By End 2016, Over 43% of World's Skyscrapers Are In China

[gambit]

I have to disagree with you here. You are only looking at the advantage of standalone houses and yet omitting the advantages of high-rises.

Inside the property, of course a standalone house is better. Bigger space, more privacy. But the desirability and hence pricing of a property doesn't only depend on that. It also depends on what is outside the property; eg: location. The advantage of high-density living is that everything is convenient. Schools, malls, food, jobs, transport, healthcare etc can be minutes of walk away and therefore a much more vibrant neighborhood.

The reasons you gave are very subjective. It can differ greatly between individuals as well as cities. What is real sense of privacy? How much do you need it in exchange of the opportunity costs associated with it? Do other people think like you that strolling in city parks is not as enjoyable as strolling in the neighborhood? Or is it actually just in your city that you find city parks inferior? If an average house is better than a luxury apartment any day, why is there such a high market demand for luxury apartment (reflected by its prices)?

Of course the reasons I gave are subjected to personalities involved. But from my experience, no young couple who just had the first baby, left the apartment, got into a single family house, hated the house, and returned to the apartment. Maybe it is just Americans who prefers single family homes over apartments. But I doubt it considering how many Chinese engineers I know who loves their houses after growing up in Beijing, Shanghai, Dalian, or Singapore. To a man/woman, the moment the salaries made it affordable, houses were bought.

Do they miss the city life ? Yes. Have I missed the city life ? Yes. But is giving up our houses worth it ? No. Why is NYC's Central Park so popular and pretty much a need for NYC's denizens ? Somewhere along the way, people got tired of looking at bricks and steel. As much as they enjoy the city life, the need to get away from the city, even with an artifact like Central Park, got the better of them. In the park, people instinctively separated themselves from each other. You see clusters of individuals. Everyone understands the need for privacy in that open air environment. Ironic, is it not ? That New Yorkers have to go outside to have a sense of privacy that each feels the apartment does not give.

As far as luxury apartments and their demands go, am in Vegas and luxury apartments are usually sold in quick order by the time the building's construction just got formal approval from the city. But people who can afford these luxury apartments also have other properties and among them -- a standalone house.

Skyscrapers city lines are supposed to be marks of a country's progress in many ways and such an impression to the world is quite a need, not a luxury, to have.

 

[shadows888]

Of course the reasons I gave are subjected to personalities involved. But from my experience, no young couple who just had the first baby, left the apartment, got into a single family house, hated the house, and returned to the apartment. Maybe it is just Americans who prefers single family homes over apartments. But I doubt it considering how many Chinese engineers I know who loves their houses after growing up in Beijing, Shanghai, Dalian, or Singapore. To a man/woman, the moment the salaries made it affordable, houses were bought.

Do they miss the city life ? Yes. Have I missed the city life ? Yes. But is giving up our houses worth it ? No. Why is NYC's Central Park so popular and pretty much a need for NYC's denizens ? Somewhere along the way, people got tired of looking at bricks and steel. As much as they enjoy the city life, the need to get away from the city, even with an artifact like Central Park, got the better of them. In the park, people instinctively separated themselves from each other. You see clusters of individuals. Everyone understands the need for privacy in that open air environment. Ironic, is it not ? That New Yorkers have to go outside to have a sense of privacy that each feels the apartment does not give.

As far as luxury apartments and their demands go, am in Vegas and luxury apartments are usually sold in quick order by the time the building's construction just got formal approval from the city. But people who can afford these luxury apartments also have other properties and among them -- a standalone house.

Skyscrapers city lines are supposed to be marks of a country's progress in many ways and such an impression to the world is quite a need, not a luxury, to have.

perhaps your just bias since you live outside of it and most of your friends too? i said it's more 60/40 in favor if you look at urbanization rates.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

China is economy focused country and not interested in world domination and that is the secret of their success they help people

Their planning and economic focus shows the growth in their cities

Comparatively other nations (with out naming names have wasted their whole budget on war), as their leaders were more interested in starting wars

 

[AndrewJin]

China is economy focused country and not interested in world domination and that is the secret of their success they help people

Their planning and economic focus shows the growth in their cities

Comparatively other nations (with out naming names have wasted their whole budget on war), as their leaders were more interested in starting wars

Once again, their populist leader veers off to war crimes around the world.
It proves that no matter which one they elect via the so-called democratic election, the outcome is the same, a puppy for the military industrial complex.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

US's economic problems are 100% due to their own policies over last 30 years , instead of focusing on local economy and developing trade ties with world nations.

