter, and even if they have it, it is a matter of formality. Neither experts nor the public are in a position to challenge the government's decision. The move forward at the expense of some minority. Essentially what they think is, too bad your family will be worse off due to this project - but it is doing the city a good, so sorry and suck it up. That's how they built things fast.
On the other hand, spending millions and millions in endless studies doesn't sound like a responsible way of doing things either, not to mention efficiency. Should it really require 10 years for EA and study for a LRT project? I doubt it. Did the Yonge and Bloor subway have such lengthy EA? Would the DVP be able to be built at all if we do it today? I doubt it. Regarding public consulation, yes, people should be allowed to speak out about their opinions, but how much of it is really just sheer NYMBYism under the disguise of "freedom" - in the end, the vast majority of Toroninians lose in terms both money and time, just because 1% of the people don't feel like it.
What frustrates me is not about consulations and reviews, but there doesn't seem to be a timeline. There has to be a reasonable fixed date when the government should say "that's it. We need to make a decision now", instead of just keeping having endless meetings and studies on paper. What good does it do? Does one additional review really add much value? How many versions of transit plans did we see in the past 5 years, and do we believe it is a result of freedom and democracy, or utter ineffiency and waste of time? Worst thing is, after all the money spent and years in waiting, there is still no conclusion.
Last edited:
ehlow
Senior Member
I don't believe there is a comparison between those Chinese cities building 15 subway lines and Toronto. Their populations are multiple times bigger than ours. Some of their urban areas have the entire population of Canada within them. Beijing's population is > 21 million (city only), and their cities are extremely dense as well.
I understand this comparison happens often because we have a lot of Chinese immigrants here (including xiaohaha & ksun I'm assuming), however, it's a ridiculous comparison in my opinion. China is a rapidly developing economy completely different from us. Their cost of labour is very low, and the regulations are completely different.
ksun, I doubt anybody believes that the Yonge line is better than the new Chinese subway lines. They have new tunnels, trains, and signalling systems. Our signalling systems and technology are 60 years old and need to be replaced.
I understand this comparison happens often because we have a lot of Chinese immigrants here (including xiaohaha & ksun I'm assuming), however, it's a ridiculous comparison in my opinion. China is a rapidly developing economy completely different from us. Their cost of labour is very low, and the regulations are completely different.
ksun, I doubt anybody believes that the Yonge line is better than the new Chinese subway lines. They have new tunnels, trains, and signalling systems. Our signalling systems and technology are 60 years old and need to be replaced.
ksun
Senior Member
Size and population is not the reason. I mentioned before Nanjing is comparable to Toronto (7M people) but is building 8 lines at the same time now, something unimaginable in Canada. China is not just about Shanghai and Beijing. There are at least half a dozen mid sized city more comparable to Toronto's population (5-8M).
I agree with you that cost of labour and regulation is the main reason here. Our entitled expensive union workers definitely didn't make building transit any faster either.
China built the 1300 km Beijing-Shanghai high speed rail in 2.5 years (from start to completion of track laying), faster than that 200 meter Island Airport Tunnel. If we build a Toronto-Montreal HSR with less than half the distance, it will probably take 10 years minimum construction only.