Chinese firm wins $567M contract to build rail cars in Springfield

[Aepsilons]

1849 California Gold Rush - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1863 First Transcontinental Railroad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the links, @Peter C . I knew of the Gold Rush , but never knew it was a determining factor for Chinese migration. Interesting. Well , to be honest i'm just awed at the early migration of Asian people to American territory as early as the 19th century. One area of interest, for me, is the migration of Japanese to Hawaii as early as the 19th century to work in the Pineapple plantations there, then also Japanese migration to California and other states in the West Coast.

From humble beginnings!

Japanese pineapple laborers during the early 20th century U.S.A.

Japanese immigrants to Utah in the turn of the 20th century

Japanese workers in a Berry Farm in California

 

[ozzy22]

It seems like Mr. Burns has some Chinese competition to deal with, I hope he gets to keep his nuclear plant.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Thanks for the links, @Peter C . I knew of the Gold Rush , but never knew it was a determining factor for Chinese migration. Interesting.

Thousands and thousands of people rushing to the shores of California expecting to find gold lying on the ground and an easy fortune. But that was far from reality. Having no skills, no money, and no property they signed up for whatever jobs they could find...and 10 years later that job was the railroad.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Agreed. I've discussed this issue with @LeveragedBuyout and @SvenSvensonov in an another thread , there are factors that limit a wide-scale HSR system from being developed in the United States. For one, states' have to agree to this as they have the power to negate it, any wide scale HSR problem will also face stiff resistance from: 1) environmental groups, 2) airline companies, 3) busing companies, 4) established railway network systems (ergo, amtrak). Your reference to North American car culture is also poignant.

One more point to add is that the US has generally been reluctant to allow China access to infrastructure projects, even non-strategic ones such as passenger trains. Businesses will not like the plan unless they get a cut, environmentalist will complain about you breathing in the direction of a plant or animal, the states have their own paths that might converge from those of other states, and the US Federal and state government are not too keen on Chinese involvement in our non-business affairs. China has experience, but it isn't likely to be of much use in the US.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

One more point to add is that the US has generally been reluctant to allow China access to infrastructure projects, even non-strategic ones such as passenger trains. Businesses will not like the plan unless they get a cut, environmentalist will complain about you breathing in the direction of a plant or animal, the states have their own paths that might converge from those of other states, and the US Federal and state government are not too keen on Chinese involvement in our non-business affairs. China has experience, but it isn't likely to be of much use in the US.

Engineering (infrastructure) projects are also going to be a lot more difficult for China, since they will not be able to use their usual tactic of importing Chinese workers to do the work locally, like they do in Africa. The visas would never be granted, and even if they were, the unions would never stand for it. Thus, the Chinese engineering firms would be unlikely to win on price. That leaves the products, e.g. train assembly. Japan successfully transitioned auto manufacturing to the US, so I don't see why China would not see similar success with its own products.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Engineering (infrastructure) projects are also going to be a lot more difficult for China, since they will not be able to use their usual tactic of importing Chinese workers to do the work locally, like they do in Africa. The visas would never be granted, and even if they were, the unions would never stand for it. Thus, the Chinese engineering firms would be unlikely to win on price. That leaves the products, e.g. train assembly. Japan successfully transitioned auto manufacturing to the US, so I don't see why China would not see similar success with its own products.

During the times of the transcontinental railroad these tactics would work, but that was almost 200 years ago and American people have got a lot more protective of their business interests since then. Also, I'm not sure the US needs Chinese help anyways. Cost, as seen with California disastrous high-speed rail projects, has been the biggest impediment to infrastructure upgrades in the US... we just don't like spending money on things not designed to explode or make others explode. Technical know-how isn't a problem. We know how to build high-speed rails, every other factors just gets in the way.

 

[TaiShang]

One more point to add is that the US has generally been reluctant to allow China access to infrastructure projects, even non-strategic ones such as passenger trains. Businesses will not like the plan unless they get a cut, environmentalist will complain about you breathing in the direction of a plant or animal, the states have their own paths that might converge from those of other states, and the US Federal and state government are not too keen on Chinese involvement in our non-business affairs. China has experience, but it isn't likely to be of much use in the US.

Indeed. They always have the right to turn down the Chinese offer.

***

China CNR Corporation has won the contract to build 284 ‪#‎subway‬‪#‎cars ‬for the city of ‪#‎Boston‬.

The ‪#‎Massachusetts‬ state government approved the sale on Thursday BJT. The new cars will replace those on the city's Orange and Red Line.

Source: Chinese Economy News & Updates | Page 286

 

[hans]

Not allowing Chinese worker will increase the cost and slow the process.
Yet the advantage of Chinese labor is still significant.
Normal Chinese workers earns $500 and engineers 1500$.
It is much less than US.
Also Chinese is willing to work more time for an urgent project..
The efficiency is much higher than US.

Engineering (infrastructure) projects are also going to be a lot more difficult for China, since they will not be able to use their usual tactic of importing Chinese workers to do the work locally, like they do in Africa. The visas would never be granted, and even if they were, the unions would never stand for it. Thus, the Chinese engineering firms would be unlikely to win on price. That leaves the products, e.g. train assembly. Japan successfully transitioned auto manufacturing to the US, so I don't see why China would not see similar success with its own products.

Right, US spend too much money on military while Chinese is focusing on economy.
China is still doing base infrastructure everywhere, inside and outside of China...

During the times of the transcontinental railroad these tactics would work, but that was almost 200 years ago and American people have got a lot more protective of their business interests since then. Also, I'm not sure the US needs Chinese help anyways. Cost, as seen with California disastrous high-speed rail projects, has been the biggest impediment to infrastructure upgrades in the US... we just don't like spending money on things not designed to explode or make others explode. Technical know-how isn't a problem. We know how to build high-speed rails, every other factors just gets in the way.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

This above pic seems more in-line with reality

Current train:

 

[Azeri440]

Leaving aside political considerations，it will be cakewalk for China to win the bid for the California High-Speed Rail Project。

is that project still going to happen? I heard the massive costs associated with projects pretty much led it to die

 

[libertad]

Those cars would be alot cheaper if they built them in China, but the heavy union influence here would not have allowed it. Still a positive step for free trade and open competition.