Last 30 years USA wasted so much resources on meaningless bases and wars (cold or hot wars) that they could have had 40 Trillion Surplus had they been more focused on local economy

It all comes down to developing and respecting other people / country's sovreignity and US seems to have lost that focus in last 30 years.

Comparitively when we see China , we find that they are the opposite focused on education, economy and welfare of people and regional trade. That is the ultimate secret to China's success

The only good move US has done locally is Obama Care initiative while 1000 time more funds were wasted in wars globally

 

[AndrewJin]

US's economic problems are 100% due to their own policies over last 30 years , instead of focusing on local economy and developing trade ties with world nations.

Last 30 years USA wasted so much resources on meaningless bases and wars (cold or hot wars) that they could have had 40 Trillion Surplus had they been more focused on local economy

It all comes down to developing and respecting other people / country's sovreignity and US seems to have lost that focus in last 30 years.

Comparitively when we see China , we find that they are the opposite focused on education, economy and welfare of people and regional trade. That is the ultimate secret to China's success

The only good move US has done locally is Obama Care initiative while 1000 time more funds were wasted in wars globally

Maybe it's a good move that many US cities are now investing in infra by buying Chinese metro cars.

Their railway and metro systems are too deadly, one of the most dangerous in the world.
Time to make a change.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

On March 16, 2017 President Trump submitted his request to Congress for $639 billion in military spending

Well US has a defence budget of 639 Billion spent on War Machine
when reality is that they don't need all these weapons (F16 / F15 are still ok platform)

The 639 Billion can be used to help their own people and create schools and hospitals and new cities

• The bases overseas = Useless
• The excessive trouble seeking like in North Korea = Useless
• The excessive tours far away from USA = Useless
• Toppling governments = Useless
• Arming of Kurdist Terrorist = Useless
• Illegal boming in Syria = Useless

Unfortunately that is the realization US has to do , reduce war budget to 5 billion and save thet 634 billion and pay down your(USA) debt or invest in your own people


634 Billion fund is so big that they can easily make education free in USA or education free etc


Pay down your DEBT!!!!
or
Create free education or hospital care
or
Create new infrastructure in your country


You got 3000 planes
You got 2000 ships

Just really about priority ....


China is successful becasue , it simply focues on education , school , trade, health care and its cities and regional partners

US should learn a thing and two from China's successful diplomacy

> If you owe 20 Trillion Dollars Debt , 2017

You should be responsible and start paying it down 600 Billion per year

• In 12 years you would pay down 7 Trillion Debt , 35% of national debt
• In 20 years you would pay down 12 Trillion debt , 60% of national debt
• In 25 years you would pay down 15 Trillion debt , 75% of national debt

Just by not worrying too much being the Police of World

Now creating international problem with Russia or China , just very irresponsible behavior

Decision to waste all that money was 100% US own leaders not China , Not Russia , Not Arab world or anyone but Leaders of USA

Now if China or Russia is growing it is not becasue they are cheating or doing anything illegal they just have not wasted their time on war or police work of world

 

[dingyibvs]

As someone who moved out of a city I think I can speak from first-hand experience. Of all the neighborhood kids I grew up with the one's with blue-collar jobs are still living there. They never made enough money to leave. They are either living in the same home they grew up in (which their parents purchased) or are renting. Some of these people purchased nearby property by leveraging the money they saved by living at home and became landlords (renters pay much of the property costs). However those who got successful white collar jobs fled the city. They purchased a home in the more well-to-do suburbs where the median income is higher than the typical city dweller. They have larger acreage and can put in a pool, park a boat, have a large private playground (with slides, swing sets, inflatable bouncers, etc) for their kids (instead of them running off to a park), grow fruit trees, large vegetable and flower gardens, greenhouses, etc. They are also surrounded by higher income people so their neighborhoods are generally nicer looking and clean. When their parents die and their old city home becomes available they never move back to city life. They either sell it (usually to a landlord) or become landlords themselves. None of my siblings wants to live in our parents' home even though it is over 6,000 sq feet (557sq m), worth well over $1M, and has main bus lines stopping within 250m of the door.

