Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by justinschuh 4654 days ago
Is my sarcasm filter off here? The ghost towns in the US are dramatically smaller, were pretty much all the result of organic growth, and were actually populated at some point. They're ghost towns now because the populations moved away for any number of reasons (the end of a boom, economic shift, major catastrophe, eminent domain).

The situation in China is completely different. Regional governments are naively trying to stimulate their economies with these huge construction projects. So, they're building giant cities without proper planning or consideration for population shifts. These cities have never been occupied and it looks like they never will. Worse, they're being paid for by highly rated bonds issued from the central government. The whole thing looks like a real estate bubble that could tank the Chinese economy.

2 comments

Not all US ghost towns are are dramatically smaller. There seem to be many with peak population in the (low) tens of thousands.

- http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-01-townha...

- http://finance.yahoo.com/news/american-ghost-towns-21st-cent...

And while I agree with you that they weren't unoccupied to begin with, unlike the case with many of China's ghost cities, I beg to disagree on the rest of your argument - namely that the US model was appropriate for its time (we have decades of hindsight) and that the Chinese model isn't appropriate for the present (we don't know).

Many experts have been prophesying a crash for China's investment driven economy for years now, and a dramatic correction in real estate prices. Yet, after a small correction prices are still rising - http://www.economist.com/news/china/21577118-soaring-house-p...

We may only know a decade or two later whether a few dozen ghost cities was a small price China paid for continuing to power ahead economically.

>> namely that the US model was appropriate for its time

There was no model other than freedom. Freedom to invent, create, build, farm all as we saw fit. This is completely different and perhaps antithetical to what the Chinese are doing now. Their government is trying to will the result of prosperity into existence rather than allow it to culminate on its own as it does in a truly free society.

Without defending the Chinese model (which for the record I despise), let us also not forget that "freedom" is relative and defined from the POV of the winners/majority.

In the case of the "building" of America, so to speak, were there not people who did not quite enjoy the same freedom you speak of? In fact millions would have forfeited their freedom so the rest could "invent, create, build and farm as they saw fit".

America isn't a perfect country but it's the best one I know of.
Ehhhh, lets not get crazy. I'm a US citizen and have lived in the US all my life, and I could name a handful of countries much better, based on GDP, happiness, or the accessibility of affordable housing and healthcare.

The US is nice, but perfect it ain't.

Are these "generic" bonds, or does the government issue bonds explicitly tied to the development of one or another city development? Are these bonds to be paid out from new-city tax revenue streams? (Not enough plugged in to the China finance system to search for myself.)

If so, I'm surprised that financial institutions would buy these bonds, despite their high ratings.