Many white collar companies also moved closer to the suburbs (for instance many high tech companies are in the 'burbs). So people now have the choice of working in suburban locations or commuting into the city (or even remote desktop). I happen to work for a large financial company with offices in both areas. I worked in both. I'm currently in one of their main downtown offices. There's well over 1000 people across multiple offices (some overseas) and pretty much everybody makes 6+ figure salaries. I do not know of any co-worker who has their primary residence in the city (they may have a secondary or a third). It certainly isn't because they can't afford it.

Costs in the suburbs are not necessarily cheaper than the city. Many people in a nice suburb pay over $10,000 just in local property taxes a year. That's a showstopper right there for many people who want to leave the city and are used to paying maybe $2K. Only a crappy town in the middle of nowhere would be that low. So if people don't make good money they are stuck in the city or forced to rent in a suburb (if it has apartments) or buy a place in the middle of nowhere.

That isn't to say there are no well-off people living in the city...of course there are.

How much can your parents' million dollar home buy you in the city? Here in NYC a million can get you a pretty spacious home on LI, but it can only get you a pretty average 1BR apartment in Manhattan, and it'll be a co-op. Have you ever thought why that is? It's because the demand for urban living is so damn high. If people really hated city living so much, apartments and condos in the city would cost a lot less.

Besides, the situation in China is different from the US. For one, China has much higher population, far less habitable land, and even less arable land compared to the US. Space is at a premium, and there simply isn't enough for all the suburban living without degrading the environment further. Secondly, aside from a handful of cities, the public transportation in the U.S. is pitiful. This takes away a lot of the convenience of high-density living and makes living in the 'burbs more appealing.

Personally, I prefer having some land and space. After living in highrises in Miami and NYC the last few years, I think I'll be moving to a more suburban locale. With that said, I also understand it's a matter of preference. My girlfriend loves the convenience of city living, my mom loves it even more, while my dad grew up a farmer in China and has preferences more aligned with mine.

 

[randomradio]

If people are wondering why India doesn't have many skyscrapers, in India, most airports are located inside the cities, that's why skyscrapers are non-existent.

For example, Bangalore has 4 airports, and 3 are inside. So they restrict skyscrapers up to 20Km around the airport. And you can't have a building above 300m, which was 150m a few years ago. And you can't have a world beating skyscraper unless you are 20-56Km away from an airport, depends on where the aircraft approach is.

So this creates restriction in the location where you can build one. Plus, there's the issue of acquiring land.

 

[shadows888]

If people are wondering why India doesn't have many skyscrapers, in India, most airports are located inside the cities, that's why skyscrapers are non-existent.

For example, Bangalore has 4 airports, and 3 are inside. So they restrict skyscrapers up to 20Km around the airport. And you can't have a building above 300m, which was 150m a few years ago. And you can't have a world beating skyscraper unless you are 20-56Km away from an airport, depends on where the aircraft approach is.

So this creates restriction in the location where you can build one. Plus, there's the issue of acquiring land.

move the airports out. they can't cost that much to relocate... and all future cities, plan ahead for airport location. i think Shenzhen have the same problem but height is restricted at 600 m / 2,000 ft. The Ping An Finance Centre was cut down 60 meters in height because of it (building was suppose to be at 660 meters) )

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

How much can your parents' million dollar home buy you in the city?

It's in the city within 5 miles of the state capital building. How close does it have to be?

Secondly, aside from a handful of cities, the public transportation in the U.S. is pitiful. This takes away a lot of the convenience of high-density living and makes living in the 'burbs more appealing.

I guess I'm not in one of those "pitiful areas". The public transportation here is actually pretty good for many communities outside the city. If people choose to work in the city there are a myriad of bus lines either taking them directly downtown or to the subway system end stations. There are also multiple commuter rail lines to take them downtown. If they want to drive there are huge parking garages at the end of the subway lines.

The median family income of most suburban areas around me is over double the median income of people who live in the city.

The median income of NYC is only around $50K. I bet most of the suburbs of NYC are also over double that.

The fact is people who make good money tend to flee the city. Of course there are exceptions but the median income shows the disparity.

 

[shadows888]

It's in the city within 5 miles of the state capital building. How close does it have to be?



I guess I'm not in one of those "pitiful areas". The public transportation here is actually pretty good for many communities outside the city. If people choose to work in the city there are a myriad of bus lines either taking them directly downtown or to the subway system end stations. There are also multiple commuter rail lines to take them downtown. If they want to drive there are huge parking garages at the end of the subway lines.

The median family income of most suburban areas around me is well over $100K. One is over $250K. The city median is only $62K.

i'v been to many US cities, public transportation is awful. only NYC have one that actually works via subways. in a lot of cities, those "buses" don't even come on time. whats the point, that's why everyone just drives. oh geez, you must be near Detroit or equivalent, where people in suburban areas have higher incomes than those in cities.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

i'v been to many US cities, public transportation is awful. only NYC have one that actually works via subways. in a lot of cities, those "buses" don't even come on time. whats the point, that's why everyone just drives. oh geez, you must be near Detroit or equivalent, where people in suburban areas have higher incomes than those in cities.

A suburb of Boston. The buses run fine unless there is a blizzard or something.

 

[randomradio]

move the airports out. they can't cost that much to relocate... and all future cities, plan ahead for airport location. i think Shenzhen have the same problem but height is restricted at 600 m / 2,000 ft. The Ping An Finance Centre was cut down 60 meters in height because of it (building was suppose to be at 660 meters) )

Moving an airport is way too hard. People want it closer to the cities after all. So local politics will come in the way. Plus some of the airports are really air bases, and you can't persuade the military to relocate because they are more concerned with access points, proximity to important nodes in the city, proximity to mechanized infantry etc.

Even expanding the city out of the airport's way is not possible because people prefer the shorter distance to an airport over having skyscrapers. Whenever they build a new satellite city, they end up building an airport inside that satellite city as well. Plus, funny as it is, the neighbourhood around the airport becomes urbanized and commercialized as well.

What we really need is very, very good planning and cooperation between the builders, local govt and central govt. They have to come up with solutions, both technological and civic planning, that allow aircraft to fly unhindered among skyscrapers.

 

[Mista]

Of course the reasons I gave are subjected to personalities involved. But from my experience, no young couple who just had the first baby, left the apartment, got into a single family house, hated the house, and returned to the apartment. Maybe it is just Americans who prefers single family homes over apartments. But I doubt it considering how many Chinese engineers I know who loves their houses after growing up in Beijing, Shanghai, Dalian, or Singapore. To a man/woman, the moment the salaries made it affordable, houses were bought.

Do they miss the city life ? Yes. Have I missed the city life ? Yes. But is giving up our houses worth it ? No. Why is NYC's Central Park so popular and pretty much a need for NYC's denizens ? Somewhere along the way, people got tired of looking at bricks and steel. As much as they enjoy the city life, the need to get away from the city, even with an artifact like Central Park, got the better of them. In the park, people instinctively separated themselves from each other. You see clusters of individuals. Everyone understands the need for privacy in that open air environment. Ironic, is it not ? That New Yorkers have to go outside to have a sense of privacy that each feels the apartment does not give.

Those are anecdotes. I also know of people from Australia moving to Singapore because they find Australia neighborhood inconvenient and boring.

You know, city parks doesn't have to be some huge branded parks where everyone in the city goes to. Small parks which serve a district exists too.

People instinctively separate themselves from each other in the park? What are you talking about? People obviously separate themselves if they don't know each other. What do you expect? Strangers forming up a circle together?
New Yorkers have to go outside to have a sense of privacy because apartments does not give privacy? People visit parks to have a sense of privacy? Where did you get that from? I find your claim getting more and more unfounded.